Ken spends £1 million of farepayers' cash on a three-minute advert
Ken Livingstone spent £1 million of farepayers' cash in three minutes today.
It went on a short film by Oscar-nominated director Mike Figgis designed to encourage Londoners to be considerate to one another on public transport.
The media were invited to a screening at the National Film Theatre, at which Ken was joined by three "celebrities" - Simon Webbe, Phil Daniels and Miquita Oliver.
I'd heard of Phil Daniels from Quadrophenia, and believe Simon Webbe was in the pop band Blue. Trendier work colleagues tell me Miquita OLiver is a TV presenter best known for being a mate of Lily Allen. They all seemed nice, and spoke about how awful it was when someone misbehaved on a bus, but I'm still trying to work out why they were there.
I've asked Transport for London whether they collected appearance fees (Konnie Huq was paid £4,750 when she appeared at a Ken press conference last year) but strangely TfL seems not to know. They're much quicker off the mark when they want to complain about a story they don't like.
Londoners will, from Friday, be able to judge the advert for themselves. It will be screened on nearly 800 screens - hence the bumper £1 million cost.
TfL, to be fair, has commissioned some good promotional films - the one advising motorists to look out for bikers still makes me wince. As for Mr Figgis's work, I thought it was pretty good, though I doubt whether it'll do much to stop those neanderthals on the 52 bus playing their gangsta rap on the top deck.
Ken hopes the message will go out that we should not play loud music, shout into our mobile phones or eat smelly food in the company of fellow travellers. Most folk are considerate enough not to do this anyway. The anti-social louts who inflict their bad behaviour on others probably won't be paying £10 a ticket to sit in the cinema at the weekend - they'll be out running wild on the buses and trains.
Was this an admission from Ken that his free bus travel for teenagers had created "bedlam buses"? Of course not. It's society that needs fixing, he said.
But Boris was quick off the mark to say the problem was of Ken's own making. He's right, to a degree - and if he's got any sense, he'll keep referring to bedlam buses all the way up to election day.
Surely it would have been better to spend the money on more inspectors to keep the problem under control - no misbehaving teen is going to be remotely moved by a 3 minute film urging them to be considerate! What a waste of money!
Posted by: Alison | 30/01/2008 at 10:22 AM
Anything that makes the buses nicer to travel on would be welcome. But instead of spending a million on ads, why not spend it on cleaning? London buses are disgustingly dirty, and they smell weird, even without people eating smelly food. I have rarely travelled on a bus in London which was even averagely clean.
The mayor can't fix society, but he can do something about the state of the buses.
Posted by: Sarah N. | 30/01/2008 at 12:08 PM
A child travelling on a bus recently asked me if it had been raining. I replied, no, it's just that the bus window hasn't been cleaned in some time. What standards does Transport for London require of the bus companies for cleanliness, in its contracts with the bus companies, and how does TfL monitor these standards? Surely this is a question that the Mayor will answer between now and Mayday.
Posted by: Cynthia Hay | 30/01/2008 at 05:44 PM
Why doesn't Mr Livingstone and TfL follow the example of the authorities in Singapore and China's Shengzhen and simply ban food and drink from public transport? Of course some people will flout the ban, but the overwhelming majority of citizen's will not break the law. I have seen drivers both allow and refuse people without tickets / cards, to travel on their buses, so why not food and drink?
Posted by: TCBH | 31/01/2008 at 09:15 AM
Why doesn't somebody at TfL take control of all the free newspaper litter on the underground trains? I suggest the companies distributing them ought to be charged IN ADVANCE for clearing the litter.
Posted by: Richard Tracey - Wandsworth | 01/02/2008 at 11:25 PM
Dear Ross, Ken, Boris and Evening Standard Readers. It comes accross as cheap popularism to go on about kids on buses.
I am a Grandmother who does not get worked up about kids 'acting out' on buses - in fact most do not behave this way, though lots of them together do tend to talk their talk loudly which I can find reasonably amusing to listen to believe it or not!
Yes, it can be annoying but they are relatively harmless. Any apparent lack of manners just mirrors British culture generally, i.e. Most adults think nothing of being down right rude to kids from a very early age - just listen to how quite small kids are spoken to by 'elders and betters' - strangers, parents and teachers!
It is in the British culture to speak roughly to children which of course builds up disrespect in them of adults.
I heartily agree about food on buses but, as someone suggested, stop messing around with expensive films TfL and just ban it! Also, ban feet on seats - it's always guys im my experience!
I now sit on my newspaper as a precaution against any lurking, shoe- transported dog mess etc!!!
One big problem for me is witnessing bus drivers' attitude/culture, with the rare few exceptional drivers proving the rule! It's one of rude, mumbling indifference, unsmiling, moodiness and a vibe which can promote and escalate problems uneccesarily.
It is ok for them as they are safe behind their protective screens, but not for passengers. London is full of characters who have untreated mental health probs and/or drug probs, who try to use buses sometimes without tickets or whatever.
But TfL should not allow or expect drivers to deal with these social issues. It is dangerous for all of us to have 'worked up' bad tempered drivers careering along our roads after steaming altercations with difficult passengers.
Policing buses should belong to a large inpection team (forget conducters, it won't happen), who can be radioed ahead should it be really necessary. But, it would be better if discretion was used - so what if a few people with problems do not pay?
I notice when in Paris, that transport workers ignore the few who jump the barriers or alight without a ticket. It is left to occasional inspection teams who suddenly appear and who inpect everyone. Likewise,this should not be the drivers' job in London.
I have lost count of the times I have paid a fare for just such a person who is being given hell by a driver meaning that we the passengers are witness to all this unpleasantness and stranded and vulnerable in the presence of a confused and sick person who by definition, may not be in his right mind and so potentially violent.
Such a person could be drunk, on crack or mentally disturbed. We do not need drivers exercising loud indigant 'high handed' negative judgements from behind the safety of their screens.
The routine seems to be to turn off the engine and refuse to move, creating a stand off! At the same time unprofessional opinions are sometimes broadcast via the public mic system by the driver in an attempt to gain sympathy ( some kind of public servant martredom act)causing stress and a real 'health and safety' situation for pasengers, notwithstanidng that all this must be bad for drivers' blood pressure and 'health and safety' ultimately
It's worth noting that my London experience is in stark contrast to my Paris one. There, the RATP transport workers seem trained not to get involved. I have never seen such events as those in London.
And they exhibit impeccable manners plus a kind and neutral attitude towards the travelling public. Paris bus drivers tend to smile and say 'Bonjour' as passengers get on - the passengers respond likewise - yes the kids too!
They are patient with those fumbling with tickets,'oysters' or money, engaging in brief pleasantries throughout. It is amazing to note that they always seem to reopen the door for stragglers and sometimes allow people to alight at traffic lights - incredible!
They are not behind screens - indeed the RATP buses are fitted with them but they are always wound down (as a car window is).
I have never witnessed a problem on a Paris bus neither in the centre or the suburbs (Banleius), (occasional riots excepted of course).
It's worth reporting too that Paris RTAP workers and drivers get involved on a voluntary basis with helping homeless, drinker types who are tolerated whilst sheltering in Metro stations. I have seen them distributing food and hot drinks to this community during cold weather.
In parting: re Fuel and emissions in London, can someone at TfL tell us why the fuel 'Aquazol' which is used in Paris buses is not used in our (literally stinking) London buses?
A little internet research informed me that this type of diesel is 60% less harmful and polluting and, IMPORTANTLY, its use requires no modification of bus engines?
Finally, please please Ross, Ken and Boris, urgently demand that all buses and taxis (all except electric) get out of the currently hellish Oxford street.
This could be done relatively easily by making each bus route terminate at each end - both Tottenham Court Road and Hyde Park ends and then link the 'broken'or interrupted routes with a fleet of hop on and off smaller 'free' electric buses for onward journeys along Oxford Street.
Meanwhile, I use only the back streets to access the department stores as the noise and fumes in Oxford street are a terrible health hazard.
Just get on with it TfL - what are you waiting for? Oxford Street with its dangerous, crawling wall of buses, as it is today, is a huge (and physically dangerous) embarrassment for London.
Posted by: ivegotanasbo | 07/02/2008 at 01:26 PM