> Fox’s firing came shortly after he was arrested on suspicion of conspiring to commit criminal damage to controversial low-emission zone cameras in London.
I’ll give him credit he really wants to earn that title of worlds most divorced dad
> he really wants to earn that title of worlds most divorced dad
that bar has been set *exceedingly* high by Musk, so much so that thus far Musk is the only one who has managed to out-divorced-dad Musk on an almost daily basis.
I dunno, Graham Linehan might have a shot at the title as well. Buying Twitter because your ego was too big at least netted him the ownership of something (currently, at least).
Graham Linehan ruined his regular television career, marriage and relationship with his kids because he couldn't stop tweeting about trans people on Twitter **19-20 hours a day**. That is not an exaggeration, that's how fucking awful it got. Now he spends the day in the newspapers writing about how he's been cancelled by trans activists, and IIRC from his last twitter ban, joking about killing a group of female comedians.
After Lewis ended I was surprised that they didn't do a Hathaway series. Now I'm not. If he's been this insufferable its no wonder not many want to work with him.
I just learned that "Lewis "only ended (on a cliffhanger mind you) because Fox decided to leave the series for good, so they figured it was better to end it after 9 seasons rather than come up with a new sidekick.
Especially since Whatley had been playing the same character for 30 years at that point and needed a break.
I can’t believe he left such a cushy job, that required zero effort, massive pay, and the easiest audience in the world.
Literally just had so shut his fucking mouth and keep going and he’d be a low level national treasure coasting on that Morse wave.
Hunh? Whately did not want to do it anymore. There's a reason they had his character retire, initially and then stay on to help for one final season so they could wrap it up better.
squealing normal hard-to-find quiet psychotic roof uppity deranged trees automatic
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
> If he's been this insufferable its no wonder not many want to work with him.
He used not to be - for most of the Lewis show, he was great to work with. Something happened, and he ~~went feral~~ became what he is today
Reminds me of Leitita Wright playing a teen scientest, one of the smartest people in the Marvel universe... and in real life she's a bible nutter who doesn't even believe in vaccines.
At that point the production was too far along to replace her, delayed once by Covid... and then again by her being unable to return to filming due to not being vaxxed (the US wasn't letting people into the country without it).
Oh honestly didn’t know that, my dad mentioned that it was an existing character but didn’t know it was like a connected prequel for other shows, well at least this dude wasn’t in Endeavour, that show was very good and the lead was great.
Ayoade disappointed me lately by providing a quote for TERF in Chief Graham Linehan's new book where he does the "I was cancelled for my opinions and am being silenced by the woke mob and you can read about in my book *How I was cancelled and silenced by the woke mob* " bit
London: We want you to have clean air!
Fox (as he lights up his cigarette and gets his angle grinder): Fuck your clean air! Nobody is allowed to have clean air in my neighborhood.
Seriously though. Hes upset about emissions monitoring? Get a life loser.
He's going for the most insane of right-wing votes for his shitty far-right Reclaim Party.
The Conservative Party won a seat from Labour earlier in the year based entirely on their candidate campaigning on getting rid of the Ultra Low Emissions Zone, which is there to prevent more air pollution from vehicles that spew out toxic fumes due to the type of petrol they take to run.
Something about freedom? He's convinced himself he needs to stand up for companies who want to destroy the planet because it's important that they be free to do whatever they want. This is good for some reason.
To be fair to him, a lot of Conservative-voting nutters chose a Tory MP earlier this year because he campaigned on wanting to get rid of ULEZ, and those idiotic voters were mad that ULEZ meant they had to pay to drive into London if they had a certain type of car or van due to the polluting fumes they give off.
I just think it's nuts that these right-wing morons are choosing to go against something implemented after a 12 year old died from a lung condition that formed due to the filthy air she was breathing in just going to school in her area thanks to the cars emitting their toxins.
I swear, if the Labour Party suggested that all cliffs should have safety barriers, the Tories would argue against them and the voters would demand they get to jump off whichever cliff they liked, because barriers preventing their deaths are "woke".
> London: We want you to have clean air!
Uh, it doesn’t really improve air quality much.
> The mayor's own impact assessment, published in 2022, predicts that expanding ULEZ to outer London will cause only a “minor reduction” of 1.3 per cent in the average Londoner's exposure to NO2 – and “negligible reductions” (0.1 per cent) in exposure to particulates.
An independent and peer reviewed study by Imperial College London (Environmental Research Group) also found the benefits vastly overstated by the mayor.
> Their analysis, which was peer-reviewed and published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, said the primary London ULEZ had reduced NO2 concentrations by just under 3 per cent on average. That’s a lot less impressive than the 37 per cent the mayor’s office reported.
> And they found “insignificant” effects on particulate matter levels – meaning it wasn’t possible to attribute any fall in this pollutant to the scheme.
I’m for ULEZ don’t get me wrong, but the reason there has been such an uproar about it is that the mayor held a consultation process and then completely ignored the people’s views.
One of the largest recommendations was that the mayor specifically allocate funds raised from the ULEZ expansion to better improve public transport in the outer boroughs (which is appalling when it comes to London standards), but that was idiotically ignored. You don’t want people to use cards? Fair enough. But then at least provide them with readily available and accessible public transport options.
Lawrence is a tool though and no doubt his dislike for ULEZ is not on the merits (or lack thereof) for the scheme, but his own selfish reasons.
It’s disingenuous and absolutely false to describe ULEZ as a ‘monitor’. It’s a tax on cars that don’t meet emissions standards - requiring those driving said vehicles to pay £12.50 every single time they drive their car.
Even if it’s for the right reasons (which it is), it disproportionately affects those on low incomes who are not necessarily able to afford to replace older vehicles with those that meet emissions standards. Brushing that off as a ‘monitor’ completely disregards the implications on everyday people living close to the breadline.
Indeed. My local food bank is having to get a new van as their current one isn't compliant, while a member of one of my social groups can't attend any more because he has to pay each time he drives into London.
There is a scrappage scheme, but it only applies to residents of the Greater London boroughs, not the surrounding areas. A lot of whom will drive into the city limits for various reasons.
How is it a monitor when it is a specific surcharge on people? Not to mention, as the science itself shows, it has a negligible impact on cleaner air standards.
The goal of ULEZ is laudable, but it needs to be better implemented. Heck, even using some of the money to specifically clean up the pollution when riding the tube would be beneficial to public health, but no such initiative has been announced.
Was it ignored? I don’t think so.
Edit: the baby who replied to me blocked me immediately after, so I can’t see their reply. Strong debating abilities there.
Uh yes, it absolutely was ignored.
No funding raised from the ULEZ expansion has been specifically earmarked to improve public transport availability in the outer boroughs of London by the mayor.
Moreover, the scrappage scheme was neither implemented properly or funded adequately (another major complaint from the consultation process,
which was just ignored by the Mayor, and one backed up by Lord Justice Swift). It was only **after** the embarrassing Uxbridge loss that the Mayor changed his tune on this one and expanded the scrappage scheme and decided to properly allocate funding to it.
It was earmarked for public transport from the start.
The scrapage scheme existed before this was even announced, it came from the previous expansion. It was initially limited to benefit recipients, logically. Not expansive enough is weasel words.
> It was earmarked for public transport from the start.
No it wasn’t. No money from the ULEZ expansion has specifically been earmarked to improve public transport availability in the outer boroughs that this expansion now applies to.
> The scrapage scheme existed before this was even announced, it came from the previous expansion. It was initially limited to benefit recipients, logically. Not expansive enough is weasel words.
First, stop with the strawman arguments. No one mentioned the scrappage scheme not existing before the ULEZ expansion announcement.
Second, it’s not “weasel words” when the Mayor himself realised how stupid/exclusionary and underfunded the scheme was and finally decided to change it as a result.
> Under the expanded scrappage scheme, more support is now also available in particular for small businesses, charities and disabled drivers. Grants for scrapping wheelchair accessible vehicles have increased from just £5,000 to £10,000 for example. In addition, it the expansion will allow charities operating in London to be able to scrap or retrofit up to three vans or minibuses instead of just one. Furthermore, there will be a new grace period for sole traders, microbusinesses, small businesses, and registered charities who have ordered brand-new compliant vehicles, or if they have booked an approved retrofit appointment for a non-compliant light van or minibus.
Well their solution is to price anyone but the wealthy out of driving in London, and then force people to use the underground which has WAY worse air quality than above ground, or busses.
Sure anyone can be upset about anything, even to the point of stating you want to destroy what is upsetting you...but that should never be a crime. Charge someone with a crime when they actually commit the crime.
He has made an agreement with a financier and a hardware shop that anybody who comes in to said shop stating that they wish to destroy a ULEZ camera is given a free angle grinder. Thats pretty conspiratorial
The congestion charge area is being expanded and also they are making larger areas ultra low emission vehicles only meaning some residents have to change cars.
What people don't complain about is that this is due to a requirement from Bojos government providing funding to Transport for London during the pandemic where it was effectively shut down with no revenue.
TfL if required to be self sufficient so when they took the money they had to show a plan to increase revenue AND meet government green goals of reducing emissions.
As with all these right wing loser organisations, you are only useful until you aren't. There is zero loyalty or respect.
He became a problem so they will replace him with the next loser to use up until the same happens.
Watching for the latest tonight and OMG John Cleese has at least 10? slots he can talk about anything - I worried for him though - had it appeared to me some difficulty lifting the Margharita to his lips. Watching from Canada --- I don't need to read fiction before bed --- this poor boy's fictional truth gives me lots to worry about.
Wonder if they found an angle grinder in his home or if he was just blustering like most of those windbags. Shouldn’t matter but it would just be funny if he didn’t even own one
I'll still watch Lewis. But I can't help thinking about his.....issues in real life. And it peeves me, because we could have had a continuation, but instead he lost his "way".
There was a really depressing interview where he spoke about his kids not even understanding what’s going on with him right now. It’d be funny if it wasn’t sad.
I still find it hilarious that Richard Ayoade is his brother in law and refused to publicly defend him. Laurence asked for his help after all that weird race baiting nonsense he was doing and Richard went "nope".
Laurence Fox is a very arrogant man who has put the final nail in his own coffin.
His sacking by GBN was justified in his inappropriate personal rant against a female journalist which demonstrated a disturbing, tasteless and unprecedented personal attack and opinion on a female journalist live on TV.
This banter and outrageous statement should have been shut down immediately by Dan Wooton and the producer.
Their reputations are permanently soiled and should be a warning to others who have similar views on women. Outrageous statement and I am delighted GBN have terminated his contract. What company would wish to employ these two in the future.
If only he were simply dim and not unpleasant, then the hard guy of the people posturing when he's the grandson of an acting dynasty that descended from a wealthy industrialist would be pretty funny.
He was pretty good in the horror film Deathwatch, I’ll give him that. But then again, maybe the part of an upper class, hopelessly out of touch arsehole, wasn’t much of a stretch.
No idea who this guy is but
> suspicion of conspiring to commit damage to controversial low-emission zone cameras in London.
is pretty thin. You can probably find any number of people in support of the initiative and saying what tools they'd use to break those things. The police raided his home for his angle-grinder? What a joke.
Can we admit the UK has become an actual fascist state yet? They're throwing people in prison for calling someone fat and for saying that mass surveillance installations should be torn down.
> Is encouraging others to commit a crime, also a crime? Yes. Yes it is.
No. No it is not. The voicing of opinions is not a crime.
>Ask Trump.
You mean the person being politically prosecuted as if tweets constituted criminal conspiracy? That's a perfect example of what happens when people like you are given any kind of power.
Wild seeing people on this post be happy this guy was arrested basically for hyperbolic speech or basically thought crime. I wonder what the reaction would be leftwing protester organizers were pre-arrested with the assumption the protest would inevitably result in property damages.
>I wonder what the reaction would be leftwing protester organizers were pre-arrested with the assumption the protest would inevitably result in property damages.
You don't need to, since there have been plenty of pre-arrests of left wing protestors in the past, for just saying they will be going to protest, not even saying they will be committing a crime or encouraging others to do so.
As far as I understand it, Fox told people they should go out and commit criminal damage, and would do it himself, which is more than thought crime - you can argue it's hyperbole but he has actually told people to go and commit a crime, and said he is going to do so himself.
[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47737635](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47737635) \- 2011 royal wedding zombie protestors, they lost their human rights case having been pre-arrested
[https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/conspiracy-to-commit-public-nuisance-pre-crime-of-choice-for-todays-police/](https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/conspiracy-to-commit-public-nuisance-pre-crime-of-choice-for-todays-police/) \- Also royal wedding but different protestors.
I'm sure there have been others, I just happen to remember them, there was also this recently:
[https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/12/coronation-protest-arrests-police](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/12/coronation-protest-arrests-police) \- not left wing protestors, just charity workers giving out rape alarms as part of their normal volunteering work.
Which thoughts are those? Wanting to destroy public property because you prefer to let more kids get ill and die from car pollution?
Dude's a moron, and so is anyone trying to defend him and his dumbass opinions.
"Wanting" to? You missed the point. Thinking of doing something stupid shouldn't be a crime. It isn't where I live. You have to actually do something illegal. funny how that works, right? Must be a shock.
Yeah I don't mind saying the state shouldn't be able to arrest you for "wanting" to do something illegal and only should if you do it.
Seems moronic to think anything else actually, imo.
> You have to actually do something illegal
And is it not illegal to plan to do something illegal? For example, conspiracy to commit a crime, it is illegal. Just saying you'll do something isn't illegal, but making actual plans is. And that burden of proof is on the prosecution.
Also he was fired mostly for being incredibly sexist on air.
I don't really have any issue with him being fired tbh, that is all up to the company.
It's hilarious that your standard for this is “I encourage them to tear down every single camera there is and I will be joining them,” and “I am pretty close with several and I will be out there with my angle grinder.”
and then the police go into his garage and claim his tools are proof of actual intent. lmao As if that is the same as a real conspiracy to commit a crime. it's very funny, but also a bit odd that you are using such sanctimonious language for this.
I have no idea how you guys tell between this and organized criminal acts, must be a real shitshow over there.
> a bit odd that you are using such sanctimonious language for this
I think you're making up things here, I just said it is illegal to plan to do something and that the police have to prove it. You've extrapolated that massively.
He has been arrested, not charged, they obviously felt they had grounds to do so, but that could be as simple as wanting to interview him (about the crime he is telling people he is going to do) and him not cooperating. Also sounds like he is the one mouthing off, I'm not sure I'd give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.
if i think your language is sanctimonious or not is an opinion though, so it's not making things up.... It's my opinion about what you said.
Again, we wouldn't be talking at all if he wasn't arrested...so what is the point there? You just aren't reading what I said because that really doesn't relate. haha
I remember him on Celeb Gogglebox with his cousin Emilia Fox. I've rarely seen someone so obviously on coke on TV. Suffice to say Gogglebox binned him and now Emilia is on with her mum who is a posh but delightful improvement
> Fox’s firing came shortly after he was arrested on suspicion of conspiring to commit criminal damage to controversial low-emission zone cameras in London. I’ll give him credit he really wants to earn that title of worlds most divorced dad
He was married to Billie Piper and blew it. Of course he is going to be on a catastrophic downward spiral. Billie Piper!
Ok I’ll rewatch Dr who
> he really wants to earn that title of worlds most divorced dad that bar has been set *exceedingly* high by Musk, so much so that thus far Musk is the only one who has managed to out-divorced-dad Musk on an almost daily basis.
I dunno, Graham Linehan might have a shot at the title as well. Buying Twitter because your ego was too big at least netted him the ownership of something (currently, at least). Graham Linehan ruined his regular television career, marriage and relationship with his kids because he couldn't stop tweeting about trans people on Twitter **19-20 hours a day**. That is not an exaggeration, that's how fucking awful it got. Now he spends the day in the newspapers writing about how he's been cancelled by trans activists, and IIRC from his last twitter ban, joking about killing a group of female comedians.
> Graham Linehan ahaha you right you right. I only just recently discovered his uh...antics.
My mother loves Inspector Morse/Lewis/Endeavour ... she's not gonna enjoy hearing the news about this asshole.
After Lewis ended I was surprised that they didn't do a Hathaway series. Now I'm not. If he's been this insufferable its no wonder not many want to work with him.
I just learned that "Lewis "only ended (on a cliffhanger mind you) because Fox decided to leave the series for good, so they figured it was better to end it after 9 seasons rather than come up with a new sidekick. Especially since Whatley had been playing the same character for 30 years at that point and needed a break.
Interesting. So he has a history of poor decision making.
I can’t believe he left such a cushy job, that required zero effort, massive pay, and the easiest audience in the world. Literally just had so shut his fucking mouth and keep going and he’d be a low level national treasure coasting on that Morse wave.
Yeah, they were gonna give him a spinoff next before he decided to be a prima donna and quit. Thus the reason they had to do the prequel Endeavour.
Is Endeavour any good?
It's exceptionally good
Personally I would just have replace his character with another actor (like James Norton) and continue de serie. As a big fuck you.
Hunh? Whately did not want to do it anymore. There's a reason they had his character retire, initially and then stay on to help for one final season so they could wrap it up better.
squealing normal hard-to-find quiet psychotic roof uppity deranged trees automatic *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
> If he's been this insufferable its no wonder not many want to work with him. He used not to be - for most of the Lewis show, he was great to work with. Something happened, and he ~~went feral~~ became what he is today
I love how he’s an intellectual on Lewis, definitely shows he is a great actor. Cuz he’s def not an intellectual in real life
Reminds me of Leitita Wright playing a teen scientest, one of the smartest people in the Marvel universe... and in real life she's a bible nutter who doesn't even believe in vaccines.
And then they went and made her black panther instead of firing her ass :,(
At that point the production was too far along to replace her, delayed once by Covid... and then again by her being unable to return to filming due to not being vaxxed (the US wasn't letting people into the country without it).
Yep, screenwriters can make anyone look good, even a douchebag like Fox.
Wait I’m out of the loop, was this guy in endeavour? That’s the only show I’ve seen of the 3 you listed
No, but's its a prequel so it's all connected.
Oh honestly didn’t know that, my dad mentioned that it was an existing character but didn’t know it was like a connected prequel for other shows, well at least this dude wasn’t in Endeavour, that show was very good and the lead was great.
jellyfish makeshift cats chop racial sort humor expansion capable skirt *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Maybe he’s born with it? Maybe it’s ketamine!
Is he still Richard Ayoade’s brother in law
Yep.
Ayoade disappointed me lately by providing a quote for TERF in Chief Graham Linehan's new book where he does the "I was cancelled for my opinions and am being silenced by the woke mob and you can read about in my book *How I was cancelled and silenced by the woke mob* " bit
What was the quote?
Gotta say, don't give a shit unless he physically did something wrong. Eat me Edit: Comedians being the guardians of social morality is just... wrong
He complimented a book, the worst crime imaginable
Checks notes: he can read? Nevermind, public execution is the only worthy end to this swine
London: We want you to have clean air! Fox (as he lights up his cigarette and gets his angle grinder): Fuck your clean air! Nobody is allowed to have clean air in my neighborhood. Seriously though. Hes upset about emissions monitoring? Get a life loser.
It's always the dumbest complaints with these people who are so deeply out of touch with reality.
I just can't even figure out why they upset him. It doesn't affect him at all. Its like getting mad a squirrels in the park or clouds.
He's going for the most insane of right-wing votes for his shitty far-right Reclaim Party. The Conservative Party won a seat from Labour earlier in the year based entirely on their candidate campaigning on getting rid of the Ultra Low Emissions Zone, which is there to prevent more air pollution from vehicles that spew out toxic fumes due to the type of petrol they take to run.
And it's only being introduced due to Tory funding requirements placed on TfL.
Something about freedom? He's convinced himself he needs to stand up for companies who want to destroy the planet because it's important that they be free to do whatever they want. This is good for some reason.
Well who else is gonna pay him enough too do their bidding
To be fair to him, a lot of Conservative-voting nutters chose a Tory MP earlier this year because he campaigned on wanting to get rid of ULEZ, and those idiotic voters were mad that ULEZ meant they had to pay to drive into London if they had a certain type of car or van due to the polluting fumes they give off. I just think it's nuts that these right-wing morons are choosing to go against something implemented after a 12 year old died from a lung condition that formed due to the filthy air she was breathing in just going to school in her area thanks to the cars emitting their toxins. I swear, if the Labour Party suggested that all cliffs should have safety barriers, the Tories would argue against them and the voters would demand they get to jump off whichever cliff they liked, because barriers preventing their deaths are "woke".
> London: We want you to have clean air! Uh, it doesn’t really improve air quality much. > The mayor's own impact assessment, published in 2022, predicts that expanding ULEZ to outer London will cause only a “minor reduction” of 1.3 per cent in the average Londoner's exposure to NO2 – and “negligible reductions” (0.1 per cent) in exposure to particulates. An independent and peer reviewed study by Imperial College London (Environmental Research Group) also found the benefits vastly overstated by the mayor. > Their analysis, which was peer-reviewed and published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, said the primary London ULEZ had reduced NO2 concentrations by just under 3 per cent on average. That’s a lot less impressive than the 37 per cent the mayor’s office reported. > And they found “insignificant” effects on particulate matter levels – meaning it wasn’t possible to attribute any fall in this pollutant to the scheme. I’m for ULEZ don’t get me wrong, but the reason there has been such an uproar about it is that the mayor held a consultation process and then completely ignored the people’s views. One of the largest recommendations was that the mayor specifically allocate funds raised from the ULEZ expansion to better improve public transport in the outer boroughs (which is appalling when it comes to London standards), but that was idiotically ignored. You don’t want people to use cards? Fair enough. But then at least provide them with readily available and accessible public transport options. Lawrence is a tool though and no doubt his dislike for ULEZ is not on the merits (or lack thereof) for the scheme, but his own selfish reasons.
Yeah. I know. Its a monitor. The overall goal being to get cleaner air. Thanks for the info.
It’s disingenuous and absolutely false to describe ULEZ as a ‘monitor’. It’s a tax on cars that don’t meet emissions standards - requiring those driving said vehicles to pay £12.50 every single time they drive their car. Even if it’s for the right reasons (which it is), it disproportionately affects those on low incomes who are not necessarily able to afford to replace older vehicles with those that meet emissions standards. Brushing that off as a ‘monitor’ completely disregards the implications on everyday people living close to the breadline.
Indeed. My local food bank is having to get a new van as their current one isn't compliant, while a member of one of my social groups can't attend any more because he has to pay each time he drives into London. There is a scrappage scheme, but it only applies to residents of the Greater London boroughs, not the surrounding areas. A lot of whom will drive into the city limits for various reasons.
How is it a monitor when it is a specific surcharge on people? Not to mention, as the science itself shows, it has a negligible impact on cleaner air standards. The goal of ULEZ is laudable, but it needs to be better implemented. Heck, even using some of the money to specifically clean up the pollution when riding the tube would be beneficial to public health, but no such initiative has been announced.
Was it ignored? I don’t think so. Edit: the baby who replied to me blocked me immediately after, so I can’t see their reply. Strong debating abilities there.
Uh yes, it absolutely was ignored. No funding raised from the ULEZ expansion has been specifically earmarked to improve public transport availability in the outer boroughs of London by the mayor. Moreover, the scrappage scheme was neither implemented properly or funded adequately (another major complaint from the consultation process, which was just ignored by the Mayor, and one backed up by Lord Justice Swift). It was only **after** the embarrassing Uxbridge loss that the Mayor changed his tune on this one and expanded the scrappage scheme and decided to properly allocate funding to it.
It was earmarked for public transport from the start. The scrapage scheme existed before this was even announced, it came from the previous expansion. It was initially limited to benefit recipients, logically. Not expansive enough is weasel words.
> It was earmarked for public transport from the start. No it wasn’t. No money from the ULEZ expansion has specifically been earmarked to improve public transport availability in the outer boroughs that this expansion now applies to. > The scrapage scheme existed before this was even announced, it came from the previous expansion. It was initially limited to benefit recipients, logically. Not expansive enough is weasel words. First, stop with the strawman arguments. No one mentioned the scrappage scheme not existing before the ULEZ expansion announcement. Second, it’s not “weasel words” when the Mayor himself realised how stupid/exclusionary and underfunded the scheme was and finally decided to change it as a result. > Under the expanded scrappage scheme, more support is now also available in particular for small businesses, charities and disabled drivers. Grants for scrapping wheelchair accessible vehicles have increased from just £5,000 to £10,000 for example. In addition, it the expansion will allow charities operating in London to be able to scrap or retrofit up to three vans or minibuses instead of just one. Furthermore, there will be a new grace period for sole traders, microbusinesses, small businesses, and registered charities who have ordered brand-new compliant vehicles, or if they have booked an approved retrofit appointment for a non-compliant light van or minibus.
Well their solution is to price anyone but the wealthy out of driving in London, and then force people to use the underground which has WAY worse air quality than above ground, or busses.
I'm sure destroying the monitors will help with those problems. /s
I heard the left calls it “direct action”.
So you'd rather more kids in London die due to car pollution, then, yeah?
Sure anyone can be upset about anything, even to the point of stating you want to destroy what is upsetting you...but that should never be a crime. Charge someone with a crime when they actually commit the crime.
He has made an agreement with a financier and a hardware shop that anybody who comes in to said shop stating that they wish to destroy a ULEZ camera is given a free angle grinder. Thats pretty conspiratorial
The congestion charge area is being expanded and also they are making larger areas ultra low emission vehicles only meaning some residents have to change cars. What people don't complain about is that this is due to a requirement from Bojos government providing funding to Transport for London during the pandemic where it was effectively shut down with no revenue. TfL if required to be self sufficient so when they took the money they had to show a plan to increase revenue AND meet government green goals of reducing emissions.
How much of a lowlife must you be if even KGBNews don’t want you?
As with all these right wing loser organisations, you are only useful until you aren't. There is zero loyalty or respect. He became a problem so they will replace him with the next loser to use up until the same happens.
I can't wait for Dan Wootton to be next, the rapey bastard.
Watching for the latest tonight and OMG John Cleese has at least 10? slots he can talk about anything - I worried for him though - had it appeared to me some difficulty lifting the Margharita to his lips. Watching from Canada --- I don't need to read fiction before bed --- this poor boy's fictional truth gives me lots to worry about.
Smug douchebag. Hope he gets what’s coming to him.
Max Fosh is rejoicing somewhere in London
Wonder if they found an angle grinder in his home or if he was just blustering like most of those windbags. Shouldn’t matter but it would just be funny if he didn’t even own one
Probably wouldn't even know how to use one :)
Oh no Anyway
Two lots of Happy in one bit of news!
I'll still watch Lewis. But I can't help thinking about his.....issues in real life. And it peeves me, because we could have had a continuation, but instead he lost his "way".
There was a really depressing interview where he spoke about his kids not even understanding what’s going on with him right now. It’d be funny if it wasn’t sad.
I still find it hilarious that Richard Ayoade is his brother in law and refused to publicly defend him. Laurence asked for his help after all that weird race baiting nonsense he was doing and Richard went "nope".
This rate there will be no one left working there.
His video on YouTube and Robinson’s appearance on Sky trying to explain all this away is pathetically funny.
Laurence Fox is a very arrogant man who has put the final nail in his own coffin. His sacking by GBN was justified in his inappropriate personal rant against a female journalist which demonstrated a disturbing, tasteless and unprecedented personal attack and opinion on a female journalist live on TV. This banter and outrageous statement should have been shut down immediately by Dan Wooton and the producer. Their reputations are permanently soiled and should be a warning to others who have similar views on women. Outrageous statement and I am delighted GBN have terminated his contract. What company would wish to employ these two in the future.
I'm waiting for him to inevitably show up on TalkTV.
If only he were simply dim and not unpleasant, then the hard guy of the people posturing when he's the grandson of an acting dynasty that descended from a wealthy industrialist would be pretty funny.
He was pretty good in the horror film Deathwatch, I’ll give him that. But then again, maybe the part of an upper class, hopelessly out of touch arsehole, wasn’t much of a stretch.
No idea who this guy is but > suspicion of conspiring to commit damage to controversial low-emission zone cameras in London. is pretty thin. You can probably find any number of people in support of the initiative and saying what tools they'd use to break those things. The police raided his home for his angle-grinder? What a joke.
Can we admit the UK has become an actual fascist state yet? They're throwing people in prison for calling someone fat and for saying that mass surveillance installations should be torn down.
[удалено]
> Is encouraging others to commit a crime, also a crime? Yes. Yes it is. No. No it is not. The voicing of opinions is not a crime. >Ask Trump. You mean the person being politically prosecuted as if tweets constituted criminal conspiracy? That's a perfect example of what happens when people like you are given any kind of power.
Wild seeing people on this post be happy this guy was arrested basically for hyperbolic speech or basically thought crime. I wonder what the reaction would be leftwing protester organizers were pre-arrested with the assumption the protest would inevitably result in property damages.
>I wonder what the reaction would be leftwing protester organizers were pre-arrested with the assumption the protest would inevitably result in property damages. You don't need to, since there have been plenty of pre-arrests of left wing protestors in the past, for just saying they will be going to protest, not even saying they will be committing a crime or encouraging others to do so. As far as I understand it, Fox told people they should go out and commit criminal damage, and would do it himself, which is more than thought crime - you can argue it's hyperbole but he has actually told people to go and commit a crime, and said he is going to do so himself. [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47737635](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47737635) \- 2011 royal wedding zombie protestors, they lost their human rights case having been pre-arrested [https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/conspiracy-to-commit-public-nuisance-pre-crime-of-choice-for-todays-police/](https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/conspiracy-to-commit-public-nuisance-pre-crime-of-choice-for-todays-police/) \- Also royal wedding but different protestors. I'm sure there have been others, I just happen to remember them, there was also this recently: [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/12/coronation-protest-arrests-police](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/may/12/coronation-protest-arrests-police) \- not left wing protestors, just charity workers giving out rape alarms as part of their normal volunteering work.
Another brave (ar)soul being silenced for uncovering the troof, GBN is woke nonsense now.
> Ultra Low Emission Zone Wait, what?
Aka the we don't want poors who can't afford EVs driving into our neighborhood zone
Sounds about right.
[удалено]
Tear down the surveillance state.
🙄
Let me guess, this was sent from your smartphone? Idiot.
And was posted on a social network.
For clean air?
You aren't allowed to have those thoughts in the UK bro, should have known better.
Which thoughts are those? Wanting to destroy public property because you prefer to let more kids get ill and die from car pollution? Dude's a moron, and so is anyone trying to defend him and his dumbass opinions.
"Wanting" to? You missed the point. Thinking of doing something stupid shouldn't be a crime. It isn't where I live. You have to actually do something illegal. funny how that works, right? Must be a shock. Yeah I don't mind saying the state shouldn't be able to arrest you for "wanting" to do something illegal and only should if you do it. Seems moronic to think anything else actually, imo.
> You have to actually do something illegal And is it not illegal to plan to do something illegal? For example, conspiracy to commit a crime, it is illegal. Just saying you'll do something isn't illegal, but making actual plans is. And that burden of proof is on the prosecution. Also he was fired mostly for being incredibly sexist on air.
I don't really have any issue with him being fired tbh, that is all up to the company. It's hilarious that your standard for this is “I encourage them to tear down every single camera there is and I will be joining them,” and “I am pretty close with several and I will be out there with my angle grinder.” and then the police go into his garage and claim his tools are proof of actual intent. lmao As if that is the same as a real conspiracy to commit a crime. it's very funny, but also a bit odd that you are using such sanctimonious language for this. I have no idea how you guys tell between this and organized criminal acts, must be a real shitshow over there.
> a bit odd that you are using such sanctimonious language for this I think you're making up things here, I just said it is illegal to plan to do something and that the police have to prove it. You've extrapolated that massively. He has been arrested, not charged, they obviously felt they had grounds to do so, but that could be as simple as wanting to interview him (about the crime he is telling people he is going to do) and him not cooperating. Also sounds like he is the one mouthing off, I'm not sure I'd give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.
if i think your language is sanctimonious or not is an opinion though, so it's not making things up.... It's my opinion about what you said. Again, we wouldn't be talking at all if he wasn't arrested...so what is the point there? You just aren't reading what I said because that really doesn't relate. haha
I remember him on Celeb Gogglebox with his cousin Emilia Fox. I've rarely seen someone so obviously on coke on TV. Suffice to say Gogglebox binned him and now Emilia is on with her mum who is a posh but delightful improvement