Forum Topic

Boris Caught Lying About Super Sewer and Carnwath Road

If you are interested in this issue I strongly recommend you read Dave Hill's article in the Guardian.http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/davehillblog/2012/apr/10/boris-johnson-london-super-sewer-politics?CMP=twt_fd

Karen Cooper ● 4764d16 Comments

http://www.fulhamchronicle.co.uk/fulham-and-hammersmith-news/2012/04/25/electioneering-claim-as-papers-reveal-council-could-plough-on-with-king-street-plans-82029-30835343/

Charles Lawrence ● 4747d

"eh' was really the only response to the idea that you would be surprised that developers might be motivated by profit"At what point did I express any surprise?

Charles Lawrence ● 4749d

Charles, 'eh' was really the only response to the idea that you would be surprised that developers might be motivated by profit.If you believe Ken will protect Hammersmith from over-development you are set to be sorely disappointed. There was a massive and very unwelcome development near where I used to live. To everyone's surprise it received the backing of Ken and around the same time he went on record saying how he welcomed more high rise development. The development was thrown out at the public enquiry level.Ken would claim that he supports development to increase the amount of low cost housing available. It was Simon Hoggart I think who pointed out that the system for allocating effectively deeply discounted homes was highly politicised and ripe for corruption. Most people would assume these homes go to nurses, fire fighters and police officers but they rarely do. Therefore the social benefit of all the housing development under Ken was probably not much greater than under Boris. Their enthusiasm for building is mutual and, to be fair to them, in a city with an acute housing shortage this is not wholly a bad thing.

Paul Corcoran ● 4749d

PS: I am sure that, if you have a question, you can do a little better than 'eh?'

Charles Lawrence ● 4750d

It seems quite clear to me...but if I have to explain...you suggest Ken is all for high-rise developments. (I have to say in passing I don't know where you get the evidence for that). But to be more specific, the King St development is all about building yuppie flats, not social housing. The developers behind the project are not interested in building social housing - nor are the current Council - because that's not where the profit lies. Ken, on the other hand, is interested in social housing so would impose conditions on the developers which make the whole thing totally uninteresting to them...clear?

Charles Lawrence ● 4750d

'the developers are only in it for the money so why would they go ahead if there's no profit to be made? 'Eh?

Paul Corcoran ● 4750d

The King St project got more publicity London-wide and it  stood to alienate a lot of Tory voters so Boris gave the appearance of halting it but it hasn't gone away.And to say Boris wouldn't have lost many votes anyway because the project was being sponsored by the Council is utter nonsense...The Tory mayor Boris and the LBHF Tory council are the same thing as far as most voters see it.For example, Boris's lead is rapidly shrinking - hooray! - according to the latest opinion polls because of the government's current 'omnishambles' so it all links up, doesn't it?The Shepherd's Bush market plan is facing judicial review because it includes demolishing nearby homes and shops which have nothing to do with the market so, hopefully, it won't proceed in its present form.As for Ken supporting the King St project it if the social housing component is increased...the developers are only in it for the money so why would they go ahead if there's no profit to be made?

Charles Lawrence ● 4750d

If we have to rely on tory MP's to tell it how it is about Cameron & Osborne- "a couple of posh boys showing no remorse" then can we please at least push forward to something different re the mayoral election. As the best of a bad bunch I hope we can elect Ken who tho annoying isn't deeply amoral and missionless like Boris, and then combine forces to help steer some change.

Elizabeth Spring ● 4750d

Out of interest. How much did Livingstone throw away of our own money in his grandiose tram plan for the Uxbridge Road. And will it reappear?

michael wale ● 4750d

Not sure I can accept that the decision was down to political expediency. Other more controversial projects in the Borough such as Shepherd's Bush market and Fulham Reach seem to be proceeding, the opposition to King Street development seemed mainly to come from people who would never vote for Ken Livingstone and Boris wouldn't have lost many votes anyway because the project is being sponsored by the Council. It would not surprise me if the project reappeared in some shape or form if Ken was elected as he has been even more enthusiastic about high rise projects than Boris. If past behaviour is a guide he'll support it if the social housing component is increased.

Paul Corcoran ● 4750d

Important to note that Boris has NOT vetoed the King St development.It has been withdrawn for the time being - my belief is for political expediency.It would not surprise me to see it re-appear in some shape or form if Boris is re-elected.

Charles Lawrence ● 4751d

Calling a Boris a liar for saying what he did is really stretching a point and, as for him being the mouthpiece of the property developers, was it not him who vetoed the King Street development?I don't think he has been a particularly effective Mayor and would personally rather see the back of him but these over-the-top attacks on him smack a bit of desperation. Despite him being inept and all style and no substance he looks nailed on to get a second term. Ken's fare reduction will make a significant difference to me so it is enough to get my vote despite reservations about some of his policies.

Paul Corcoran ● 4751d

Boris is the mouthpiece of the rich, the bankers and the property developers.It will be a disaster for this city and for the people of Hammersmith and Fulham, with its loony, arrogant and gerrymandering Tory council, if he is re-elected.Nobody is perfect but Ken has a track record of defending the interests of Londoners, not the elites. 

Charles Lawrence ● 4754d

Excuse me! Ken Livingstone honourable. I was involved in the fight to preserve the multi ethnic allotments in East London. We offred to make a heritage site for the Olympics, ceding half the site to the Olympic four week concrete pathway. The allotments had been there for over 100 years. we also offered to feed the smallest nation. Livingstone would not come down and view the site, ever. He never supported the people. He even said that one of the allotment holders could not enter City Hall with onions around her head because it was a security risk. 'honourable'. ?

michael wale ● 4754d

No-one but no-one should take the tory press bias as truthful reportage, so it is still Ken for me - ugh, what if slimy Boris slithers back in?Jenny Jones is nice, but too narrow; we can always influence Ken's actions afterwards and he was an honourable mayor before. I shall (scepticaly) be voting Labour; Join me!!

Elizabeth Spring ● 4754d

Faced with the awful tax avoiding Livingstone, I shall be voting Green. Join me!

michael wale ● 4754d