I think you've misunderstood my argument. I'm not arguing that people shouldn't drive. I'm saying that this is a waste of public resources. It won't regenerate High Streets in any meaningful way. The deadweight loss is enormous and poorly targeted. To do this in an energy crisis is tone deaf.
Yes, and that's a matter for the district or town/parish council. Not something that strategic public resources should be used for.
Ely does free parking. Up to Ely. I like their High Street (and even drive there...). Cycle storage is also pathetic. And that gives the "regeneration" game away.
I agree. And vice versa. The combined authority makes no sense other than as a body designed to link up the various towns and cities. This is overstretch.
Whatever the local parking policies this has happened right across the world.
So local parking charges would be a very long way down the chain of causality.
We made a mistake not levying supermarket parking- that cash could have been invested in town centres. That's what is needed.
It includes Peterborough. A city.
Putting aside rants about urban people being too dumb to understand different contexts, there is no evidence systematically linking free parking to High Street regeneration.
Availability of parking is important ( in fact, free parking reduces that after a point).
This is Peterborough.
By the way, this is why transplanting mayors everywhere is an error. When tourist taxes and income taxes are devolved to non metropolitan mayors you'll see much more of this nonsense.
In the middle of another energy crisis, our Mayor thinks it is sensible policy to subsidise free car parking. This is about saving High Streets of course not client politics.
cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.gov.uk/news/mayors-...
(and no I'm not doing "was it br-egg-xit?" Or "such a poultry amount". Sorry)
Less than one a day on average even after recent surge. You can't run a successful modern country on that basis.
BSW result
Would love to see how a party with that sort of platform would fare in the polls.
Wait, there's one in Germany.
Annual change in co2 emissions by region
What do you notice about the countries above the line with increasing emissions versus those below the line with declining emissions?
To be a fossil fuel producer is to be a fossil fuel consumer.*
So bear that in mind with the drill everything people.
(*Unless you are Norway.)
The irony is that America is becoming more Chinese like in its politics just as not being so was its strongest card.
And this weakens its ability to persuade Europe not to move economically closer to China through electro interests.
It still has NATO. Laughable isn't it?
The politics of being an electro v petrostate will reorder geopolitics in odd ways. It will bring Europe and China closer together. It already is.
The US's strongest card was that it was an internationalist liberal democracy.
Oh well. You messed that one up didn't you fellas?
This is taken from an excellent @drsimevans.carbonbrief.org thread on the latest from IEA.
The US and Canada are wealthy countries that should be massively reducing carbon emissions. They aren't because their politics is dominated by petrostate brain.
Annual change in co2 emissions by region
What do you notice about the countries above the line with increasing emissions versus those below the line with declining emissions?
To be a fossil fuel producer is to be a fossil fuel consumer.*
So bear that in mind with the drill everything people.
(*Unless you are Norway.)
Don't worry. You can download it from Grok.
In fairness it's also massively better than the Merseyside derby I watched earlier.
#lfc 100% record at the Hill Dickinson.
Yes. Labour makes fundamentally bad arguments because of a caricatured and outdated view of working class life. See also failure to challenge flag vandals. Greyhound racing is basically irrelevant in terms of working class life. It simply isn't an argument.
These comments are not verified. So I've taken this down just in case. I haven't got time to check it out- hopefully they were verified before publication.
My bad. Lesson learned.
Fgs I had rather expected that this would have been verified before publication. I'm going to take down with a mea culpa.
Tbh, the best and only line for Starmer is "it's on me. I messed up. I'm sorry. I take responsibility." Which is where it will end up.
It's not a resignation matter for a PM in my view. But all this deflection etc is making it worse.
Others messed up too.
At some point we have to move on.
And for Jenrick to call for others to take responsibility for their actions in the same interview shows a complete absence of ethical consistency. Not serious.
Jenrick told the BBC that he believed Tice had followed advice, and repeated Tice's claim he may have paid too much in tax. He said: "Richard is a very successful businessman, he has had a 40-year business career, he's created thousands of jobs, he's paid millions of pounds in tax.”
This is a pathetic defence of Richard Tice.
Tax is an obligation not a voluntary contribution. You have to pay all of what you owe.
Mistakes do happen but in this case something more systematic and deliberate seems to be emerging.
Social leasing is a great idea. Especially if it comes with efficiency advice and support.
Always the green proposal not on the table....
Same with Greens where I am locally.
Only one of the Labour strategy or the Green strategy will decarbonise electricity by, say, the mid 2030s.
And it's not the Green approach.
Yes, exactly. Ignoring trade-offs seems to be a bit of a Green signature. I wouldn't describe them as a populist party per se but that is a populist strand.
The concluding comment of the conversation was "so now we have a load of Muslims and gays."
It was a sloppy report.