Skip to main content

CBT, National Council of Women and RNIB back John Hemming on buses

The campaign for better transport have written a letter to Gordon Brown in which they say:
We were surprised to hear your dismissive response when the issue of the number 41 bus in Birmingham was raised at Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday 3 February.

John Hemming MP rightly pointed out that bus cuts are symptomatic of a national problem and that the London system of bus franchising should be an option elsewhere.
We were outraged to hear MPs laugh in response. It suggests they are out of touch with the problems people face in their everyday lives.

Two-thirds of public transport journeys are made by bus. 4.8 billion journeys were made by bus and light rail in England in 2008/9, many more than the 1 billion journeys made by rail. On average, 25% of households in the UK don't have access to a car and buses are particularly important during this recession to access employment, education and training. A reliable, high quality bus network gives people the option of leaving their cars behind, which reduces congestion and carbon emissions.

I am writing to seek your assurance that buses and the people who use them are high on the Government’s priority list. You could do this by:
- giving a clear statement of support for the use of new quality contract (bus franchising) powers in West Yorkshire and elsewhere (West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority is likely to be the first authority to use these powers)
- providing funds to WYITA and other transport authorities that want to use quality contract powers, but which need “pump priming” funding


As you can tell if you look at the letter this is backed by the RNIB, PTeg and
National Council of Women of Great Britain (NCWGB).

The response from the PM and the MPs, however, implies that bus issues are not even on the list at all.

Cat Hobbs has blogged about this here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).

KING’S BENCH DIVISION

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

LORD HEWART CJ:
It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…