This could hurt. And dont forget, other cities will be looking at what
Red Ken does, so it could be coming to a city near you.
I dont see any allowances for disabled.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx

"ITF"  wrote in message 
news:rplti39i48vj6ueqhaj9v07cpjgjr6nov3@4ax.com...
>
> This could hurt. And dont forget, other cities will be looking at what
> Red Ken does, so it could be coming to a city near you.
> I dont see any allowances for disabled.
>
> http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx

Disabled have a concession of a one of payment of £10.00 pa

On 5 Nov, 13:07, "Tom" <nospam@bed> wrote:
> "ITF"  wrote in message
>
> news:rplti39i48vj6ueqhaj9v07cpjgjr6nov3@4ax.com...
>
>
>
> > This could hurt. And dont forget, other cities will be looking at what
> > Red Ken does, so it could be coming to a city near you.
> > I dont see any allowances for disabled.
>
> >http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx
>
> Disabled have a concession of a one of payment of £10.00 pa

"Different vehicles will be affected over time and increasingly
tougher emissions standards will apply. Cars, motorcycles and small
vans will not be affected."

That pretty much covers most disabled people travelling in their own
vehicle.
Unless you want to travel in a motor home, HGV or horse box.

Oh, not forgetting that improving air quality improves the air quality
of the disabled too - some of us are affected by air pollution.

Martin  <><

Martin  <><

Responding to ITF...
>
> This could hurt. And dont forget, other cities will be looking at what
> Red Ken does, so it could be coming to a city near you.
> I dont see any allowances for disabled.
>
> http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx

Hmmm. I sense politically motivated scare-mongering here.

	The aim of LEZ is to improve air quality in London by deterring 
	the most polluting vehicles from being driven in the area. 
	Affected vehicles include older, diesel-engined lorries, buses, 
	coaches, large vans, minibuses and other heavy vehicles that are 
	derived from lorries and vans, such as motor caravans and 
	motorised horse boxes.
	
	Different vehicles will be affected over time and increasingly 
	tougher emissions standards will apply. Cars, motorcycles and 
	small vans will not be affected.

And from http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/2526.aspx

	The Low Emission Zone (LEZ) will affect older, diesel-engined 
	lorries, buses, coaches and large vans (exceeding 1.205 tonnes 
	unladen weight) and minibuses.
	
	It will also include other specialist vehicles that are derived 
	from lorries and vans including; motorised horse boxes, breakdown 
	and recovery vehicles, refuse collection vehicles, gritters, 
	sweepers, concrete mixers, tippers, removals lorries, fire 
	engines, motor caravans, ambulances and large hearses (over 2.5 
	tonnes) are also included.

So it looks as if "Red Ken" isn't quite the monster you feared.

Considering the effects of constant traffic in such a built up area, 
this actually looks like yet another good idea from Mayor Ken.

Are you by any chance one of those partizan spooks that drop this
kind of stuff into newsgroups then? Just wondering, as this post sure 
looks like that kind of thing.

-- 
   _________________________.0.___________________________
   Everything you ever needed from a religion, plus jokes!
              http://principiadiscordia.com/
   -------------------------.|.---------------------------

.
"Tom" <nospam@bed> wrote in message 
news:472f158f$1_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>>
>> http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx
>
> Disabled have a concession of a one of payment of £10.00 pa

And, I believe, vehicles registered as disabled are automatically exempt, as 
at present.
-- 
Budgie
NB Reply to newsgroup. Email address will get you nowhere

"Budgie"  wrote in message 
news:ofUXi.20455$Eq.4674@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...
> .
> "Tom" <nospam@bed> wrote in message 
> news:472f158f$1_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>>>
>>> http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx
>>
>> Disabled have a concession of a one of payment of £10.00 pa
>
> And, I believe, vehicles registered as disabled are automatically exempt, 
> as at present.
> -- 
> Budgie
> NB Reply to newsgroup. Email address will get you nowhere

Yes but with a £10.00 registration fee...as stated

On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 06:40:49 -0800, "mart2306@hotmail.com"
 wrote:

>On 5 Nov, 13:07, "Tom" <nospam@bed> wrote:
>> "ITF"  wrote in message
>>
>> news:rplti39i48vj6ueqhaj9v07cpjgjr6nov3@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > This could hurt. And dont forget, other cities will be looking at what
>> > Red Ken does, so it could be coming to a city near you.
>> > I dont see any allowances for disabled.
>>
>> >http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx
>>
>> Disabled have a concession of a one of payment of £10.00 pa
>
>"Different vehicles will be affected over time and increasingly
>tougher emissions standards will apply. Cars, motorcycles and small
>vans will not be affected."

Our only vehicle is a motorhome based on a VW T4 which though it is OK
now wont pass those requirements later
>
>That pretty much covers most disabled people travelling in their own
>vehicle.
>Unless you want to travel in a motor home, HGV or horse box.
Many people do travel in Motorhomes
>
>Oh, not forgetting that improving air quality improves the air quality
>of the disabled too - some of us are affected by air pollution.

Then wear a mask
>

On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 23:26:43 GMT, Mike  wrote:

>Responding to ITF...
>>
>> This could hurt. And dont forget, other cities will be looking at what
>> Red Ken does, so it could be coming to a city near you.
>> I dont see any allowances for disabled.
>>
>> http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx
>
>Hmmm. I sense politically motivated scare-mongering here.

And you miss the obvious foot in the door policy being put down by
Livingstone.

>
>So it looks as if "Red Ken" isn't quite the monster you feared.

So it looks like you cant read between the lines
>
>Considering the effects of constant traffic in such a built up area, 
>this actually looks like yet another good idea from Mayor Ken.

Yeah sure, unless you live in London and drive a Motorhome
>
>Are you by any chance one of those partizan spooks that drop this
>kind of stuff into newsgroups then? Just wondering, as this post sure 
>looks like that kind of thing.

No but its obvious by your ignorance that you will sit back and be
walked over and then start the moaning.

On 6 Nov, 07:56, ITF  wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 06:40:49 -0800, "mart2...@hotmail.com"
>
>
>
>
>
>  wrote:
> >On 5 Nov, 13:07, "Tom" <nospam@bed> wrote:
> >> "ITF"  wrote in message
>
> >>news:rplti39i48vj6ueqhaj9v07cpjgjr6nov3@4ax.com...
>
> >> > This could hurt. And dont forget, other cities will be looking at what
> >> > Red Ken does, so it could be coming to a city near you.
> >> > I dont see any allowances for disabled.
>
> >> >http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx
>
> >> Disabled have a concession of a one of payment of £10.00 pa
>
> >"Different vehicles will be affected over time and increasingly
> >tougher emissions standards will apply. Cars, motorcycles and small
> >vans will not be affected."
>
> Our only vehicle is a motorhome based on a VW T4 which though it is OK
> now wont pass those requirements later
>
> >That pretty much covers most disabled people travelling in their own
> >vehicle.
> >Unless you want to travel in a motor home, HGV or horse box.
>
> Many people do travel in Motorhomes
>
>
>
> >Oh, not forgetting that improving air quality improves the air quality
> >of the disabled too - some of us are affected by air pollution.
>
> Then wear a mask
>
>
>
> - Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Far fewer motorhomes being driven in London by anyone, never mind
disabled, than cars and such.
OK, so you will be affected. Unless upgrading your vehicle or using
other vehicles.
Most others won't be affected in their personal vehicles.

Martin  <><

On 6 Nov, 07:58, ITF  wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 23:26:43 GMT, Mike  wrote:
> >Responding to ITF...
>
> >> This could hurt. And dont forget, other cities will be looking at what
> >> Red Ken does, so it could be coming to a city near you.
> >> I dont see any allowances for disabled.
>
> >>http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx
>
> >Hmmm. I sense politically motivated scare-mongering here.
>
> And you miss the obvious foot in the door policy being put down by
> Livingstone.
>
>
>
> >So it looks as if "Red Ken" isn't quite the monster you feared.
>
> So it looks like you cant read between the lines
>
>
>
> >Considering the effects of constant traffic in such a built up area,
> >this actually looks like yet another good idea from Mayor Ken.
>
> Yeah sure, unless you live in London and drive a Motorhome
>
>
>
> >Are you by any chance one of those partizan spooks that drop this
> >kind of stuff into newsgroups then? Just wondering, as this post sure
> >looks like that kind of thing.
>
> No but its obvious by your ignorance that you will sit back and be
> walked over and then start the moaning.

Funny really, I've done quite a bit of driving in London over the
years. Hardly ever saw a motorhome being driven.
Though there will be some who own one and use it to go away with, I
presume few Londoners will have one as their sole vehicle. Parking is
bad enough with a small car.....

Martin  <><

Responding to ITF...
> On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 23:26:43 GMT, Mike  wrote:
>
>>Responding to ITF...
>>>
>>> This could hurt. And dont forget, other cities will be looking at what
>>> Red Ken does, so it could be coming to a city near you.
>>> I dont see any allowances for disabled.
>>>
>>> http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/lez/default.aspx
>>
>>Hmmm. I sense politically motivated scare-mongering here.
>
> And you miss the obvious foot in the door policy being put down by
> Livingstone.

Oh yeah, right. I forgot he was bent on world domination. My bad.

>>
>>So it looks as if "Red Ken" isn't quite the monster you feared.
>
> So it looks like you cant read between the lines

You're probably right. All I saw was nothing between the lines except 
empty space. Thank god we have people like you to tell us what 
things really mean!


>>Considering the effects of constant traffic in such a built up area, 
>>this actually looks like yet another good idea from Mayor Ken.
>
> Yeah sure, unless you live in London and drive a Motorhome

Drive a motorhome, in London? Why would anyone need or want to do a
thing like that? What a selfish thing to do! If I lived in London,
with the traffic density there, I'd be happy if a forward thinking
mayor did something to reduce the amount of pollution and the traffic
density.

>>Are you by any chance one of those partizan spooks that drop this
>>kind of stuff into newsgroups then? Just wondering, as this post sure 
>>looks like that kind of thing.
>
> No but its obvious by your ignorance that you will sit back and be
> walked over and then start the moaning.
>

Yeah, like the last time Ken Livingstone took over the world. We all 
remember that one. Well, I can't, but I'm sure you can remind me.


(Your agenda is showing. Please adjust your dress. ;)

-- 
   _________________________.0.___________________________
   Everything you ever needed from a religion, plus jokes!
              http://principiadiscordia.com/
   -------------------------.|.---------------------------

On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 00:03:36 -0800, "mart2306@hotmail.com"
 wrote:

>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Far fewer motorhomes being driven in London by anyone, never mind
>disabled, than cars and such.

Agreed but there are a lot. I know I live there. Most are driven by
older people and disabled who have them, as we do as our only vehicle.

>OK, so you will be affected. Unless upgrading your vehicle or using
>other vehicles.
>Most others won't be affected in their personal vehicles.

But many others will


>
>Martin  <><

On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 00:05:21 -0800, "mart2306@hotmail.com"
 wrote:

>>
>> No but its obvious by your ignorance that you will sit back and be
>> walked over and then start the moaning.
>
>Funny really, I've done quite a bit of driving in London over the
>years. Hardly ever saw a motorhome being driven.

Then I suggest you haven't noticed them.I live in Harringey and in my
street alone there are 4 motorhomes

>Though there will be some who own one and use it to go away with, I
>presume few Londoners will have one as their sole vehicle. Parking is
>bad enough with a small car.....

You presume wrong. Of the 4 in my road, 3 are the only means of
transport and 2, including myself are owned by Disabled.

>
>Martin  <><

On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 11:12:54 GMT, Mike  wrote:

>You're probably right. All I saw was nothing between the lines except 
>empty space. Thank god we have people like you to tell us what 
>things really mean!

Just thank me and go on your way then
>
>
>>>Considering the effects of constant traffic in such a built up area, 
>>>this actually looks like yet another good idea from Mayor Ken.
>>
>> Yeah sure, unless you live in London and drive a Motorhome
>
>Drive a motorhome, in London? Why would anyone need or want to do a
>thing like that? 
Your ignorance is astounding or do you only class London as the square
mile. It extend a bit wider than and, other than doing a massive
detour, thereby adding to pollution. Many trips I and others make in
our vans will involve going into red kens domain

>What a selfish thing to do! If I lived in London,
>with the traffic density there, I'd be happy if a forward thinking
>mayor did something to reduce the amount of pollution and the traffic
>density.

That's fine if you dot have a heavily disabled wife, who doesn't like
to be housebound. Have you tried moving a heavily disabled person
around on the underground or a London bus?
>
>>>Are you by any chance one of those partizan spooks that drop this
>>>kind of stuff into newsgroups then? Just wondering, as this post sure 
>>>looks like that kind of thing.
>>
>> No but its obvious by your ignorance that you will sit back and be
>> walked over and then start the moaning.
>>
>
>Yeah, like the last time Ken Livingstone took over the world. We all 
>remember that one. Well, I can't, but I'm sure you can remind me.

Then I will suggest you are a red Ken apologists.
>
>
>(Your agenda is showing. Please adjust your dress. ;)

I would suggest your agenda is showing more than mine, pinko

On 7 Nov, 07:55, ITF  wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 00:05:21 -0800, "mart2...@hotmail.com"
>
>  wrote:
>
> >> No but its obvious by your ignorance that you will sit back and be
> >> walked over and then start the moaning.
>
> >Funny really, I've done quite a bit of driving in London over the
> >years. Hardly ever saw a motorhome being driven.
>
> Then I suggest you haven't noticed them.I live in Harringey and in my
> street alone there are 4 motorhomes
>
> >Though there will be some who own one and use it to go away with, I
> >presume few Londoners will have one as their sole vehicle. Parking is
> >bad enough with a small car.....
>
> You presume wrong. Of the 4 in my road, 3 are the only means of
> transport and 2, including myself are owned by Disabled.
>
>
>
>
>
> >Martin  <><- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Sorry, these 4 motorhomes - how often are they driven?
Not usually very fuel efficient, often a bugger to park on the street
(like any long or wide vehicle) and many car parks are too small for
them.
So again, hardly ever saw a motorhome being driven.

Seems like you are taking an idea to reduce air pollution and taking
it personally. Still, nothing to say you must live in London and
pollute the air.
Could polute it elsewhere.

Funny really, many of the disabled people I know in London use
taxis.....
Maybe they really are cheaper and easier than running motorhomes all
over the place.

Martin  <><

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 06:14:47 -0800, "mart2306@hotmail.com"
 wrote
>> You presume wrong. Of the 4 in my road, 3 are the only means of
>> transport and 2, including myself are owned by Disabled.

>> >Martin  <><- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Sorry, these 4 motorhomes - how often are they driven?

3 of them practically everyday. One chap uses his for work
>Not usually very fuel efficient, 
28 MPG from a VW T4? that isn't bad.

>often a bugger to park on the street
>(like any long or wide vehicle) and many car parks are too small for
>them.
You really ought to bone up on Motorhomes.
2 of the vans are VW T4's which can be parked in any parking spot.
One is a Bambi, and the other is a Transit based unit.


>So again, hardly ever saw a motorhome being driven.
Then you obviously dont look
>
>Seems like you are taking an idea to reduce air pollution and taking
>it personally.
Its the thin end of the wedge

> Still, nothing to say you must live in London and
>pollute the air.
>Could polute it elsewhere.

Oh sure I pull up sticks and move away from facilities, family and
friends for a cunt like Livingstone
>
>Funny really, many of the disabled people I know in London use
>taxis.....
Then they must be either bloody rich or bloody stupid or not have
someone very disabled to have to move around.

>Maybe they really are cheaper and easier than running motorhomes all
>over the place.
No they arent AND they use diesel so lets see THEM all get banned from
Londodn or have to pay £100 a day. What about all the diesel fume
producing trains? and the smelly busses

On 7 Nov, 16:54, ITF  wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 06:14:47 -0800, "mart2...@hotmail.com"
>  wrote
>
> >> You presume wrong. Of the 4 in my road, 3 are the only means of
> >> transport and 2, including myself are owned by Disabled.
> >> >Martin  <><- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> >Sorry, these 4 motorhomes - how often are they driven?
>
> 3 of them practically everyday. One chap uses his for work>Not usually very fuel efficient,
>
> 28 MPG from a VW T4? that isn't bad.

Not bad. Unless compared to a Fiat Bravo on 44mpg. Or a Ford ka on
62mpg.
Now for fuel efficiency, Fiat 126 was brilliant. Clocked over 100 mpg.
Not suitable for everyone though - but could fit a fold up wheelchair
in the bonnet.

>
> >often a bugger to park on the street
> >(like any long or wide vehicle) and many car parks are too small for
> >them.
>
> You really ought to bone up on Motorhomes.
> 2 of the vans are VW T4's which can be parked in any parking spot.
> One is a Bambi, and the other is a Transit based unit.

Then you'll know that transit based units don't fit everywhere.

Will the Low emmission zone class those as small?

"The Low Emission Zone (LEZ) will affect older, diesel-engined
lorries, buses, coaches and large vans (exceeding 1.205 tonnes unladen
weight) and minibuses.

It will also include other specialist vehicles that are derived from
lorries and vans including; motorised horse boxes, breakdown and
recovery vehicles, refuse collection vehicles, gritters, sweepers,
concrete mixers, tippers, removals lorries, fire engines, motor
caravans, ambulances and large hearses (over 2.5 tonnes) are also
included."

Its not as if a motorhome is the only method of transport in the
transport capital of Britain.

Or:

"Vehicle modifications
If you use a vehicle within the Low Emission Zone (LEZ) which does not
meet the specified emissions standards you may be able to modify it to
reduce its emissions, and so ensure it meets them. Options include:

Fitting approved pollution abatement equipment or

Fitting a cleaner replacement engine or

Converting to an approved alternative fuel "

So those vehicles that have the worst emissions could be altered.
Or scrapped.  :)





>
> >So again, hardly ever saw a motorhome being driven.
>
> Then you obviously dont look

Pretty sure I look.
Unusual vehicles in London occasionally.

>
> >Seems like you are taking an idea to reduce air pollution and taking
> >it personally.
>
> Its the thin end of the wedge

For you maybe. If so, just don't accept it. Either take the fines or
shift areas.
Or could get a compliant vehicle.

>
> > Still, nothing to say you must live in London and
> >pollute the air.
> >Could polute it elsewhere.
>
> Oh sure I pull up sticks and move away from facilities, family and
> friends for a cunt like Livingstone

Well you must love him enough to stay then.
I'm no great fan of his but seems like enough people keep voting him
into office. Despite or because of what he has done.

>
> >Funny really, many of the disabled people I know in London use
> >taxis.....
>
> Then they must be either bloody rich or bloody stupid or not have
> someone very disabled to have to move around.
>

More expensive than owning and driving a motorhome?


> >Maybe they really are cheaper and easier than running motorhomes all
> >over the place.
>
> No they arent AND they use diesel so lets see THEM all get banned from
> Londodn or have to pay £100 a day. What about all the diesel fume
> producing trains? and the smelly busses

Yes, taxis often use diesel. Not all - some of the private hire ones
are petrol.
They also tend to be checked often for problems and emmissions aren't
too bad.
Rather better than most cars - they tend to be run better.


Martin  <><

On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:14:19 -0800, "mart2306@hotmail.com"
 wrote:

>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> >Sorry, these 4 motorhomes - how often are they driven?
>>
>> 3 of them practically everyday. One chap uses his for work>Not usually very fuel efficient,
>>
>> 28 MPG from a VW T4? that isn't bad.
>
>Not bad. Unless compared to a Fiat Bravo on 44mpg. Or a Ford ka on
>62mpg.
Well then you could say that's not bad compared to say a bike.
But it would be totally impossible for me to use either of the above
cars with my wife. It would then also preclude us from having a
holiday and getting out at weekends.

>Now for fuel efficiency, Fiat 126 was brilliant. Clocked over 100 mpg.
>Not suitable for everyone though - but could fit a fold up wheelchair
>in the bonnet.
But its a shed. And even though it might fit a wheelchair in would be
totally useless for my wife.

>
>>
>> >often a bugger to park on the street
>> >(like any long or wide vehicle) and many car parks are too small for
>> >them.
>>
>> You really ought to bone up on Motorhomes.
>> 2 of the vans are VW T4's which can be parked in any parking spot.
>> One is a Bambi, and the other is a Transit based unit.
>
>Then you'll know that transit based units don't fit everywhere.
>
>Will the Low emmission zone class those as small?
3 of them yes, untill 2010

>>
>Its not as if a motorhome is the only method of transport in the
>transport capital of Britain.

It most certainly is if you are as disabled as my wife.

>
>So those vehicles that have the worst emissions could be altered.
>Or scrapped.  :)
Altered? whos going to pay?
Scrapped, what are we to use then. I really don't think you have even
started to consider the problems of moving someone with a serious
disability around

>>
>> >So again, hardly ever saw a motorhome being driven.
>>
>> Then you obviously dont look
>
>Pretty sure I look.
>Unusual vehicles in London occasionally.

Strange.On a drive from Harringey to Greenwich yesterday I counted 16
>
>>
>> >Seems like you are taking an idea to reduce air pollution and taking
>> >it personally.
>>
>> Its the thin end of the wedge
>
>For you maybe. If so, just don't accept it. Either take the fines or
>shift areas.
>Or could get a compliant vehicle.

Typical answer. Lets see you start screaming when its done where you
live

>>
>> Oh sure I pull up sticks and move away from facilities, family and
>> friends for a cunt like Livingstone
>
>Well you must love him enough to stay then.
I love my wife yes. But I also love the area I was born and brought up
in and the area where all our support is and the area where all our
children and grandchildren are.
You are good at simplistic answers that suit you arent you?

>I'm no great fan of his but seems like enough people keep voting him
>into office. Despite or because of what he has done.

He's an asshole. Tossed out of office once for wasting public money,
he changes his public persona then gets voted back in by the unknowing
who didnt know the crap he can get up to.

>
>>
>> >Funny really, many of the disabled people I know in London use
>> >taxis.....
>>
>> Then they must be either bloody rich or bloody stupid or not have
>> someone very disabled to have to move around.

>More expensive than owning and driving a motorhome?
Have you actually been in a London taxi? checked out the fare? then it
would probably take me 10 minutes to get the wife in and out, all
whilst the meter is ticking over
>
>
>> >Maybe they really are cheaper and easier than running motorhomes all
>> >over the place.
>>
>> No they arent AND they use diesel so lets see THEM all get banned from
>> Londodn or have to pay £100 a day. What about all the diesel fume
>> producing trains? and the smelly busses
>
>Yes, taxis often use diesel. Not all - some of the private hire ones
>are petrol.
There are very few Taxis in or around London that use petrol

>They also tend to be checked often for problems and emmissions aren't
>too bad.

Too Bad ? I suggest you drive around behind them, have you also seen
the amount of taxis around at certain times? in Central London there
are times when theres more taxis on the road than private cars.

>Rather better than most cars - they tend to be run better.
You are wrong

On 8 Nov, 07:57, ITF  wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:14:19 -0800, "mart2...@hotmail.com"
>
>  wrote:
>
> >> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> >> >Sorry, these 4 motorhomes - how often are they driven?
>
> >> 3 of them practically everyday. One chap uses his for work>Not usually very fuel efficient,
>
> >> 28 MPG from a VW T4? that isn't bad.
>
> >Not bad. Unless compared to a Fiat Bravo on 44mpg. Or a Ford ka on
> >62mpg.
>
> Well then you could say that's not bad compared to say a bike.
> But it would be totally impossible for me to use either of the above
> cars with my wife. It would then also preclude us from having a
> holiday and getting out at weekends.
>
> >Now for fuel efficiency, Fiat 126 was brilliant. Clocked over 100 mpg.
> >Not suitable for everyone though - but could fit a fold up wheelchair
> >in the bonnet.
>
> But its a shed. And even though it might fit a wheelchair in would be
> totally useless for my wife.
>
>
>
> >> >often a bugger to park on the street
> >> >(like any long or wide vehicle) and many car parks are too small for
> >> >them.
>
> >> You really ought to bone up on Motorhomes.
> >> 2 of the vans are VW T4's which can be parked in any parking spot.
> >> One is a Bambi, and the other is a Transit based unit.
>
> >Then you'll know that transit based units don't fit everywhere.
>
> >Will the Low emmission zone class those as small?
>
> 3 of them yes, untill 2010
>
>
>
> >Its not as if a motorhome is the only method of transport in the
> >transport capital of Britain.
>
> It most certainly is if you are as disabled as my wife.
>
>
>
> >So those vehicles that have the worst emissions could be altered.
> >Or scrapped.  :)
>
> Altered? whos going to pay?
> Scrapped, what are we to use then. I really don't think you have even
> started to consider the problems of moving someone with a serious
> disability around
>
>
>
> >> >So again, hardly ever saw a motorhome being driven.
>
> >> Then you obviously dont look
>
> >Pretty sure I look.
> >Unusual vehicles in London occasionally.
>
> Strange.On a drive from Harringey to Greenwich yesterday I counted 16
>
>
>
> >> >Seems like you are taking an idea to reduce air pollution and taking
> >> >it personally.
>
> >> Its the thin end of the wedge
>
> >For you maybe. If so, just don't accept it. Either take the fines or
> >shift areas.
> >Or could get a compliant vehicle.
>
> Typical answer. Lets see you start screaming when its done where you
> live
>
>
>
> >> Oh sure I pull up sticks and move away from facilities, family and
> >> friends for a cunt like Livingstone
>
> >Well you must love him enough to stay then.
>
> I love my wife yes. But I also love the area I was born and brought up
> in and the area where all our support is and the area where all our
> children and grandchildren are.
> You are good at simplistic answers that suit you arent you?
>
> >I'm no great fan of his but seems like enough people keep voting him
> >into office. Despite or because of what he has done.
>
> He's an asshole. Tossed out of office once for wasting public money,
> he changes his public persona then gets voted back in by the unknowing
> who didnt know the crap he can get up to.
>
>
>
> >> >Funny really, many of the disabled people I know in London use
> >> >taxis.....
>
> >> Then they must be either bloody rich or bloody stupid or not have
> >> someone very disabled to have to move around.
> >More expensive than owning and driving a motorhome?
>
> Have you actually been in a London taxi? checked out the fare? then it
> would probably take me 10 minutes to get the wife in and out, all
> whilst the meter is ticking over
>
> >> >Maybe they really are cheaper and easier than running motorhomes all
> >> >over the place.
>
> >> No they arent AND they use diesel so lets see THEM all get banned from
> >> Londodn or have to pay £100 a day. What about all the diesel fume
> >> producing trains? and the smelly busses
>
> >Yes, taxis often use diesel. Not all - some of the private hire ones
> >are petrol.
>
> There are very few Taxis in or around London that use petrol
>
> >They also tend to be checked often for problems and emmissions aren't
> >too bad.
>
> Too Bad ? I suggest you drive around behind them, have you also seen
> the amount of taxis around at certain times? in Central London there
> are times when theres more taxis on the road than private cars.
>
> >Rather better than most cars - they tend to be run better.
>
> You are wrong

You disagree with me, no problem with that.
No problem when low emissions comes my way - I'm in a car. You say red
ken is an asshole - ok,means he is a politician.
Yet he gets voted in - probably by people who don't care about his
policies or actually like them.
I for one will be glad if air quality in cities improves. More than
enough people with respiritory problems around. And yes, I've used
London taxis many times. Every time I'm in London it seems (tubes and
buses would usually make me late for my meetings).

Seems like your choice is simply to pay. You say you can't use a
different vehicle, can't afford taxis and can't get altered.
When all the choices you can't do are taken away, whats left become
your only options.

Martin  <><

Responding to ITF...
> On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 11:12:54 GMT, Mike  wrote:
>
>>You're probably right. All I saw was nothing between the lines except 
>>empty space. Thank god we have people like you to tell us what 
>>things really mean!
>
> Just thank me and go on your way then

Yeah, hang on a minute, I need to swerve around that huge ego that
just ran out in front of me.

Aaaaand there we go! Damn! Spilled my coffee!

>>
>>
>>>>Considering the effects of constant traffic in such a built up area, 
>>>>this actually looks like yet another good idea from Mayor Ken.
>>>
>>> Yeah sure, unless you live in London and drive a Motorhome
>>
>>Drive a motorhome, in London? Why would anyone need or want to do a
>>thing like that? 
> Your ignorance is astounding or do you only class London as the square
> mile. It extend a bit wider than and, other than doing a massive
> detour, thereby adding to pollution. Many trips I and others make in
> our vans will involve going into red kens domain

Ignorance? Astounding? Thats because its actually sarcasm based on
your blatent and clearly biased political flag waving, and you missed
it. The rest is just you and your political opinions.


>>What a selfish thing to do! If I lived in London,
>>with the traffic density there, I'd be happy if a forward thinking
>>mayor did something to reduce the amount of pollution and the traffic
>>density.
>
> That's fine if you dot have a heavily disabled wife, who doesn't like
> to be housebound. Have you tried moving a heavily disabled person
> around on the underground or a London bus?

How does this relate to the fact there was nothing in the resource 
you cited that indicated that your disability mobility vehicle would 
be restricted? Oh, right, its ALL Red Ken's fault, him being supreme 
overlord of London and all that.

>>
>>>>Are you by any chance one of those partizan spooks that drop this
>>>>kind of stuff into newsgroups then? Just wondering, as this post sure 
>>>>looks like that kind of thing.
>>>
>>> No but its obvious by your ignorance that you will sit back and be
>>> walked over and then start the moaning.
>>>
>>
>>Yeah, like the last time Ken Livingstone took over the world. We all 
>>remember that one. Well, I can't, but I'm sure you can remind me.
>
> Then I will suggest you are a red Ken apologists.

Suggest away. Enjoy yourself!

>>
>>
>>(Your agenda is showing. Please adjust your dress. ;)
>
> I would suggest your agenda is showing more than mine, pinko
>

Pinko! Wow! Not heard that one in a while! (Do you favour a tightly 
clipped hairstyle and wear ex-army fatigues by any chance? ;)

-- 
          ________________.0.________________
          The Way of the Chao-Pao! is strong.
               http://tinyurl.com/382gmp
               -----------.|.-----------

On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 22:18:37 GMT, Mike  wrote:

>
>Yeah, hang on a minute, I need to swerve around that huge ego that
>just ran out in front of me.
>
>Aaaaand there we go! Damn! Spilled my coffee!

Oh dear, a coffee drinker
>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>Considering the effects of constant traffic in such a built up area, 
>>>>>this actually looks like yet another good idea from Mayor Ken.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah sure, unless you live in London and drive a Motorhome
>>>
>>>Drive a motorhome, in London? Why would anyone need or want to do a
>>>thing like that? 
>> Your ignorance is astounding or do you only class London as the square
>> mile. It extend a bit wider than and, other than doing a massive
>> detour, thereby adding to pollution. Many trips I and others make in
>> our vans will involve going into red kens domain
>
>Ignorance? Astounding? Thats because its actually sarcasm based on
>your blatent and clearly biased political flag waving, and you missed
>it. The rest is just you and your political opinions.

No political flagwaving at all. I would have condemned the ridiculous
act whoever it was. Its just idiots attempting to get us all onto
public transport

>
>
>>>What a selfish thing to do! If I lived in London,
>>>with the traffic density there, I'd be happy if a forward thinking
>>>mayor did something to reduce the amount of pollution and the traffic
>>>density.
>>
>> That's fine if you dot have a heavily disabled wife, who doesn't like
>> to be housebound. Have you tried moving a heavily disabled person
>> around on the underground or a London bus?
>
>How does this relate to the fact there was nothing in the resource 
>you cited that indicated that your disability mobility vehicle would 
>be restricted? Oh, right, its ALL Red Ken's fault, him being supreme 
>overlord of London and all that.

I take it you have read it? No? Ahh so its simply an argument your
after then.
>
>>>
>>>>>Are you by any chance one of those partizan spooks that drop this
>>>>>kind of stuff into newsgroups then? Just wondering, as this post sure 
>>>>>looks like that kind of thing.
>>>>
>>>> No but its obvious by your ignorance that you will sit back and be
>>>> walked over and then start the moaning.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Yeah, like the last time Ken Livingstone took over the world. We all 
>>>remember that one. Well, I can't, but I'm sure you can remind me.
>>
>> Then I will suggest you are a red Ken apologists.
>
>Suggest away. Enjoy yourself!

And Im right
>
>>>
>>>
>>>(Your agenda is showing. Please adjust your dress. ;)
>>
>> I would suggest your agenda is showing more than mine, pinko
>>
>
>Pinko! Wow! Not heard that one in a while! (Do you favour a tightly 
>clipped hairstyle and wear ex-army fatigues by any chance? ;)

Take your pick, It will all look admirably stupid .

Responding to ITF...
> On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 22:18:37 GMT, Mike  wrote:
>
>>
>>Yeah, hang on a minute, I need to swerve around that huge ego that
>>just ran out in front of me.
>>
>>Aaaaand there we go! Damn! Spilled my coffee!
>
> Oh dear, a coffee drinker

Not now, I spilled it avoiding your ego. Good job I have a few 
teabags in reserve!

>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Considering the effects of constant traffic in such a built up area, 
>>>>>>this actually looks like yet another good idea from Mayor Ken.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah sure, unless you live in London and drive a Motorhome
>>>>
>>>>Drive a motorhome, in London? Why would anyone need or want to do a
>>>>thing like that? 
>>> Your ignorance is astounding or do you only class London as the square
>>> mile. It extend a bit wider than and, other than doing a massive
>>> detour, thereby adding to pollution. Many trips I and others make in
>>> our vans will involve going into red kens domain
>>
>>Ignorance? Astounding? Thats because its actually sarcasm based on
>>your blatent and clearly biased political flag waving, and you missed
>>it. The rest is just you and your political opinions.
>
> No political flagwaving at all. I would have condemned the ridiculous
> act whoever it was. Its just idiots attempting to get us all onto
> public transport

"Idiots" in plural. Not just "Red Ken" then?

And there's me thinking that because you blamed the whole thing that 
didn't appear in your citation on "Red Ken" you were actually blaming 
"Red Ken" and not the collective you now appear to be blaming for 
something that did not appear in your citation.

Yeah, politically unbiased. I can see that now you've explained it so 
well. When you say "Red Ken", its in an affectionate way. My bad, I 
thought when you used that Thatcherite media assassination propaganda 
term you were intending to use it in the same way its always been 
used, as an insulting derogatory distraction label. How silly of me!

>
>>
>>
>>>>What a selfish thing to do! If I lived in London,
>>>>with the traffic density there, I'd be happy if a forward thinking
>>>>mayor did something to reduce the amount of pollution and the traffic
>>>>density.
>>>
>>> That's fine if you dot have a heavily disabled wife, who doesn't like
>>> to be housebound. Have you tried moving a heavily disabled person
>>> around on the underground or a London bus?
>>
>>How does this relate to the fact there was nothing in the resource 
>>you cited that indicated that your disability mobility vehicle would 
>>be restricted? Oh, right, its ALL Red Ken's fault, him being supreme 
>>overlord of London and all that.
>
> I take it you have read it? No? Ahh so its simply an argument your
> after then.

So, you can't find an appropriate passage to cite then.

Neither could I. Just your knee-jerk conclusions, and reference to 
"Red Ken", which we now know is a term *you* use affectionately.

Its your argument. *You* prove *your* point.

>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Are you by any chance one of those partizan spooks that drop this
>>>>>>kind of stuff into newsgroups then? Just wondering, as this post sure 
>>>>>>looks like that kind of thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> No but its obvious by your ignorance that you will sit back and be
>>>>> walked over and then start the moaning.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yeah, like the last time Ken Livingstone took over the world. We all 
>>>>remember that one. Well, I can't, but I'm sure you can remind me.
>>>
>>> Then I will suggest you are a red Ken apologists.
>>
>>Suggest away. Enjoy yourself!
>
> And Im right

In your own mind you are clearly a god. In mine, you are a prat.

Interesting contrast there. I bet you get a lot of that. Hmmm?
(Come on! Admit it! You do! And its always some "Pinko" like me!)

>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>(Your agenda is showing. Please adjust your dress. ;)
>>>
>>> I would suggest your agenda is showing more than mine, pinko
>>>
>>
>>Pinko! Wow! Not heard that one in a while! (Do you favour a tightly 
>>clipped hairstyle and wear ex-army fatigues by any chance? ;)
>
> Take your pick, It will all look admirably stupid .

??? That reply doesn't connect. Want another go?

Lets rephrase it for you.

Because you used a cute term from 60s paranoid America, I asked you
if you also favoured wearing ex-army fatigues and had a closely
trimmed hairstyle, which would have been a classic image for a "down
on his luck" right wing type typical of the opinions you've offered
on this thread.

So, DO you have a short hairstyle and DO you wear ex-army fatigues?

Come to that, do you also carry a firearm and warn people to "Just 
keep on drivin' boy!" if they slow down near your parked-up ve-hicle?

;)

-- 
          ________________.0.________________
          The Way of the Chao-Pao! is strong.
               http://tinyurl.com/382gmp
               -----------.|.-----------

On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 11:06:57 GMT, Mike  wrote:

>Come to that, do you also carry a firearm and warn people to "Just 
>keep on drivin' boy!" if they slow down near your parked-up ve-hicle?
>
>;)
My My what a pompous little prat you are
Do you take lessons from Gold or did you get it from your mother.
You didnt get it from you father as you surely dont know who he was.

Ill put you on the old killfile then peoplecan get back to discussing
matters of disability of which my original thread was on topic.
Bye by Mr Pomposity.

Responding to ITF...
> On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 11:06:57 GMT, Mike  wrote:
>
>>Come to that, do you also carry a firearm and warn people to "Just 
>>keep on drivin' boy!" if they slow down near your parked-up ve-hicle?
>>
>>;)
> My My what a pompous little prat you are
> Do you take lessons from Gold or did you get it from your mother.
> You didnt get it from you father as you surely dont know who he was.
>
> Ill put you on the old killfile then peoplecan get back to discussing
> matters of disability of which my original thread was on topic.
> Bye by Mr Pomposity.
>

No sense of humour, some people. ;)

-- 
          ________________.0.________________
          The Way of the Chao-Pao! is strong.
               http://tinyurl.com/382gmp
               -----------.|.-----------