• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.
I would have thought that having as much as possible within 15 minutes of your home would be a good thing. Pensioners and those with limited mobility might just find it so much more convenient.

Ideally yes, but unfortunately I know many people with limited mobility who really cannot do without a car, even for fairly short journeys most of us could walk. The geography of certain localities (some of which cannot be changed even with improved pedestrian walkways) can cause challenges too.
 
Been to Oxford several times. Hate the place. Possibly the most divisive and pseudo-feudal town in England. Mind, I didn't like Cambridge much either. Or Leeds.

I do like Liverpool, Chester, Nottingham, Southend, Bangor, Canvey Island, Southport - even Welwyn Garden City :)
Witham?
 
Ideally yes, but unfortunately I know many people with limited mobility who really cannot do without a car, even for fairly short journeys most of us could walk. The geography of certain localities (some of which cannot be changed even with improved pedestrian walkways) can cause challenges too.
They would still be able to drive so this is no reason to prevent facilities to allow people to walk.
 
But no-one is being forced to stay within a certain locale..

People's concerns are that there is clear potential for mission creep here, in similar manner to how the Common Market slowly but inexorably morphed into the European Union, or how official CCTV cameras are everywhere these days, or how the government's Ofcom (Office of Communications) in its 21 year history, has changed radically from a comparatively toothless Broadcasting Standards Commission into a rather nebulous and massively powerful organisation that acquired substantial powers under Covid to penalise and suppress "unhelpful" reporting of the pandemic (i.e. anything that challenges the official narrative). That is perhaps a topic for another thread, but suffice it to say that not everyone who hears alarm bells ringing at further government steps to regulate our lives, are tin-foil hat wearing Ickes (or Brands).
 
People's concerns are that there is clear potential for mission creep here, in similar manner to how the Common Market slowly but inexorably morphed into the European Union, or how official CCTV cameras are everywhere these days, or how the government's Ofcom (Office of Communications) in its 21 year history, has changed radically from a comparatively toothless Broadcasting Standards Commission into a rather nebulous and massively powerful organisation that acquired substantial powers under Covid to penalise and suppress "unhelpful" reporting of the pandemic (i.e. anything that challenges the official narrative). That is perhaps a topic for another thread, but suffice it to say that not everyone who hears alarm bells ringing at further government steps to regulate our lives, are tin-foil hat wearing Ickes (or Brands).
Jaysus, there's an awful lot of conflation going on there.
Is there any evidence for your actual claims, regarding the fifteen minute city, as opposed to your dubious assertions on the rest?

Regarding the Common Market becoming the EU, this happened over decades, democratically, in full view. Hardly a secret, unwanted agenda.
Just because successive British governments mischaracterised it as some kind of enforced rule by a foreign power for craven purposes has little to do with the fact that most countries that now voluntarily include themselves in the EU have benefited enormously from it and so were willing to find greater cooperation.

As regards the UK OffCom, again, limited example, not representative beyond your shores.

Also, there's a huge difference between mis- and disinformation measures during time of crisis and suppression of anything outside the 'official narrative'.

I'm not saying I'm an advocate of the fifteen minute city, but all we need to do is look at major urban centres to see they are not working in their current guise. So, whose job is it to do better?

We clearly can't keep building them they way we used to, so what is to be done?

Governments are elected to do things that regulate people's lives — healthcare, food standards, skills certification, rules of the road, etc.
To simply say that a measure is setting "alarm bells ringing at further government steps to regulate our lives" without actually providing any evidence, or indeed reasoned argument, for the assertion is scaremongering.

If there is any evidence to suggest that such a measure is to limit freedoms, present it — because there's nothing intriguing, let alone compelling been put forward yet.
 
They would still be able to drive so this is no reason to prevent facilities to allow people to walk.

I never said that pedestrian facilities should be prevented.

I'm not against improving pedestrian facilities to encourage more walking, but I also don't think it should be an all or nothing approach (cars vs. pedestrians). There are many aspects of 15 minute cities that could be positive in principle, but they are also unrealistic and will require a lot of investment to make them work properly. Perhaps it is a scheme which would work in specific areas/zones to tackle congestion and pollution, but I know many, many areas where it simply would not work (if the aim is reducing congestion and pollution, rather than generating revenue).
 
Last edited:
I never said that pedestrian facilities should be prevented.
But you (and some other people on the thread) do seem to be against the idea of having facilities within walking distance for certain cities apparently on the basis that it would prevent disabled people from driving (simply not true - the Oxford scheme still allows for anyone to drive as much as they want within their 15 minute zone.) It is not an "all or nothing" approach. Or, because it would not work across the entirety of the UK, that it should not be allowed anywhere. It seems as if you might be arguing against something which has never been proposed in the first place. But I don't know the details of every scheme being proposed so..

I know many, many areas where it simply would not work (if the aim is reducing congestion and pollution, rather than generating revenue).
Okay, which of these areas are currently being considered for a 15 minute city scheme?
 
the Oxford scheme still allows for anyone to drive as much as they want within their 15 minute zone.
Well, (IIRC) it limits drivers to 100 days on which they can drive their cars outside of their zone and anything over that will incur a penalty charge notice. So yeah, technically you can drive around as much as you like within your zone, but that isn't what people are complaining about.
I think it's a great idea to provide everything anyone could want in a city within a 15 minute walk or cycle, but it's an impossible to achieve utopian dream which has no basis in reality for the vast majority of the general public.

I lived in Welwyn Garden City for 20 years and the original ethos and plan by Ebeneezer Howard (for WGC & Letchworth & Hampstead) was that the whole of the town would contain all of the facilities anyone would require so that everything was in easy reach. That was in the early 1920s so well before most people had cars.
The whole of the town had to be built 'from scratch' including all the parkland, shops, transport, entertainment, schools, doctors etc etc etc, and that everyone who lived in the area would be employed locally.
But times move on. Mass car ownership and an increasing population, plus the removal of branch lines, and then modern consumerism, and then online shopping destroying 'The High Street', has meant that people now have less available to them locally than they used to, not more. So people have to travel to other places, and also for employment will commute to other towns and cities, sometimes an hours drive away or more.
I can only imagine the problems that would be found (or created) in attempts to 'retro-fit' existing towns and cities with these ill thought-through ideologies, which would probably become obsolete anyway in a few years time, especially if we all get our flying cars.

Here in Flitwick they are about to close the last of the local bank branches, which means that if (like me and many others) you don't do 'online banking' then your nearest bank branches are in either Luton, Dunstable, Leighton Buzzard, Bedford, Hitchin or Stevenage. All of which are more than a 15 minute drive away on a good day.
The nearest hospitals? Again, Stevenage, Luton and Bedford.
And Flitwick is not a tiny, small 'one horse town'. And yet the only main shops we have here are a medium sized Tesco built in the 1990s, a small co-op, a Dominos pizza, a Costa, and a small number of independent cafes, estate agents, and various other small traders, plus 3 or 4 pubs.
Oh and they're building a Lidl on the outskirts of town.
There's no cinema, no post office, no 'nightlife' (except the pubs which are mostly awful).
There is a train station but I expect that is mostly so that people can leave Flitwick.
 
So yeah, technically you can drive around as much as you like within your zone, but that isn't what people are complaining about.
The post I was replying to complained that some people cannot walk for 15 minutes even if they wanted to. I was pointing out that they won't be expected to. I guarantee no local authority would try to implement that idea.
Here in Flitwick they are about to close the last of the local bank branches, which means that if (like me and many others) you don't do 'online banking' then your nearest bank branches are in either Luton, Dunstable, Leighton Buzzard, Bedford, Hitchin or Stevenage. All of which are more than a 15 minute drive away on a good day.
The nearest hospitals? Again, Stevenage, Luton and Bedford.
And Flitwick is not a tiny, small 'one horse town'. And yet the only main shops we have here are a medium sized Tesco built in the 1990s, a small co-op, a Dominos pizza, a Costa, and a small number of independent cafes, estate agents, and various other small traders, plus 3 or 4 pubs.
Oh and they're building a Lidl on the outskirts of town.
There's no cinema, no post office, no 'nightlife' (except the pubs which are mostly awful).
There is a train station but I expect that is mostly so that people can leave Flitwick.
And what are the details of the 15 minute scheme planned for Flitwick?
 
But you (and some other people on the thread) do seem to be against the idea of having facilities within walking distance…

Part of the problem is that we’ll get the “15-minute city” stick, but not the carrot: We’ll have fines imposed on us for having the temerity to travel outside our government-imposed “pens”; we won’t get the foundations-up remodelling of our cities required to ensure that everything we need is within 15 minutes’ travel of us.

the Oxford scheme still allows for anyone to drive as much as they want within their 15 minute zone.)

Bless the regime for allowing that crumb to fall to us from their table!

maximus otter
 
But you (and some other people on the thread) do seem to be against the idea of having facilities within walking distance for certain cities apparently on the basis that it would prevent disabled people from driving (simply not true - the Oxford scheme still allows for anyone to drive as much as they want within their 15 minute zone.) It is not an "all or nothing" approach. Or, because it would not work across the entirety of the UK, that it should not be allowed anywhere. It seems as if you might be arguing against something which has never been proposed in the first place. But I don't know the details of every scheme being proposed so..


Okay, which of these areas are currently being considered for a 15 minute city scheme?

To be honest I think you're starting to put words in my mouth. Perhaps I've given the wrong impression in some of my posts, but I even said in my last post that it may work for some areas and zones (which is quite different from saying it shouldn't be allowed anywhere on the basis that it wouldn't work everywhere).

One of my main points of contention is whether the facilities and services people regularly require will actually be within their 15 minute zone. In many cases I doubt this will be the case, as services have become more and more centralised over years. If governments and local authorities are serious about these schemes then they need to invest in infrastructure (on many fronts). At the moment it seems like this is more about the stick than the carrot. Where are the co-ordinating policies to actually make this work in practice, and enable lasting changes in public behaviour? We're probably not a million miles away from each other in terms of viewpoints, but I do hold a lot of scepticism about how it will all work in practice.

If the required services and infrastructure are not in place to make this idea work, then ultimately people will continue to behave as they currently do and begrudgingly pay fines providing they're not crippling (which may hit lower socio economic classes the hardest). If this happens, then what has been achieved?

I don't believe any of the places I'm thinking about are being considered as 15 minute cities, but they could be, and I thought this thread was a discussion about the general concept. It is only natural that as initiatives are introduced in one area, people will consider the practicalities of a similar scheme in their own area.

Edit: I started writing this reply and put it down to get lunch. Upon finishing the post I've just seen @maximus otter has used the same carrot/stick analogy. Don't know why but that made me laugh!
 
Mahyar Tousi interviews an Oxford local councillor who gives details of the way in which an FOI request has exposed the local council for withholding traffic data on the proposed LTNs, 'bus gates' and other measures that residents of the city are protesting against as they move towards a '15 minute city'.
I'm not adding the link to the film itself here (because politics) but you can find it if you look on Mahyar Tousi's you tube page.
https://www.youtube.com/@MahyarTousi/videos
 
But no-one is being forced to stay within a certain locale..
You're right - drive anywhere you like, as long as you can afford all the fines.
 
To be honest I think you're starting to put words in my mouth. Perhaps I've given the wrong impression in some of my posts, but I even said in my last post that it may work for some areas and zones (which is quite different from saying it shouldn't be allowed anywhere on the basis that it wouldn't work everywhere).
Noted but I wasn't - I was careful to use the words "seem to" to invite clarification rather than put words into your mouth.
One of my main points of contention is whether the facilities and services people regularly require will actually be within their 15 minute zone. In many cases I doubt this will be the case, as services have become more and more centralised over years. If governments and local authorities are serious about these schemes then they need to invest in infrastructure (on many fronts). At the moment it seems like this is more about the stick than the carrot.
They are being centralised to big cities, which is where 15 minute city schemes are being proposed. Though getting decent infrastructure sounds like a great carrot to me. But I feel sure you are right and most authorities would not want to invest in anything that isn't already there. Therefore they would not be able to implement a 15 minute city scheme.
I don't believe any of the places I'm thinking about are being considered as 15 minute cities, but they could be, and I thought this thread was a discussion about the general concept. It is only natural that as initiatives are introduced in one area, people will consider the practicalities of a similar scheme in their own area.
Of course you are free to think anything you like but like you say, it is a discussion so I wanted to discuss it.
 
That's interesting. You see the cost of exercising your freedom as a fine? Why do you feel that your rights trump mine?

Like Crowley said, "Do what thou wilt shall be the only law".
I have no idea what point you are making.

My point was that with the zoning that would be introduced in a 15 minute city, people would be constrained in their ability to move around by car, because of a system of fines. I was pointing out that the only people who this would not affect much would be wealthy people, who could afford to pay the fines.
I'm not sure how you make this out to be me asserting my rights over yours. I'm not wealthy enough to pay a bunch of fines.
 
Like Crowley said, "Do what thou wilt shall be the only law".
(just ignore me being picky, but...)
No, IIRC the actual Crowley quote was "There is no law beyond 'Do what thou wilt' - do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law".
His idea being that through encouraging people to follow their own desires, good or bad, that they would be more free, as part of his own doctrine which he named 'Thelema' *.
I expect we've got a thread on Crowley somewhere but I can't be arsed to look.
He probably would have had an interesting opinion on "15 minute cities".

[* In this instance, it related to the self and a persons 'will' to do something, as described in ancient Greek philosophy, the word 'thelema' although rare in Classical Greek, "signifies the appetitive will: desire, sometimes even sexual".
(Early Christian writings occasionally use the word to refer to the human will, and even the will of the Devil, but it usually refers to the will of God.)]
 
(just ignore me being picky, but...)
No, IIRC the actual Crowley quote was "There is no law beyond 'Do what thou wilt' - do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law".
His idea being that through encouraging people to follow their own desires, good or bad, that they would be more free, as part of his own doctrine which he named 'Thelema' *.
I expect we've got a thread on Crowley somewhere but I can't be arsed to look.
He probably would have had an interesting opinion on "15 minute cities".

[* In this instance, it related to the self and a persons 'will' to do something, as described in ancient Greek philosophy, the word 'thelema' although rare in Classical Greek, "signifies the appetitive will: desire, sometimes even sexual".
(Early Christian writings occasionally use the word to refer to the human will, and even the will of the Devil, but it usually refers to the will of God.)]

Crowley's ethos would likely result in anarchy, which I doubt many of us really want.

On the political scale between totalitarianism and libertarianism, I stand rather closer to the latter than the former, but I can see that, if taken to extremes an "anything goes" anarchy would be as ghastly as the other end of the scale with a big brotherish state.
 
result in anarchy, which I doubt many of us really want.
Smash the system!
Smash everything!
Smash smash smash!
For mash, get sm.....
....oh...hang on....sorry....I appear to have taken us significantly off topic.
1680259632033.png
 
A couple of clips from Russell Brand interviews about 15-minute cities and restricting the public right to free movement.

 
Edinburgh's version of 15 minute cities is '20 minute neighbourhoods' (which for many in Edinburgh is frankly already a reality as it's a compact city, but still)

Anyhoo, these booklets have been dropping onto doormats in Leith in the east end of the city (not my photo):
pyq31v7eh6ra1.jpg


Source

edit: amended 'anyway' to 'anyhoo' because it's more fun
 
Last edited:
Edinburgh's version of 15 minute cities is '20 minute neighbourhoods' (which for many in Edinburgh is frankly already a reality as it's a compact city, but still...

Not just '20 minute neighbourhoods', mind - but (insert scary chord progression) '5G / 20 minute neighbourhoods'! I wonder how often covid restrictions get name checked?

You know - I kind of miss the fluoride in the water thing. What happened to that?
 
The same mis/disinformation continually gets reposted to this thread no matter how many times it's been debunked, shown to be a UL or just totally made up.

If I recall correctly, didn't it turn the freakin' frogs trans rather than gay?
 
Back
Top