London Mayoral Election

oh I rarely get over excited [ although I like the thought] but I see now it was another of your cryptic comments ab , about representing.I don't think Granjura having lived in the UK for so long, does think that the Lords actually represent us, but was putting the case for all religions to be included [or no religion] and that it seems dominated by Cof E.
Actually [although I don't know] I suspect that some of the Lords put Cof E on forms about themselves, even when they haven't been near a church for 40 years.It's the standard thing to do.

whitewave, it was on Today, this morning, why should he be allowed to refuse to comment, he put children at risk yet does not have to explain why he chose to put the children at risk

Rosesarered, I did not say - understand , I said represent as granjura did it was granjura who spoke of representing , so not a silly remark by me, just you getting over excited yet again,

Didn't take long to find the first bit of information suppressed by Johnson. Sod the children being made ill by toxic air, they don't matter as they are only the deprived. No votes there.

He has declined to comment.

That's a silly remark ab as many of the Lords know and understand so called 'ordinary folk' very well.

Who in the Lords does represent any part of the population granjura?

Personally, I don't see why any faith should have a reserved place within the political system, and I would say the same even if all the major faiths were represented.

Is this what you call CofE bashing Alea:

'Yes, but it is so outdatedand unfair, so is the large representation of CofE in the Lords. Prince Charles has said it very clearly, and CofE Archbishops too.
How crazy that 'the Faith' doesn't even include other Christians in this day and age- aand still explicitly exclude Catholics as the enemies of the State. I thought the First Elisabeth had got that sorted out a VERY long time ago.'

If it is, then I'd like to say you need to re-read the thread- there is no 'bashing' there, at all- just stating how obviously unfair it is, and outdated- as the CofE represents only a small part of the population nowadays.

www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/16/boris-johnson-accused-of-burying-study-linking-pollution-and-deprived-schools

For those who think Boris would make a good PM or leader of the Tories.
Of course, you might think it's okay to hide the truth like he did with this report. After all, the poor Londoners do not matter to him.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/may/14/junior-doctor-rosena-allin-khan-selected-labour-candidate-tooting

An A&E junior doctor is standing in the Tooting by election, to replace Khan. Hope she gets in. Can't see any reason why she shouldn't.

(yawn)
Bored now.

nearly a week ago. We've moved on since then

Oh have we? Is that the Royal "We " or just the select few who dominate populate the News and Politics threads?

I do not know. I thought you were the thread police, hence your original comment.
It does seem strange that you seem to always criticise a certain person, no matter what time differential there is. Why is that?

Oh lawks -a- mercy. Off limits then?
Just remind me, what is the official limit again?

Every hour? You're talking about 9th May, nearly a week ago. We've moved on since then.

Not aware of a 6-day Statute of Limitations regarding threads, must be a new rule you somebody has dreamed up

Well pardon me for having other things to do in the interim. Must pencil in a window for checking GN every hour.

Keep up, Alea. Not looking that far back.

Well I am somewhat . at how this thread could invite yet another an instance of C of E bashing! (9 May, 21.24)
Never pass up an opportunity, eh?

and they might start singing

no groups of 8 or more That's a WI visit out of the question then

Yes I agree dj

It was obviously an ego-trip for Boris.
Given what you say, Eloethan, I am surprised that Khan says he is not opposed to it in principle. I think he should be.

The Guardian article does say that Sadiq Khan is not opposed in principle to the garden bridge but is concerned about the procurement process. That is, of course, an issue - the person appointed has only done one bridge but in the procurement process was apparently recorded as having "relevant design experience".

However, there are several other reasons why there is a great deal of opposition to this bridge being built at all.

There are many green spaces and large parks in central London (it is said to be the greenest city in Europe and the fifth greenest in the world) so there is no need for a garden bridge which will be very expensive to maintain - an estimated £3.5 million per year (and we all know that estimates rarely go down). Gardening experts have also questioned how the tree and plants are to be irrigated.

It is also to be sited in a space between two other bridges which are less than a 10 minute walk apart, and the proposed planting of trees is likely to obscure what is a wonderful unobstructed view towards St Paul's.

There are more than 30 prohibitions as to its use:
No running, no cycling, no music, no picnics, no groups of 8 or more, no visits after midnight, etc. etc. Names and addresses can be demanded of anyone who infringes any of these rules. It has been said that there will be queues to gain access and murmurs of a ticketing system being put in place.

For a bridge that is not really needed, it is an awful lot of money to spend when we are in the grips of an austerity regime, which has resulted in many public amenities in much less affluent areas of London and other parts of the country being closed. The total estimated budget is £175 million, with £30 million being provided by Transport for London and £30 million by the Treasury.

Good for Khan, hope he succeeds and it is pulled