19 June - Ask a silly question…
Today was going to be a blog free day because I have to negotiate the triple
whammy of no Elizabeth Line services combined with a much reduced SouthEastern
service and nothing from Thameslink. Why railwaymen find the need to strike in
order to further punish the travelling public I have no idea.
However
someone facilitated a quick and easy Sunday comment by asking for justification
of yesterday’s blog about Khan’s money raising ULEZ.
The blog did not deny that there was a pollution problem and began by saying that BiB
sometimes faces both ways and sometimes might be mischievous and yesterday’s probably fell into both camps.
Arguably by featuring what could be construed as Conservative complacency over pollution it was a little left leaning but Sadiq Khan rarely has unmitigated right on his side.
Occasionally one can see the pollution from high vantage points in Bexley (see yesterday’s old photo) and since
becoming an EV driver I am perhaps more aware of exhaust fumes, but it is
reducing problem. What evidence do I have for that asks Mr. his/his/himself/singular.
How about the evidence in Mr. Khan’s report?
“Annual mean Nitrogen dioxide concentrations measured at all automatic monitoring stations
have constantly decreased over the 7-year period (2014-2020) for which data have been reported.”
Clear to most people but maybe not Lefties with narrow views.
I am accused of linking to Khan’s ‘evidence’ but then
“dismissing it”. If picking holes in Khanְ’s report is dismissing it then I am happy to plead guilty.
76 Bexley schools were said to be
adjacent to excessively polluted roads but twelve of them didn’t actually exceed the
guidance, they equalled it. A further 19 exceeded the WHO limit by the smallest
measurable margin. 13 were within the limits.
Khan failed to
push those facts to the fore. They are all there for those who can
be bothered to look but Messrs Khan and Broadbent would prefer that you didn’t.
Out of 89 schools 64
failed the WHO standard not 76 as stated in Khan’s report but Mitchell thinks it is
me who biases the results and not the saintly Sadiq. Ultimately of course Khan
can easily knock any analysis right off course, he admits that the WHO guidelines
can be changed and presumably if at any time he needs more money to fund overseas jollies
or his existing arguments fall apart due to current favourable trends he will do so.
The emphasis of the report
is that pollution in Bexley is above the
adopted limits but as it admits, by only the tiniest of amounts and Khan himself
accepts that electrically powered cars are now 20% of new purchases.
Probably Bexley is borderline polluted right now as is to be expected of a borough with
the worst public transport provision in London and consequently the highest per
capita car ownership, but the former has been in Khan and his predecessors’ hands
since 1933, so whose fault is it?
At this stage I am beginning to think that Mitchell Broadbent is a complete
idiot. Apparently the diligent application of unbounded intellect deduces that I am a climate sceptic but I
cannot find a reference to that subject. Khan makes passing reference to a
climate emergency in his report but I chose to ignore it.
BiB has never mentioned climate change except where it is listed as a Manifesto
promise. So many opportunities to rant about Climate Change and never once
did so. Obviously a rabid climate sceptic - for those with unmovable
preconceptions about people with whom they may not share political affiliations. The intolerant Left.
Running out of ways to pursue a weak argument, MB goes on to be critical about
mickey-taking of the WHO’s assertion that the name Monkeypox is racist. Quite obviously
everyone whose first thought after hearing the word Monkey is to conjure up a
picture of a presumably black man has to be racist at heart. Maybe Mr. B is eyeing up the
monkey wrench in his toolbox right now with malice aforethought.
Finally
I am accused of relying on anecdotes. Very weird. The only thing getting close
to anecdotal was my reference to occasionally seeing and smelling pollution. It, if
anything supports Mr. Broadbent’s blinkered view but his lack of logical
argument won’t let him see it.
If someone follows a Twitter account which exists only to point readers at this
blog they must know by now what to expect. Something that is critical of
untruths and generally right leaning. There is plenty of choice, most blogs lean the other way.
My expectation that any contrary views
I might attract will be well thought and fact based is obviously in vain. Shame.