Getting all sentimental - about a bus

A little over six years ago, I indulged myself in a secret geeky pleasure – a ride on the penultimate AEC Routemaster on a normal, cross-London bus route. It was a little misleading, because these 1960s veterans continued to ply their trade on two special ‘heritage’ routes, the 9 to Kensington High Street, and the 15 to Tower Hill. But the final day witnessed an outpouring of emotion for a public transport icon that only the British could be capable of (see files marked 'End of Steam on British Rail' and 'London's Last Tram').

As a reasonably recent arrival to London in 2005, I was already nostalgic for the Routemaster, with their 1950s design and quirks of a bygone age. They plied the streets of Dalston where I first lived, a flotilla of weathered red metal, rubber and comfy moquette. I missed them so much that I even ended up doing weekend work as a conductor and guide for a company that specialised in Routemaster charters when money became tight.

I'm normally never a stranger to sentiment, but I recognised these museum pieces couldn’t go on for ever without significant re-engineering, time and money (the first one was built in 1959 after all). An impending 2017 deadline imposed by the Disability Discrimation Act sounded the death-bell for these purring red beasts. Mayor Ken Livingstone had made it clear that, since the introduction of German-built bendy buses on the high-capacity Red Arrow routes in 2002, the future was not going to be the preserve of elderly double-deckers with an open ‘hop-on, hop-off’ rear platform. The Routemaster was, after all, evolved from a design which, admittedly with the addition of a roof and pneumatic tyres, was little different from the pre-war B-Type, and later RT type. Why then, in 2005, would anyone want to operate a vehicle that was prone to accidents around its rear platform and which, without passenger doors, could be very cold in winter?

 
It took a Tory mayor, Boris Johnson to take that somewhat retrograde step – much against the advice of industry professionals and those who said “it can't be done”. But Boris did it. The proof of the pudding for me was on Saturday, as I perused the Thomas Heatherwick-designed Routemaster New Bus for London. In tune with London's aspirational classes, it was parked up outside the brand-spanking new Westfield shopping centre in Stratford, itself the epitome of modernity situated on the Olympic park. Londoners were invited to inspect their new public carriage, and they seemed impressed during my short visit. It is indeed a beautiful vehicle which may finally render redundant the insult 'he/she/it looks like the back of a bus’; the NBfL is far from ugly. Its striking curves, traditionally-inspired seating and flooring and other bespoke design touches make it a winner, at least from an aesthetic point of view. Oh, and like many of London's new buses, it's a hybrid – so the Toyota Prius loving classes should come flocking. 
 

Like all good design however, the proof of the pudding will be in how it fares in every day use. The new vehicle seats just 64, and there is less space for wheelchair users and those with pushchairs – facilities which bendy buses seemed to have in abundance. The first two prototypes of eight initial buses are due in service on 20 February on the arduous 38 route – a bus route which has become ridiculously frequent in recent years, and one which runs not too far away from Boris' own home in Highbury. So let's see how the residents of Hackney and Islington deal with an open-platform bus six years after the last one ran in their locality. It is a high-profile risk to take for a Mayor of London who is so keen to see this expensive and quirky pet project succeed. I hate to be a cynic, but even if it does succeed I'll wait for the first person to fall off the back of one and become seriously injured (or worse) and see what the Mayor thinks about his new bus then. 'Elf 'n safety may well win the day - the passengers of 2012 just aren't those of 1962.

Meanwhile, is it just possible that the average passenger just wants a seat on the way to work – and isn't particularly bothered about what the bus looks like?

There is no clear lesson to learn from the riots - yet. But we’re all responsible.

< Insert terrifying picture of burning building here >


Yes, it’s a bit of a cliché. But it’s no joke. No mainstream politicians can escape some sort of responsibility for the rioting and civil unrest that ravaged England. Most are making noises about what should be done to ‘fix’ society; with David Cameron essentially repackaging many of the speeches he made when he first became leader of the Conservative Party with an angry tone of voice. This time, he’s added authoritarian zeal by calling for social networks to be closed down and has floated the idea of water cannons and rubber bullets. None of this illiberal nonsense seems bother Nick Clegg however, who in return has announced a ‘communities and victims panel’ which will fall tantalizingly short of the public inquiry that is really needed to get answers.

The impact of cuts cannot truly be felt yet and although it cannot be ruled out as a causal factor in helping create the riots, or doing enough to stem social disorder, the Labour party under Ed Miliband, to their credit are broadly right in their refusal to pinpoint the cause on anything in particular. That is sensible, clear-headed thinking at this stage. And although Miliband has instead called for a more wide-ranging, community-led inquiry into what went wrong, he cannot escape Labour’s failure to recognise the ties that bind in urban populations while it was in government, despite justified expenditure in inner cities through programmes such as SureStart and city academies. It may remain to be seen how much the public connects with his linking of the banking crisis, MPs’ expenses and the phone-hacking scandal and the apparent reaction of the ‘underclass’ to this irresponsibility, but it may well be a useful political narrative in the months to come.

Some people on the radical, Trotskyite left are convinced that looting is a political act in itself – and that what happened is somehow part of a wider workers’ movement. If that is true, then this class war that is horribly dysfunctional, when the communities that have suffered the most damage are pretty much characterised by the poorest parts of London: Tottenham, Brixton and Hackney, not to mention other areas of deprivation in the UK. It’s fairly perverse to support the wilful destruction of property of people who have nothing in the first place, whether that be homes or small businesses. A class analysis of the problem falls at the first hurdle.

That’s not to say that the left have nothing to say about the riots. But it needs to understand that an economic analysis is somewhat limited in its scope. We could blame Margaret Thatcher and the deliberate running down of certain British industries in the 1980s, but it wouldn’t fix our problems in 2011. Likewise, we shouldn’t discount traditional Conservative and right-of-centre politicians as completely wrong when they talk about families as the ‘building blocks of society’. A strong, family-type unit is crucial to a child’s upbringing, but strong families exist in many forms, whether that be a heterosexual, 2.4 children nuclear family or the sort with two daddies or one mummy. All of the above are preferable to brutal, murderous gangs which, as David Cameron has rightly identified, are no substitute for the caring, loving bonds of families and law-abiding, respectful communities.

So there are lessons for the left, as well as the right. And it seems irresponsibility by pretty much every section of society is to blame in some way or another. But the main parties are unwilling to lift up the rock to see what is actually happening underneath, evading the real answers as if nothing had happened. The causes of the riots are not ‘criminality pure and simple’: that is a woefully ignorant and inaccurate misreading of the mayhem which wreaked England’s streets last week. Opportunistic they may have been, but the riots cannot be defined on racial, economic, sociological or even criminal lines. In London, around half of those arrested in the first week after the riots were under 18, but among the balance were teachers, social workers, chefs and postal workers. No stereotypes there. So it is clear that whichever bit of society ‘broke’, it was by no means characterised by the unwaged and unemployed. Indeed, while we consider these facts, the most convincing analysis of the riots has come from people such as Peter Oborne and Camila Batmanghelidjh, who have at least introduced several interesting socio-political perspectives - as political commentator and social worker extraordinaire - into the debate.

We may have made some progress in our initial post-mortem of the riots. We might even agree that society – and that word is absolutely crucial - does need to teach responsibility at every level and cannot pretend the underlying problems of social decay don’t exist. Government plays a role in this process just like the rest of us, but it’s certainly not about single-parent families or ‘Left-Wing’ teaching in our schools. Similarly, it’s not purely about poverty or the cutting back local services.

We do need a moral code that at the same time is not ‘moralising’ but unites everyone, and which doesn’t play easily into the hands of ideologues whether they are political or religious. Sadly, going down that path could happen too easily. But blinding ourselves with an easy, readily available panacea doesn’t do the victims of last week’s unrest justice.

When a kiss is not 'just a kiss'

When is an innocent kiss between two young men in a pub deemed 'obscene'? That was the question on everyone's lips - if you'll excuse the pun - at a 'kiss-in' protest outside the John Snow pub in London's Soho last night. The catalyst was the reaction by a complete stranger in the pub, and the landlord's response, to a seemingly innocent snog between 23-year old James Bull and 26-year old Jonathan Williams, who had the audacity to show more than a little interest in each other after a successful first date on Wednesday evening.

As far as I know, there's no law against kissing. But, I know that landlords are entitled to throw people out of their premises if they are causing a disturbance, or discomfort to other patrons. And it's entirely true that heterosexual couples have been thrown out of pubs for over-affection. But, as Williams has said, “public decency laws tend to, from my understanding, apply to indecent exposure. We were kissing on the lips”.

If I am a complete stranger to you and I kiss my boyfriend, as a gay man, without doing anything lewd or obviously inappropriate, am I *really* offending you? Or do you just ignore it and concentrate on having a good time with your own friends or partner?

I don't like to assume that Britain is fundamentally homophobic. Public attitude surveys have recently shown a clear swing towards tolerance and acceptance of homosexuality. But I wonder if Britain is still just far too prudish in an age of sexual liberation and enlightenment and, as a friend said to me “uses prudishness to justify homophobia”. Maybe this is true. I fear that in an age of civil partnerships and employment equality we're still in danger of letting archaic views go unchallenged. Yes, gay and lesbian people have more or less got legal equality. But I still can't go down most streets in London – let alone anywhere else - holding hands with my boyfriend without attracting stares, while straight couples go completely unnoticed. I don't want to be noticed. I don't want to be tolerated, nor accepted. I want complete ambivalence. And that goal seems so far away, even in my lifetime.

The politics of Wednesday's protest were a bit of a mess and it was hardly a coherent campaign built over a long period time. It was a spontaneous event brought together by the power of Twitter, which may have been unthinkable a few years ago. Social networking and mobile phones have helped mobilise people in a way that people had maybe forgotten how to do until recently. As someone Tweeted:

“I got thrown out of a bar once years ago for kissing my boyfriend. But it was before Twitter had been invented, so we just laughed”.

But I began to wonder how the trend towards spontaneous protesting had influenced the John Snow event, in the context of a government which is finding new outposts of dissent every day, not least the enormous anti-cuts protests just a few weeks ago. Gay and lesbian people - often accused of being apolitical or indifferent – have an opportunity in the aftermath of this incident. If the LGBT community wants to take this further, the John Snow protest could build into something a lot bigger. It's hardly a comparison, but the attitude of Barclays Bank in South Africa in the 1980s soon changed when it became clear that the younger customers who might otherwise bank with them boycotted them for being complicit with apartheid – and they pulled out.

Here's a bit of free consultancy for the Sam Smith's public relations people – if you even exist. Listen and take note of what your customers are saying about you. Because the protests will be back outside the John Snow every Friday until you apologise to Jonathan and James and change your attitude.

Cycling for a good cause

The other day, I woke up feeling like I could take on anything and win. This doesn't happen very often, and certainly not at 7:15am in the morning. But, the day dawned bright and sunny, and I felt the overwhelming urge to take on a new challenge.

Over the course of one weekend in the summer I will be cycling from London to Paris, to raise money for the London Lesbian and Gay Switchboard, for which I volunteer. It will take several days, but it will be worth it. Andy and I have already planned a post-ride party in Paris - which will hopefully be warm, serene and relaxing after several days manic pedalling across the English and French countryside.

POTENTIAL STICKING POINTS:

1. I don't have a bike. I realise I must rectify this in order to complete the ride - and I need to start training soon. But I'm already planning trips into and across town, to Brighton, and the countryside.
2. I am tremendously unfit - so will probably have to take it more slowly at first. But part of the point of all this is to increase my general fitness levels. I've joined several gyms in the past - and get bored quickly - so hopefully this will be a form of fitness which I can really enjoy.

I will be setting up ways in which you can sponsor me soon. Watch this space!

All over, bar the counting

So it's all over bar the counting. Ken, and Labour's fate is sealed not only in London but across the country. As I sit down in front of the BBC's Election Night coverage it feels strangely like the last General Election, because to all intents and purposes this is a referendum on the performance of the Government since Gordon Brown became Prime Minister. Oddly, I don't feel Labour's general woes have been reflected in London, as I knocked on doors and spoke to voters across the capital. Whether people in Balham or Barnet have their own reasons to vote for or against the Labour candidate is a separate issue. Personalities have dominated, as they tend to now, especially with the coverage afforded by the free newspapers, blogs, and other media outlets.

Anyway, we did well today. I'm absolutely exhausted, but the hours of traipsing the streets seemed to work a treat. We had the highest turnout of anywhere in the ward, which was good news for our patch at least. Not one person I personally spoke to said they were voting for Boris, although I'm sure they existed somewhere in the ward. Here in Balham it is difficult to tell - we're in an inner London borough (Lambeth) but with plenty of green space and wealthy commuter occupied homes. The place actually looks quite Tory, but the make-up of our street suggests otherwise.

I still have no idea what's going to happen, but I've enjoyed the campaign, and I can sleep well tonight knowing I've done something to prevent London going blue. Tomorrow will tell...

Lessons to be learned after 1 May

The vitriol and the smears from the Standard have continued right up to the very bitter end, but I think Ken may just clinch this election. Today, their headlines claimed Boris had claimed an 11% surge over his rival, only a couple of days after the Guardian/ICM poll put Livingstone 6% ahead. Or, 4% if you count the people who've actually registered. So, as those who've interpreted this campaign have proved throughout, the truth is somewhere in between and not one candidate has really pushed that far past his rival.

I suspect we're in for a few surprises on Thursday - and not necessarily with the final outcome of the contest. If anything, this election will prove that pollsters' methods are outdated. Have they really taken into account the multiple combinations of first and second preference votes? There are some unholy alliances which will undoubtedly manifest themselves on polling day, and they won't be confined to the 'big four'.

So, to the big organisations who supposedly act as a weather vane for democracy - remember, not everyone in London has access to the Internet. Consider whether your sampling methods are fair and representative of the online and offline electorate. And, a caution to the candidates who judge their popularity by the number of people signed up to their respective Facebook groups. Perhaps I take democracy too seriously, but there's more to this than casually joining an online group when you don't necessarily intend to back it up at the ballot box.

I said in my previous post that I think this election could be won by the bloggers, but the issue is with the gulf of expectation between the number of people who say they'll vote, and those who've already scribbled down their choices by post or will plod down to the polling station on 1 May. More often than not, the results of these knife edge elections will have a number of factors influencing their result. Thursday could bring with it torrential storms and resulting in a huge swathe of less mobile and older people who decide against voting. On the other hand, we could be blessed with fine sunny spells - either way, it'll have an impact on the final result.

Whatever happens - the majority of voters will have made up their mind at this stage in the campaign (even if they weren't telling me so when when I went canvassing the other night!) and the final push of the Ken campaign will hopefully have made a positive impact. Ken's really made this job what it is by constantly pushing the limits and out-politicking everyone else. By doing so he has proved there's too much at stake to leave this fantastic city in the care of at best, a somewhat confused right-wing buffoon, and at the worst, a reactionary unreconstructed Thatcherite. London deserves a bit more confidence in its future than that.

Why bringing back the Routemaster isn't the answer for London

Boris Johnson launched his transport manifesto for London today, but his ideas struggle to sound coherent or even workable. The Conservative candidate for the job of Mayor claims Ken Livingstone has "run out of ideas", when the current incumbent of the job has demonstrated anything but. TfL is a remarkably different organisation from the old London Transport inherited some nine years ago. Bus use has risen dramatically - a reverse of the considerable decline outside the capital and there are signs of considerable investment in the Tube (even if the Metronet debacle has somewhat damaged public confidence in the funding structure). It's all down to a co-ordinated, well-funded and integrated transport policy and a Mayor with a genuine passion for the things which make a difference to Londoners.

Johnson's latest wheeze proposes bringing back the Routemaster, seemingly in an attempt to capitalise on public mistrust of their replacements, those nasty European bendy-buses which happily purr down continental boulevards but which have never really caught on in Britain.

The last Routemasters were retired from front-line service in December 2005, minus the ten or so which currently ply their trade on the 'heritage' routes. There was public outcry at the abolition of these venerable old beasts, as many a Time Out article and opinion piece pointed out. What the travelling public didn't quite realise is quite how time expired these vehicles were.

The Routemaster was developed as a replacement for London's trolleybus fleet, in a post-war Britain, catching up on the development of new vehicles had been stalled for at least six years during wartime. The concept of the vehicle was revolutionary for its time, but its basic look and feel was little different from the pre-war 'RT', itself a development of the 1910 'B' type. So, in 2005, a fleet of buses was operating on front line services in central London based on a design which originated before many passengers' grandparents were even born. Operators of the Routemaster struggled to find spare parts, their capacity restricted their usefulness somewhat, and they cost considerably more than one-person buses to operate because of the necessity of the conductor to collect fares and oversee passengers embarking and disembarking.

Boris has announced a competition to design a new Routemaster - a bus fit for the 21st century. But London Transport long ago stopped building its own vehicles, and in an age of standardisation and globalised transport manufacturers, a bus that's specially designed for London use only isn't going to find markets elsewhere. The black cab only survived because its basic design was so adaptable elsewhere.

To Boris and his campaign team, this dewy eyed notion of a cheery conductor returning to shout 'fares please' up the stairs might be a vote winner. But, as TfL have stated, returning the conductor to London's buses, not least developing the replacement vehicle, would cost something of the tune of £108m. Is that a price Johnson is prepared to pay? And if so, how would he fund it? It's a question I've already put to him - and it'll be interesting to see how nostalgia will survive in a mayoral election which is already more bitter than the previous two.