Skip to main content

With the real John O Shea please stand up (41 bus)

John O Shea is trying to face both ways on the issue of the No 41 bus.

I raised a serious issue about how the 1985 Transport Act is continuing to undermine bus services outside London. I did this at Prime Ministers question time. The Prime Minister is in charge of a government that is responsible for the statutory environment for buses.

On The Stirrer John O Shea says:
"As a matter of fact, I would support re-regulation of the bus system and local control rather like that in London. It makes sense to try and integrate the operation."

On his blog he says:
"And before John Hemming burbles something about the Labour Party not caring, he's wrong. we've been campaigning on this as well."

On the other hand he quotes Conservative Councillor Gareth Crompton:
"You made an absolute tit of yourself at PMQs, provoking howls of derision from all sides.."

John O Shea has to decide whether it is right to raise the issue of how the problems with the regulation of bus services cause the cancellation of services like the No 41 bus or not.

Either I was right to raise the issue with the PM - who has the ability to get the legislation changed - or not.

It is no good Labour saying well ... we don't like the cancellation of the No 41 bus, but you mustn't say anything in parliament about it.

The simple fact is most Labour MPs don't rely on bus services for their transport and were quite happy to deride me for mentioning it. That says a lot.


Jerry said…
Maybe a few responses to John O Shea should read....

Never mind John, there's plenty 'o' Room up stairs, OOOOPs sorry, Tickets Please!!!.

Or maybe he would like the respone I always get, The "NO.41" is "out of service, hang fire in the cold and rain, we are almost positive something will come along soon"

Hey us poor smucks are used to it, so I suppose we will just plod on regardless, Hey I don't even live anywhere remotely close to the "No. 41" but the same thing, identicle in every sense happenes to me on a daily basis, big question is WHY?
PoliticalHack said…
Do many MPs rely on buses for transport? You certainly don't.
john said…
I don't rely on the bus, but I do use the bus.

The point, however, is that I do take seriously the concerns of those people who do rely on the bus.

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. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.

I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…