ugly old tax thief new zealander judith mayhew wants Crossrail at any cost
endcrossrail | 07.10.2008 14:59
The no news commuter paper the Evening Standard gives New Zealander Judith Mayhew centre stage. Mayhew was effectively knighted for her City Corporation dirty work which destroyed the rights of the poor, took masses of corporate welfare and began a programme of displacing ordinary people in London to realise the dreams of property developers. According to Evading Standards, Mayhew is against the sex shops. She might be but I have never heard this woman talk about the lap top clubs sited in poorer parts of London which sit there to feed the worse types of the City. Mayhew like her disgusting City friends wants Crossrail scheme to provide transport needs for bankers and property profits for developers is supported by both Mayor Livingstone and Mayor Johnson. Thankfully Mayhew who is an insult to women has no children as she continues to drive her "any cost" policies in London.
Judith Mayhew is hated by ordinary Londoners for a reason. Her Damehood is laughable she is part of an English institution that is an embarrassment to any right thinking person. Being knighted by the Queen is an insult to any ethical person. It is ok as Dame Judith has no ethics to worry about.
Apparently the Evening Standard wants us to be impressed with her links to the City and the banking industry. Are you having a laugh? or are corporate journalists that stupid?
Apparently the Evening Standard wants us to be impressed with her links to the City and the banking industry. Are you having a laugh? or are corporate journalists that stupid?
endcrossrail
Comments
Hide 2 hidden comments or hide all comments
Ignoring the real story
07.10.2008 16:47
It's kind of weird that the anti-crossrailers haven't picked up on the bigger story, that's already been noted by Private Eye: that Crossrail is looking increasingly under threat.
Private Eye noted that Labour has stopped plugging it to the same extent, and was curiously quiet about it at its party conference, suggesting it was going to be dropped.
Even the Evening Standard piece, that took a kicking above, had some interesting comments that were missed out in the rant above.
It suggested that all the rebuilding work around Tottenham Court Road, which is supposed to tie in with the Crossrail station, is under threat because of the credit crunch.
--
Mark Fenwick, chairman of Fenwick Ltd with a family fortune of £386 million and a board member of the NWEC, thinks it will be a hard sell.
He tells the Evening Standard: “In the current climate, I am afraid to say that the redevelopment of the eastern end of Oxford Street is unlikely to go ahead. I'm surmising that it will be postponed and won't be going forward because of the current uncertain state of the economy and the deep-seated problems in the property business,” he says.
Rosemarie MacQueen, director of planning and development at Westminster City Council, goes further.
“Right now,” she says, “the eastern side of Oxford Street looks like the back end of some two-bit suburban market town. But the property developers are telling us in no uncertain terms that they won't do any new developments until Crossrail has been sorted out, and so it is unlikely we'll see any movement before 2017." [...]
Doesn't this leave Dame Judith — whose current mandate is for five years only — with a rather diminished brief?
--
By the way, the reason Dame Judith didn't launch an attack on lap-dancing clubs in other parts of London was because she was talking about her new job as .... er ... head of the New West End Company, which only covers some streets around Oxford Street.
Norville B
norville b you have missed the point
07.10.2008 17:56
you seem to have missed the point or you have deliberately done this to avoid the fact that it is clear that judith mayhew is using the evening standard to push her little case for how important crossrail is.
This brings me on to the next point so who does Crossrail benefit and who actually wants it. Crossrail benefits the City and property developers but London does not want it. The only referendum carried out by the evening standard showed people do not think crossrail is vital or important no matter whether has been Livingstone or Mayor Johnson and Mayhew push this point. Most people have not allowed to vote on whether they want crossrail for instance
people who use the northern line definitely do not want or see the need for crossrail and people in the north of london do not want it
people in the south of london do not want crossrail
people in the east end do not want crossrail
people in the west end do not want crossrail
people in the City and Canary wharf do want crossrail but guess what the city have not put up their money and where is the £3.5bn from the the business levy? where is it norville b? perhaps in the same place where all the billiions went with the Lehmans head?
so it seems judith mayhew and her chums in the City do want crossrail but you want to comment on the hard luck story how there is a possibility that they may not be able to rely on corporate welfare to get crossrail. Then you go on to quote yet another hard luck story. This time, it is the man from Fenwicks, he cannot see anything happening until 2017 ie until taxpyaers have got crossrail going, why should taxpayers pay for crossrail?
you pay for it norville b and the idiots in the City.
you seem to be clutching at straws so you can make the evening standard on some silly new zealander no one could care less about unless you are in the property business. she is influential amongst the people with the worst ethics in London, how influential is that really?
your arguments are as flawed as the wrinkles behind the hag who thinks she is influential when she is hated
endcrossrail
more info on mayhew
07.10.2008 18:35
notocrossrail
mayhew wants more taxpayers money while business gets to pay nothing
07.10.2008 18:54
A third of top companies in the UK pay no tax and they want the Government to cut more corporation tax so as most are paying zero and getting loads of subsidies, what is too much for these idiots?
Londoners are subsidising the City, so why does it not go somewhere else for its subsidies can it take the uglies with it, that is in case you are wondering Livingstone, Johnson and Mayhew with her financial idiots and her new husband.
Mayhew is like that other disgusting legal person mentioned in the Crossrail articles Adrian Montague
endcrossrail
*sigh*
08.10.2008 09:21
I've just pointed out that there is growing evidence that Crossrail is in trouble, and if you'd bothered to read the Evening Standard article properly you'd have seen further hints that this was the case from the other people quoted.
If you're really anti-crossrail you should say "Yes, great, that's encouraging. I'm not going to get my hopes up yet, but thanks for pointing that out".
Instead of taking this information on board, you dumbly attack me and suggest I'm pro-Crossrail.
As for your claim that the Dame's whole interview was aimed at plugging Crossrail, again - how naive are you? She mentioned it in that interview because it might lead to the rebuilding of stuff around Oxford Street. Which is exciting for her because her whole job right now is plugging that part of London, which is what that interview was all about. No alarms or surprises there.
You're so busy launching rants about the New Zealander's looks you've missed the bigger picture, a picture that is wholly relevant to the anti-crossrail campaign.
Norville B
anti-crossrailers do not accept the agenda of the right wing press - u do
08.10.2008 10:21
reading behind the lines, what is mayhew about? exploitation of the most vulnerable and raising land values artificially at any cost so her and cohorts can profit, the hag (she is not a woman) is a vulture without ethics and perhaps this is why she is given the job.
Crossrail is bad and people in the campaign will continue to highlight the wrongdoing despite Norville B so people will not forget what was done by these people and we will know the identity of those who tried to present it as a good thing to the public without ever asking them if it was wanted or needed. You also seem to miss the point that lots of people have pointed that there is no support for Crossrail but you only seem to be interested in the newspaper angle (one that is for commuters) and mayhew (some silly new zealander who most Londoners despise). The rest of us do not pander to corporate news angles because there is a small ray of sun shine but because we will expect and demand the proper analysis and if is not coming, we will demand it again and especially in the pathetic article of a woman who is linked to the worst political and business types. Why? because it hides what is really going on ... which is obviously your agenda
have you mentioned why crossrail is good? who actually supports it? that is a real story absent from the evading standards and your pathetic anyalysis of why the crossrail campaign should be pleased.
By the way are you linked to "we" or `'me", he uses the titles "sighs" for his pro-establishment posts, you are all a bit tired arent you? so if you do not mind we will continue to analyse what this stupid new zealand hag keeps saying in the name of Londoners.
eastender
More important story
08.10.2008 10:24
While you were getting you knickers in your twist about someone only tangentially connected to Crossrail mentioning it in passing, you seem to have missed a rather more important story in the same Evening Standard.
The fact you did not notice this story, which is wholly more important to your campaigns, does suggest you are a bunch of amateurs.
--
Crisis puts the Crossrail sums on wrong lines
Anxious times for those involved in the Crossrail project, where key funding documents remain unsigned and the downturn and falling property values have put major question marks against some of the calculations.
--
But no, far more interesting to have a pop at some New Zealander and make references to her looks.
Norville B
the important story was revealed by campaigners long ago - norville b
08.10.2008 10:43
also i am not concerned about the new zealanders looks, it is the lack of looks of the hag called Judith Mayhew, knighted for crimes against London and poor people. Mayhew could always have plastic surgery, she really needs it but she will still have to live with her inside, oh dear was that a "sigh", "we", "me" "Norville B".
eastender
norville b not interested in how crossrail tried to destroy people's lives
08.10.2008 10:57
i say carry on investigate and reveal who these people are?
endcrossrail
Read it again
08.10.2008 12:28
I've just provided a whole lot of useful ammunition for the anti-crossrail campaign.
Read the above links - and, yes, obviously, ignore the ES pro-business bias within them - but there are some useful facts tucked away in there about the shaky status of the project.
I've never said I was in favour of Crossrail. I've never defended the project itself. Why would I point out the the project looks in trouble if I thought it was a great idea?
I could easily be won round to joining the anti campaign, as someone who cares about east London and thinks the public transport plans fail to address where the real pressure points in the city are. But your habit of picking weird targets & ignoring more crucial information makes me worry you don't know what you're doing. Making unsubstantiated, random attacks on me doesn't help.
You accuse me of being the type of person who would have been confident about Bradford and Bingley's finances... after I've posted a series of links suggesting that the financial future of Crossrail is in jeapoardy. And you can't see the irony of that.
Norville B
norville B - joining the campaign??
08.10.2008 15:51
to tell people not to investigate crossrail and the people behind it
many people who have read articles by various people in the campaign have now a very good understanding of the financing problems behind crossrail and some of the people behind them - your efforts seem to be intended to stop that investigation and to also hold those responsible.
if you were serious about joining crossrail rather than send cuttings of newspaper articles, you would be finding about crossrail and if the figures add up, instead you quote journalists who miss the point about the finances.
endcrossrail
modus operandi of subject known as Norville B who has these hallmarks
08.10.2008 16:13
Such people use such ways to divert attention from real issues and from people, norville b has never sought to join the campaign before and neither has he been asked on these lists i think and why would he only wish to join now so many people oppose Crossrail raises further questions
do not trust norville b endcrossrail and anti-crossrail campaigners. do not be put off at norville b's attempts to engage you in polite coversation, norville b would only wish to join the campaign to undermine it or worse still infiltrate it as someone who is opposed to providing any independent thought from the mainstream. norville be is unwelcome as norville b is patronising but never intelligent and someone that anyone would want to join their cause or their ideals.
notocrossrail
Here's some original material
08.10.2008 17:38
Was going to stop, but couldn’t resist.
The original post consisted of little more than a rant containing sexist and xenophobic language against someone, based entirely on quotes lifted out of context from the Evening Standard, in which someone made a predictable, tangential comment about Crossrail. But, of course, the moment I point out more relevant links to those campaigning against Crossrail (ie – the growing swathe of stuff suggesting it is in massive financial trouble), I’m attacked for parroting the corporate line.
You accuse me of failing to investigate, yet you have a track record of printing rants which suggest you’ve not done the most basic research (ie, the piece the other week about Gilligan, accusing him of covering up the cost of Crossrail, when he’d previously exposed it).
You want investigation?
OK – the London Assembly’s budget committee’s just sounded a warning about how the costs of Crossrail are in danger of spiralling out of control because of inflation. And that the project might be delayed because of it.
--
“The budget faces significant risks and cost pressures, particularly relating to the
PPP and Crossrail”
“It will be challenging for TfL to deliver the Mayor’s priorities and manage the cost pressures relating to the PPP and Crossrail within existing resources.”
“Any long-term increase in the cost of borrowing would therefore have an impact
on the affordability of TfL’s contribution, which in turn could result either in a re-phasing of the Crossrail project”
--
They’ve also provided a handy break-down of the costs, for those keeping count, although they seem weirdly low compared to previous estimates - probably because they're not taking the potential cost increases (like inflation) into account.
"Transport for London will jointly fund Crossrail with the Department for Transport
Borrowing £3.5 billion
TfL core contribution £2.7 billion
LU interface savings £0.4 billion
Sales of surplus land and property £0.5 billion
Developer contributions £0.3 billion
London planning charge £0.3 billion
TOTAL £7.7 billion"
You can find all this stuff in this report, that they uploaded today:
--
Of course, all this is in your eyes far less relevant than calling a New Zealander woman “ugly”.
Norville B
response to norville b for his latest moral and information post
08.10.2008 19:38
construction costs have risen and yet the costs of crossrail seem to be going down (a bit odd) you probably would disagree
crossrail is headed by adrian montague famous for handing out liabilities to taxpayers with his deals as negotiated by government so this means crossrail may still get funding but this leaves the government open to a human rights challenge which can be brought at any time
£600 million is still missing from the City re crossrail
It is true that the above mentioned posts have not published information about crossrail but referred to a desperate plugging by the city's unscrupulous but that does not mean that previous information has not examined crossrail in detail and sought to properly scrutnise the people behind it. Having done so, we find the activities immoral and reprehensible of the likes of Mayhew and Montague and lets not forget Douglas Oakervee a man accused of lying but the Hong Kong Govt so therefore we reserve the right to treat these people with contempt as they are now seeking to rip off London and UK taxpayers.
This is just a tiny proportion of the information covered by people of use to the campaign, you are not one of them as you are not to be trusted and we will make it available to the public when we seek fit not at the behest of someone like you It is clear your posts are designed to protect Mayhew. What you have told us is already known which is why many find you rather pointless.
Please continue to reserve your moralistic tone to protect individuals like Mayhew or the City. However, be warned, a New Zealander that has no respect for Londoners and has exploited and offended London's communities deserves the title of being called what she is. the crossrail campaign has nothing against new zealanders but does have something against those like mayhew wherever they may be from. There are many beautiful new zealand people out there and we do not need to acknowledge their existence with the likes of you but mayhew is certainly not a person who deserves any respect.
your post has again been exposed as a failure and so go back to your original thought of not responding as you are not wanted. Your provision of already in the public domain information and moralistic tone for the most wretched beings on the planet would certainly not be wanted by anyone in the anti-crossrail campaign so reserve yourself for someone who actually wants you - i will not speculate who that would be but you already know who they are ...
goodbye and good riddance norville b
goodbye norville b
notocrossrail
crossrail is still on track according to CLRL - perhaps why Mayhew appeared
08.10.2008 19:44
eastender
Of course
09.10.2008 09:07
Of course CLRL is going to say the project is on track. Who is being naive and accepting the official line now?
CLRL stressed that any delays were down to the delays with Royal Assent - when they spoke back in *July*. That was when Oakervee said: "The only thing is the Royal Assent took a bit longer than anticipated but that doesn't really affect us."
But the report I posted was published *yesterday* (October 8). You claim you knew it all already: what, really, you knew the committee was going to warn of future delays to the Crossralil project starting? You must be psychic or something.
Norville B
here is the link to how we already knew - norville b
09.10.2008 10:03
now as you said, you were put off by the campaign so can you go away now as your expertise is a bit laughable as it remains old news and you do not know the meaning of analysis!
notocrossrail
Correction
09.10.2008 10:48
Thanks for that link. Hadn't seen that. Much appreciated.
But you accused me of posting an old bit of information you already knew. Where in the link you have provided does it even mention the warning from the London Assembly budget committee?
It doesn't.
It talked about warnings from Norris of TfL. Not the new warnings from the London Assembly budget committee, which happened yesterday, and which I provided you links for only hours after it appeared.
It's a different story. Related - as all the stuff about the future of Crossrail is - but different. So don't patronise me.
Norville B
norville b - in polite response
09.10.2008 15:01
The information you provided whilst is a decision had already been foreseen. The Assembly information has actually come about from a source and the veracity of these sources had been highlighted long before the Assembly Committee meeting. May I say that i am grateful for you highlighting the assembly committee piece - it is sadly not very interesting for the campaign unless we know of the more important decisions to be taken. I am afraid these are too numerous to go into but we expect to hear about those long before the assembly members decide to declare anything to the public and it is for this reason we are not expecting to hear this information very soon.
thank you ...
endcrossrail
Thanks
09.10.2008 15:51
Thanks. Good luck, endtocrossrail. I look forward to future updates, when it is clearer what is going to happen.
Norville B
thank you norville b
10.10.2008 08:19
While you yourself have not suggested this, I have taken the decision to concentrate on the actual flaws of characters and not the characters themselves. So Mayhew's actions are reprehensible but this does not mean that reaction to her should be equally reprehensible so on my part this will change i must thank you and do look forward to updating you when new information does appear and in the meantime thank you for the Assembly Member update.
endcrossrail
what is going on?
10.10.2008 08:20
notocrossrail
Hide 2 hidden comments or hide all comments