Single issue anti-LTN candidate unsuccessful in general election

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

One of the candidates in the recent Dulwich and West Norwood election was Mike Spenser. I hadn't heard of him before election day.

Spenser was an independent candidate running on a single issue platform: against LTNs. As far as I can understand it, Spenser wanted to:

1) scrap all existing LTNs

2) any measures to address pollution must be made on the basis of more extensive consultations 

3) responsibility for local traffic management should be passed to central government.

The candidate received 296 votes (0.7% of total).

This is the second, or maybe the third, attempt by opponents of the LTNs to turn elections (first the Tories in local elections, then this candidate for Westminster) into referenda on LTN. If they were referenda, then the issue has been definitively disposed of: the anti-LTN candidates were all defeated by some margin.

https://whocanivotefor.co.uk/person/117472/mike-spenser

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2024/uk/constituencies/E14001205

[Rockets]

I am surprised he got that many votes!

[Penguin68]

Why would anyone vote for an individual standing for Parliament on what is essentially a local issue - even if he is trying to make a national point, apparently? LTN implementation may have been flawed in Dulwich, but that doesn't mean that is is universally flawed as a concept (numbers of LTNs across the country haven't been objected to, although some clearly have) - his remedy, to make local traffic rules a matter for national government is wholly disproportionate, of course. What is extraordinary is that as many as nearly 300 people were prepared to throw their vote away - which actually suggests to me that it is an important issue locally - 300 voters prepared to register such a futile objection (futile in it's likely effect) does suggest some strength of feeling. Maybe if more people voted on local issues on local elections (rather than using a local vote to make a national point, which apparently has been the case most recently) we'd get better local government.

[malumbu]

Occasionally single issue candidates are elected, Martin Bell being the main example.  I think there was someone who got in, in a recent election, opposing the closure of a local hospital.  This time we have had a number of single issue MPs, those opposing the war in Palestine, and five MPs who are in a party who don't like foreigners.  That is not a facetious comment.

As for the odd person above, they should have campaigned against all controls against motorists, LTNs only captures measures since COVID, local authorities have been closing roads, making them one way, charging for parking etc for at least the last fifty years.  Not that it would have made the slightest difference.

[first mate]

I think most of us agree that single issue candidates are almost irrelevant at a GE. But, I also agree, it is noteworthy that some 300 locals were prepared to vote in support of a candidate against LTNs, especially if those voting were concentrated in a small area.

It was always going to be a Labour candidate at national level, as most of us wanted the last govt out. However, perhaps that certainty emboldened a few to use their votes to make a local point as well?

[Earl Aelfheah]

Sunak ordered the DfT to undertake an official study of low-traffic neighbourhoods amid efforts to stop them being built / exploit a potential wedge issue / culture war. It concluded they are generally popular.

Despite a very angry minority of people who will not accept even a modest attempt to address (almost total) car dominance of our public spaces, the majority welcome them.

Likewise, polling shows that ULEZ has majority support in London.

People want safer, quieter areas where one can linger and where (especially kids) can walk and cycle a bit more comfortably / safely.

The Dulwich LTN has been in place around 4 years now. The Square is hugely popular and the shops around it are booming. The absolute obsession of those determined to rip it out so that their car can have priority in all cases, is almost pathological at this stage.

Edited July 12 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

32 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Sunak ordered the DfT to undertake an official study of low-traffic neighbourhoods amid efforts to stop them being built / exploit a potential wedge issue / culture war. It concluded they are generally popular.

...with people who live WITHIN the LTNs....a vital part of the story that you have, perhaps deliberately, left out......

[Earl Aelfheah]

All polling has shown the same thing - that LTNs have majority support. The same is true of ULEZ. Whilst there is a lot of noise from those in favour of car priority in all cases, there is no evidence that their views are widely held. In the local elections, across London those who implemented LTNs were overwhelmingly returned to office with even greater majorities. 

I strongly suspect that if Dulwich Square were ever torn up so that cars could queue there again, you would see a lot of people and businesses up in arms.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2023/07/13/latest-polling-shows-overwhelming-public-support-for-ltns/

Edited July 12 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

Please don't then post an article by a cycle protagonist using research from a pay to play research house who don't tell you who commissioned the research.....ah....

P.S. Interesting that in said research it also says that Londoners think that cycling should have the lowest priority..one presumes you validate that too? Funny how Carlton Reid didn't pick up on that finding....

 

When asked which mode of transport should be given the highest priority on London’s streets, 37% say buses should be given the highest priority. 21% believe pedestrians should be given the highest priority, followed by private cars (13%) and cyclists (12%).

[Earl Aelfheah]

Show me any polling data that shows the majority of Londoners are against LTNs and / or ULEZ.

[Penguin68]

2 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

I strongly suspect that if Dulwich Square were ever torn up so that cars could queue there again, you would see a lot of people and businesses up in arms.

That would be a poll with a sample size, and universe, of 1 then? 

[Rockets]

30 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Show me any polling data that shows the majority of Londoners are against LTNs and / or ULEZ.

There isn't any because the anti-LTN lobby didn't pay a company to find the results it wanted......the pro-LTN lobby on the other hand have used this tactic from the get-go and then they get pro-LTN journalists like Carlton Reid or Peter Walker (often giving them "exclusives") to amplify the results because they know they won't ever look at the detail and will just parrot supportive headlines.

Activist researchers feeding activist journalists to amplify an activist agenda.

 

[Kathleen Olander]

3 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Sunak ordered the DfT to undertake an official study of low-traffic neighbourhoods amid efforts to stop them being built / exploit a potential wedge issue / culture war. It concluded they are generally popular.

Despite a very angry minority of people who will not accept even a modest attempt to address (almost total) car dominance of our public spaces, the majority welcome them.

Likewise, polling shows that ULEZ has majority support in London.

People want safer, quieter areas where one can linger and where (especially kids) can walk and cycle a bit more comfortably / safely.

The Dulwich LTN has been in place around 4 years now. The Square is hugely popular and the shops around it are booming. The absolute obsession of those determined to rip it out so that their car can have priority in all cases, is almost pathological at this stage.

Which shops are booming?

[Raeburn]

3 hours ago, Rockets said:

There isn't any because the anti-LTN lobby didn't pay a company to find the results it wanted......the pro-LTN lobby on the other hand have used this tactic from the get-go and then they get pro-LTN journalists like Carlton Reid or Peter Walker (often giving them "exclusives") to amplify the results because they know they won't ever look at the detail and will just parrot supportive headlines.

Activist researchers feeding activist journalists to amplify an activist agenda.

 

The report you posted here - and was published/pushed in loads of mainstream media - is literally a PR splash from an company selling traffic-avoidance softwear.

 

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

4 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Show me any polling data that shows the majority of Londoners are against LTNs and / or ULEZ.

We have local elections, mayoral elections,  Greater London Assembly elections and (I suppose) this last parliamentary elections. They are the definitive polls and they show that ULEZ and LTN opposition is a political loser, each and every time.

On 07/07/2024 at 09:28, first mate said:

it is noteworthy that some 300 locals were prepared to vote in support of a candidate against LTNs

Getting 0.7% of the votes cast is barely footnoteworthy. As far as I can tell I'm the only person who has noted it!

But I do invite future Conservative candidates for council, mayor and Parliament to double down on the losinf streak and build their campaigns around opposition to LTNs - they can get a drubbing again, and again, and again for all I care...

[Rockets]

3 hours ago, Raeburn said:

The report you posted here - and was published/pushed in loads of mainstream media - is literally a PR splash from an company selling traffic-avoidance softwear.

And your point is what exactly because it's pretty clear who commissioned the data isn't it - in fact they are quoted as the source of the information in the second paragraph of that article so they aren't exactly trying to hide it?

Can you find any information on who paid for the Redfield & Wilton report.......? Because they didn't do it for free....I suspect if you ever manage to find who funded it it would be quite enlightening as to why they came to the conclusions they did.....

[Spartacus]

7 hours ago, Dogkennelhillbilly said:

We have local elections, mayoral elections,  Greater London Assembly elections and (I suppose) this last parliamentary elections. They are the definitive polls and they show that ULEZ and LTN opposition is a political loser, each and every time.

Rubbish 

What it showed was a determination to get the Tories out,  any other agenda that any other candidate put forward was swallowed up by a wave of desire to get labour in. 

Still if you want to claim a miral victory because so called minor agendas were trampled underfoot by the stamped then I'm not going to take away from your parade. 

[malumbu]

Wow some political debate.  Something I have missed as we used to have great discussions on the Lounge about Brexit, international, and domestic politics.  I expect that this is something that has moved away from local social media websites (and invaded some neighbourhood WhatsApp groups~). 

So we all are experts!

Well here are some thoughts.  I expect that immigration and incompetence/rule breaking were the reasons that many defected to Reform.  I'm not sure how much Reform played the woke card that Labour will "want to control us and not allow us to drive what we want, where we want, how we want, when we want and/or charge us for the privilege and imprison us only allowing us to journey for a  15 minute walk"

Starmer did mention drivers in his Downing street speech, please let that mean professional drivers rather than the motorists as a whole.  I really don't know why he had to mention it in any case.  His campaign seemed relatively quiet on environmental issues.  Hopefully the Green MPS and some protest vote to Greens in safe Labour seats will push him on this.  I will continue to push our MP on this.

Why Labour were a few percent short of expected votes I'm sure we will hear more on.  Was it the apathetic stay at homes, shy Tories or Sunak doom mongering about a super majority and bringing out the big guns?  Starmer's personal appeal wouldn't help.

As for the single issue of restrictions on motoring - it is fair to say that Sunak's line on ending the war on motorists, and his plan for motorists had bugger all impact.  Hooray.  Even scare stories about a national ULEZ failed to land home.  Noting that government was ordered to sort out air quality by the Supreme Court in 2015 and has legal commitments to reduce carbon and meet net zero.

So in this respect it is correct to say that the masses were not influenced by any  pro motorist message from political parties.

 

[first mate]

On 12/07/2024 at 17:39, Rockets said:

Can you find any information on who paid for the Redfield & Wilton report.......? Because they didn't do it for free....I suspect if you ever manage to find who funded it it would be quite enlightening as to why they came to the conclusions they did...

Does anyone know who funded it?

Edited July 15 by first mate

[Earl Aelfheah]

On 12/07/2024 at 11:00, Penguin68 said:

That would be a poll with a sample size, and universe, of 1 then? 

No, that wouldn't be a poll. It would be an opinion, which is why it was proceeded by the words 'I suspect'.

[Rockets]

Some would suggest that the works of Redfield & Wilton and the likes of Aldred & Co are also opinions.....

[Earl Aelfheah]

Some might give the same weight to a random opinion, a survey undertaken by a polling company, and actual peer reviewed, academic research, yes. 

[Penguin68]

Peer reviewed academic research has been shown, time and time again, not to be worth the paper its published on. Terrible cases of log-rolling and academic jealousies, and a number of (intentionally) fake papers submitted and positively peer reviewed. Journals of record publish rubbish, the MMR 'Research' (and I use that word quite wrongly, being prime example.

I would, in general, trust market research from an independent polling company far more.

[malumbu]

Clearly you don't believe in scientific research.  Better give Sweden a call and speak to those people at the academy that award the Nobel prize.  As a scientist I'm not sure if I am insulted flabbergasted or both.  Well I understand that GB news is a good watch.

[Rockets]

I think a lot of people don't believe in activist research....the wild west of the research community where the conclusions are determined before the research has even started and the researchers have zero impartiality or credibility.