The post below was started before the extra-ordinary events of the weekend of the 6th August. That Sunday I cycled to Tottenham Hale to pick up some items at the Argos and then planned to pop up to Mothercare. As I went past the retail park, clearly something had gone on, and I talked to a policeman on duty there to see when the shops would re-open - I hadn't watched the news at all that morning and had no idea of the riots the night before. The policeman looked at me as if I was a complete imbecile (which was a pretty fair judgement, frankly) and explained the situation. As things escalated over the next days one could only watch with increasing amazement. I cycled back from a friend's house half a mile along Hoe Street at around 7:30pm on the Monday, and the atmosphere in Walthamstow was very strange. There was less traffic and pedestrians around than usual and everyone seemed nervous. I was nervous. I was even more nervous when a car passenger shouted at me "you're brave" as I waited for the lights at Church Street. I wasn't feeling very brave - and the comment re-enforced my deeply held belief in the merits of cowardice. Still, I arrived home without incident, and Walthamstow has since returned to its normal self.
Being removed from the rioting (preferring a nice cup of tea to looting JD Sports) it was only sights such as in the video below (filmed on the Wednesday) that reminded me of the scale of the unrest, and the magnitude of the police response. As I cycled past Bakers Arms there were 10 riot vans full of police, presumably off to patrol various parts of East London.
Wednesday, 17 August 2011
Tuesday, 16 August 2011
Crime and (very little) Punishment
Cycling casualties rose in the year ending March 2011. From the released statistics from the DfT, 1,870 people died and just under 25,000 people were killed or seriously injured on our roads in the 12 months to March 2011.
Pedestrian, Motorbike and car casualties and KSI all fell - pedestrians by 1% and 3% respectively, but car casualties and KSI fell by the most - 7% and 9% respectively.
Why pedestrian casualties fell is anyone's guess. Maybe there are less of them, maybe they learnt to run faster. Or possibly cars are now designed with pedestrian impact safety as a criteria. Certainly being in a car has become dramatically safer over the years, despite the huge increase in road traffic. This is no accident (excuse the pun). Untold money has been poured into road, and car, design to make the occupants safer. And whilst roads have become safer for car users with huge amounts of planning going into things such a motorway and A road design, this has had the effect of driving out non-motor traffic from the roads. So why has cycling had an increase in casualties? Maybe it is because of an increase in miles cycled, but then again motoring has increased over the years hugely and safety also increased - with the use of funds. Could it be that, whilst motoring has had billions poured in safety, cyclists have had to make do with advice like "take primary", or make use of cycle lanes that direct one into the path of car doors, left turning vehicles and prioritised side roads?
Maybe the decrease in car casualties and the increase in cycle casualties is due to car drivers becoming more diligent and careful, whilst those naughty cyclists are just reckless fools, flinging themselves at hapless drivers? Below are some videos,all taken on three trips in the last couple of weeks, that might point towards the real problem - motorists able to pretty much get away with anything on a regular basis.
The first two highlight the most endemic problem associated with motorist behaviour that currently blights nearly all our roads. It is so accepted that when 14% of motorists are found to be speeding on a road in Woodford Green, the police don't think this a problem. And the operation itself highlights the magnitude of the issue- if 14% of motorists are caught speeding when the police are by the roadside in big yellow POLICE jackets and waving around speed-guns one can only imagine the amount of speeding that goes on when they aren't around. Yet this criminal act, which has been completely normalised on our roads, kills people and makes roads utterly unusable for others.
Take the first video. Filmed on Saturday afternoon in Leytonstone High Road - a reasonably busy road. The speed of the car, coupled with its road position and the location of side turnings makes this a very anti-social piece of driving.
The second video is my favourite piece of road - the A11 into Stratford. Now, even in the pretty high amounts of competition in sh!t driving on the road, this BMW driver still manages to stand out amongst the crowd. The cyclist on the right is trying to make his way to the right turn at the lights. Some may say that his road positioning could be improved, but, frankly, there is absolutely no way of making this turn safely. Certainly the vehicular cycling method of "taking the lane" would have got him smeared over this BMW. This car was travelling so fast that I shoulder-checked as I entered the road and there was no car on the Bow Flyover. Thankfully, I did a final shoulder check and saw him careering down the road, hence my change in road positioning to the left. No way was I about to assert myself in this situation. This road is 30mph - but this is an utter joke. If Newham wanted to do something to help cyclists they might have thought about us when they "remodelled" the road for the Olympics. Or perhaps put in average speed cameras to keep the speed down. But there is nothing - aside from a hugely overworked 30mph flashing sign. Possibly because Newham council (ie. Sir Robin Wells) have absolutely no interest in cycling
Pedestrian, Motorbike and car casualties and KSI all fell - pedestrians by 1% and 3% respectively, but car casualties and KSI fell by the most - 7% and 9% respectively.
Why pedestrian casualties fell is anyone's guess. Maybe there are less of them, maybe they learnt to run faster. Or possibly cars are now designed with pedestrian impact safety as a criteria. Certainly being in a car has become dramatically safer over the years, despite the huge increase in road traffic. This is no accident (excuse the pun). Untold money has been poured into road, and car, design to make the occupants safer. And whilst roads have become safer for car users with huge amounts of planning going into things such a motorway and A road design, this has had the effect of driving out non-motor traffic from the roads. So why has cycling had an increase in casualties? Maybe it is because of an increase in miles cycled, but then again motoring has increased over the years hugely and safety also increased - with the use of funds. Could it be that, whilst motoring has had billions poured in safety, cyclists have had to make do with advice like "take primary", or make use of cycle lanes that direct one into the path of car doors, left turning vehicles and prioritised side roads?
Maybe the decrease in car casualties and the increase in cycle casualties is due to car drivers becoming more diligent and careful, whilst those naughty cyclists are just reckless fools, flinging themselves at hapless drivers? Below are some videos,all taken on three trips in the last couple of weeks, that might point towards the real problem - motorists able to pretty much get away with anything on a regular basis.
The first two highlight the most endemic problem associated with motorist behaviour that currently blights nearly all our roads. It is so accepted that when 14% of motorists are found to be speeding on a road in Woodford Green, the police don't think this a problem. And the operation itself highlights the magnitude of the issue- if 14% of motorists are caught speeding when the police are by the roadside in big yellow POLICE jackets and waving around speed-guns one can only imagine the amount of speeding that goes on when they aren't around. Yet this criminal act, which has been completely normalised on our roads, kills people and makes roads utterly unusable for others.
Take the first video. Filmed on Saturday afternoon in Leytonstone High Road - a reasonably busy road. The speed of the car, coupled with its road position and the location of side turnings makes this a very anti-social piece of driving.
The second video is my favourite piece of road - the A11 into Stratford. Now, even in the pretty high amounts of competition in sh!t driving on the road, this BMW driver still manages to stand out amongst the crowd. The cyclist on the right is trying to make his way to the right turn at the lights. Some may say that his road positioning could be improved, but, frankly, there is absolutely no way of making this turn safely. Certainly the vehicular cycling method of "taking the lane" would have got him smeared over this BMW. This car was travelling so fast that I shoulder-checked as I entered the road and there was no car on the Bow Flyover. Thankfully, I did a final shoulder check and saw him careering down the road, hence my change in road positioning to the left. No way was I about to assert myself in this situation. This road is 30mph - but this is an utter joke. If Newham wanted to do something to help cyclists they might have thought about us when they "remodelled" the road for the Olympics. Or perhaps put in average speed cameras to keep the speed down. But there is nothing - aside from a hugely overworked 30mph flashing sign. Possibly because Newham council (ie. Sir Robin Wells) have absolutely no interest in cycling
Then we have the "didn't see" or "didn't care" approach to cyclists. Many motorists are clearly busy people, and there is little point in dallying around waiting for cyclists or pedestrians to get out of the way. Obeying the highway code and giving some thought to the safety of other road-users is clearly a nice idea, but not when you are in a hurry. How important is a cyclist or pedestrian's journey if they didn't decide to use a car anyway?
So, as this Audi driver kindly demonstrates, cyclists should be prepared to yield to important people in German cars.
Finally, we have the last word in the true hierarchy on our roads. Whilst we stop at the lights near Tottenham Hale tube station, this very important driver in the Mazda decides to push past me and cross the lights at red, whilst pedestrians are still crossing. Clearly he beeped his horn a couple of times, so any casualties (for example the young family still crossing) would only have themselves to blame.
So there we are. Clearly the transport planners scratch their heads and worry about the cycling injuries until they realise that what is actually required is to train the cyclists better. So that they know that they need to be positioning themselves right in front of drivers such as those above. That will sort things out for sure....
Thursday, 28 July 2011
A year to go
Festivities and congratulations have surrounded the year marker to the Olympics. Boris thinks that we could hold a snap Olympics now.
There is some disquiet in the ranks though. Sir Robin Wales - Mayor of Newham - is particularly concerned by disruption on the roads with the Olympic Road Network. Clearly this is a concern in Newham, where Robin Wales has played no small part in trying to strangle cycling as a mode of transport by blocking initiatives such as Cycle Superhighways in his borough. So, in an utterly car-sick borough, the thought of disrupting the normal traffic congestion is akin to an addict being put through "cold-turkey".
Unless one will be able to cycle through the Olympic park to Stratford, the only way I can see to access Stratford Centre and Westfield from the Greenway side will be on the A11. Which, as I have blogged many times, is hardly cycling friendly. In fact, I was amazed to see a reasonable number of cyclists on the A11 the other day, a testament to our bloody mindedness in the face of local government hostility, if nothing else. However as a reminder, here is yet another video of the conditions on this road.
Note the driver of Golf is speeding and sets off the 30mph sign (which is so overworked it should seek union representation). Note also that the Golf driver barely steers around me at speed, even though the outside lane is free. This might be because he was concentrating on chatting on his mobile at the time.
This type of behaviour is routine on this stretch of road which is deeply unpleasant to walk down, and downright dangerous to cycle along. Robin Wales and his cabal of colleagues have managed to block anything that would make this area of Newham a more pleasant environment, in order that private motorists can speed their way through Stratford, presumably on their way out of the borough. This is the Olympic transport legacy for cycling. A sham of hyperbole PR and utter inaction on the ground. It could have been so different.
There is some disquiet in the ranks though. Sir Robin Wales - Mayor of Newham - is particularly concerned by disruption on the roads with the Olympic Road Network. Clearly this is a concern in Newham, where Robin Wales has played no small part in trying to strangle cycling as a mode of transport by blocking initiatives such as Cycle Superhighways in his borough. So, in an utterly car-sick borough, the thought of disrupting the normal traffic congestion is akin to an addict being put through "cold-turkey".
Unless one will be able to cycle through the Olympic park to Stratford, the only way I can see to access Stratford Centre and Westfield from the Greenway side will be on the A11. Which, as I have blogged many times, is hardly cycling friendly. In fact, I was amazed to see a reasonable number of cyclists on the A11 the other day, a testament to our bloody mindedness in the face of local government hostility, if nothing else. However as a reminder, here is yet another video of the conditions on this road.
Note the driver of Golf is speeding and sets off the 30mph sign (which is so overworked it should seek union representation). Note also that the Golf driver barely steers around me at speed, even though the outside lane is free. This might be because he was concentrating on chatting on his mobile at the time.
This type of behaviour is routine on this stretch of road which is deeply unpleasant to walk down, and downright dangerous to cycle along. Robin Wales and his cabal of colleagues have managed to block anything that would make this area of Newham a more pleasant environment, in order that private motorists can speed their way through Stratford, presumably on their way out of the borough. This is the Olympic transport legacy for cycling. A sham of hyperbole PR and utter inaction on the ground. It could have been so different.
Tuesday, 26 July 2011
Bexley Road Rage Updated
The driver in Bexley who attacked a cyclist has been sentenced.
John Nicholls pleaded guilty to common assault.
£400 fine + £100 compensation + £85 costs and £15 victim surcharge.
I think £600 cost for not being able to hold ones temper should make him think twice when deciding to bully another cyclist. Plus the criminal record.
It is interesting to note that, despite the image from the more tabloid of our press (ie: the Mail) that cyclists are lawless anarchists, many of the cyclist stories involve cyclists who are professionals. This one involved a lawyer in his late 40's. So despite the gutter press image, actually many cyclists are professional people who are often between 30 and 50. And many have the means and motivation to be recording their journeys. This should give the motorist pause for thought. There are cyclists, who not only have a record of incidents, but the knowledge and will to pursue wrong-doing through legal channels. For example, the excellent blog, The Cycling Lawyer, has posted about a motorist who pushed him into traffic, and the actions he has taken through the courts and police . And quite rightly so, this type of deeply unpleasant behaviour needs to be confronted. Normally, as a cyclist we cannot do this at the time against someone driving a car, but we should be able to pursue through a sympathetic police service.
Unfortunately as the Cycling Lawyer case, and the Bexley assault, shows, the police either don't take cyclist assaults seriously, or are so incompetent that anyone caught is sheer luck. I simply don't believe it is the latter - I think generally that cyclist assaults are treated by police and the courts as a bit of "argee bargee" and that many believe the provocation argument - even if the provocation is simply the cyclist being on the road. This is utterly unacceptable - the police and courts need to be more robust in their actions. They should also take note that many cyclists are au-fait with their rights and the law and record incidents for evidence. Not least because they can end up looking like Inspector Clouseau on a really bad day when the video and police follow-up is published.
The Bexley case does also throw up some interesting things. Firstly, the driver's license has escaped any sanction. And yet surely punching someone else over an incident whilst driving should surely be viewed as a driving related offence? Also, the police were initially stumped by the fact that the owner of the car claimed it had been stolen (and then returned in pristine condition hours later). This either means Nicholls stole the car, or the owner was lying. Either way, it should result in some action - surely people shouldn't simply be allowed to lie to the police to get away with a crime? Lastly, Nicholls was apparently, full of remorse, presumably for getting caught and being shown up to be a little thug to the hundreds of thousands who watched the video and read the reports.
The above Bexley incident has had satisfactory resolution in my opinion (even if some questions aren't answered concerning the ownership of the car). But I cannot help but wonder what would have happened without video evidence, even with the large numbers of witnesses. It is a sobering thought to think that we appear to have little protection from the law in these cases unless we happen to organise a myriad of witnesses and video evidence and then run a press campaign that gets the story into local and national press.
John Nicholls pleaded guilty to common assault.
£400 fine + £100 compensation + £85 costs and £15 victim surcharge.
I think £600 cost for not being able to hold ones temper should make him think twice when deciding to bully another cyclist. Plus the criminal record.
It is interesting to note that, despite the image from the more tabloid of our press (ie: the Mail) that cyclists are lawless anarchists, many of the cyclist stories involve cyclists who are professionals. This one involved a lawyer in his late 40's. So despite the gutter press image, actually many cyclists are professional people who are often between 30 and 50. And many have the means and motivation to be recording their journeys. This should give the motorist pause for thought. There are cyclists, who not only have a record of incidents, but the knowledge and will to pursue wrong-doing through legal channels. For example, the excellent blog, The Cycling Lawyer, has posted about a motorist who pushed him into traffic, and the actions he has taken through the courts and police . And quite rightly so, this type of deeply unpleasant behaviour needs to be confronted. Normally, as a cyclist we cannot do this at the time against someone driving a car, but we should be able to pursue through a sympathetic police service.
Unfortunately as the Cycling Lawyer case, and the Bexley assault, shows, the police either don't take cyclist assaults seriously, or are so incompetent that anyone caught is sheer luck. I simply don't believe it is the latter - I think generally that cyclist assaults are treated by police and the courts as a bit of "argee bargee" and that many believe the provocation argument - even if the provocation is simply the cyclist being on the road. This is utterly unacceptable - the police and courts need to be more robust in their actions. They should also take note that many cyclists are au-fait with their rights and the law and record incidents for evidence. Not least because they can end up looking like Inspector Clouseau on a really bad day when the video and police follow-up is published.
The Bexley case does also throw up some interesting things. Firstly, the driver's license has escaped any sanction. And yet surely punching someone else over an incident whilst driving should surely be viewed as a driving related offence? Also, the police were initially stumped by the fact that the owner of the car claimed it had been stolen (and then returned in pristine condition hours later). This either means Nicholls stole the car, or the owner was lying. Either way, it should result in some action - surely people shouldn't simply be allowed to lie to the police to get away with a crime? Lastly, Nicholls was apparently, full of remorse, presumably for getting caught and being shown up to be a little thug to the hundreds of thousands who watched the video and read the reports.
The above Bexley incident has had satisfactory resolution in my opinion (even if some questions aren't answered concerning the ownership of the car). But I cannot help but wonder what would have happened without video evidence, even with the large numbers of witnesses. It is a sobering thought to think that we appear to have little protection from the law in these cases unless we happen to organise a myriad of witnesses and video evidence and then run a press campaign that gets the story into local and national press.
Saturday, 23 July 2011
The Future of Cycle Infrastructure
For too long, the cynics have been deriding local and national government's attempts at encouraging cycling. Some have uncharitably commented upon the dichotomy between their media campaigns and the efforts on the ground.
There have been those bloggers - whose virtual cup is always half full - that have pointed out the deficiencies of the Olympic cycle infrastructure and that it might not be in accordance with the "greenest ever games". They may have been somewhat scathing about the fact that Newham council blocked a cycle superhighway to the games as blue offends their delicate sensibilities.
Well shame on them and their cynical outlook.
I think that the "greenest games ever" have a trick up their sleeve. And I have managed to get a photo of it, below.
I have it on good authority* from a source close to the games** that these yellow structures are actually Star Trek style transporters which can beam cyclists directly from their homes to the games thus avoiding the deeply cycling unfriendly roads in Newham and surrounding boroughs.
Clearly this is a major step forward in transportation. Information from an anonymous source*** says that there are one or two teething issues - principally that matter transportation hasn't been invented yet. But neither TfL or local government have ever let lack of functionality stop cycle facilities, and this shouldn't be any different - the fact they don't work won't get in the way of a PR exercise.
However, all this high technology shouldn't be allowed to put off older cyclists. The more traditional amongst us can be comforted with some age-old infrastructure just metres down the road on the greenway.
* OK, the good authority is that I made it up
** The source is me - I am quite close to the games, only a few miles down the road.
*** A good journalist never reveals his source. But it was me again.
(I can assure the public that no phone hacking was used to get this news scoop)
There have been those bloggers - whose virtual cup is always half full - that have pointed out the deficiencies of the Olympic cycle infrastructure and that it might not be in accordance with the "greenest ever games". They may have been somewhat scathing about the fact that Newham council blocked a cycle superhighway to the games as blue offends their delicate sensibilities.
Well shame on them and their cynical outlook.
I think that the "greenest games ever" have a trick up their sleeve. And I have managed to get a photo of it, below.
I have it on good authority* from a source close to the games** that these yellow structures are actually Star Trek style transporters which can beam cyclists directly from their homes to the games thus avoiding the deeply cycling unfriendly roads in Newham and surrounding boroughs.
Clearly this is a major step forward in transportation. Information from an anonymous source*** says that there are one or two teething issues - principally that matter transportation hasn't been invented yet. But neither TfL or local government have ever let lack of functionality stop cycle facilities, and this shouldn't be any different - the fact they don't work won't get in the way of a PR exercise.
However, all this high technology shouldn't be allowed to put off older cyclists. The more traditional amongst us can be comforted with some age-old infrastructure just metres down the road on the greenway.
* OK, the good authority is that I made it up
** The source is me - I am quite close to the games, only a few miles down the road.
*** A good journalist never reveals his source. But it was me again.
(I can assure the public that no phone hacking was used to get this news scoop)
Monday, 18 July 2011
Long Arm of The Law
Clearly, at the moment, the MET police have lots of things to worry about. So the case where a cyclist was assaulted by a driver probably doesn't feature highly in the top brass' list of problems to solve.
The case has been widely reported thanks in no small part to the publication of the video on YouTube being picked up by numerous blogs and local media. For those who haven't yet seen the incident that happened in Bexley between a car driver and a cyclist, here is the video below
This incident was recorded by a camera and the bus CCTV, in front of multiple witnesses including the bus driver, passers-by and the other cyclists. The number-plate was clearly visible in the video and recorded by other witnesses.
Somewhat open and shut case one may think. Except that when the police went to the registered owner of the vehicle, they explained that the car had been stolen that afternoon - with the keys in the ignition - by persons unknown, only to be returned some hours later completely untouched. As excuses go this rates slightly lower than "they made me do it" or "the dog ate it" - in fact one would expect the police to view such a story with the same incredulity as "it must have been aliens".
Except that the police seemed to shrug their shoulders and conclude they had been beaten by a criminal mastermind. This was hardly the deductive powers of Sherlock Holmes. Or even Inspector Clouseau. Eventually when the video "went viral" and the mainstream media picked up the story, the man in the video turned himself him. Presumably at this time, with multiple witnesses, video, and a man who had voluntarily come to the police, they could finally arrest and charge someone.
I cannot help but think that, without the video, this assault - even with multiple witnesses - would never have been resolved at all. Which is somewhat saddening. If thugs like this think they can get away with hitting someone in broad daylight then they will do so.
This story has a good end to a bad situation. It will be interesting to see what the driver is charged with and the result. If the owner's story is to be believed then the driver should be charged with "taking without owners consent" and driving without insurance etc. on top of any assault charges.
The case has been widely reported thanks in no small part to the publication of the video on YouTube being picked up by numerous blogs and local media. For those who haven't yet seen the incident that happened in Bexley between a car driver and a cyclist, here is the video below
This incident was recorded by a camera and the bus CCTV, in front of multiple witnesses including the bus driver, passers-by and the other cyclists. The number-plate was clearly visible in the video and recorded by other witnesses.
Somewhat open and shut case one may think. Except that when the police went to the registered owner of the vehicle, they explained that the car had been stolen that afternoon - with the keys in the ignition - by persons unknown, only to be returned some hours later completely untouched. As excuses go this rates slightly lower than "they made me do it" or "the dog ate it" - in fact one would expect the police to view such a story with the same incredulity as "it must have been aliens".
Except that the police seemed to shrug their shoulders and conclude they had been beaten by a criminal mastermind. This was hardly the deductive powers of Sherlock Holmes. Or even Inspector Clouseau. Eventually when the video "went viral" and the mainstream media picked up the story, the man in the video turned himself him. Presumably at this time, with multiple witnesses, video, and a man who had voluntarily come to the police, they could finally arrest and charge someone.
I cannot help but think that, without the video, this assault - even with multiple witnesses - would never have been resolved at all. Which is somewhat saddening. If thugs like this think they can get away with hitting someone in broad daylight then they will do so.
This story has a good end to a bad situation. It will be interesting to see what the driver is charged with and the result. If the owner's story is to be believed then the driver should be charged with "taking without owners consent" and driving without insurance etc. on top of any assault charges.
The Blackfriars Conspiracy Files
Boris has decided. 20mph on Blackfriars bridge must be raised to 30 mph.
Between the rambling about the commission of the report, and how cycling is super, Boris was quite convinced that 20mph was a bad idea. Of course he means a bad idea for people deciding to drive through central London, as opposed to a bad idea for everyone else who decides that this is a ludicrous method of transport in the centre of a large metropolis and opts for something else.
The arguments for 30mph appear as incoherent as anything I have heard from TfL and Boris. And, believe me, it is up against some pretty stiff competition. The reasoning appears to run thus: the average speed is 12mph, so 30 mph limit won't be a problem and that somehow restricting traffic to 20mph, when the average speed is 12 mph is going to cause congestion and upset the holy grail of smoothing traffic flow. All arguments about how 20mph may actually aid traffic flow since it reduces bunching and accidents is met by bluster equivalent in argumentative validity to a small child holding their fingers in their ears and shouting "LALALA".
Then Boris mentioned that he understood the issues of Blackfriars bridge as he cycled it often. So, if the Mayor of London - who TfL reports into - cycles the bridge, finds it dangerous and yet still won't do anything about it, what hope anyone else? This set me thinking - it would almost appear that TfL are advising the Mayor to make his life more dangerous. Once the connection was made it was obvious! Someone at TfL doesn't like Boris and is trying to get rid of him! What better way than a road "accident"? Where better than on the UK roads, where no-one needs to take any responsibility for their actions in a car?
Someone needs to tell Boris he is a marked man, and, in true James Bond style, the villains have come up with a complicated and dastardly plan to rid themselves of him. The continued marginalisation of cycling and walking in London isn't due to incompetence and stupidity of a car obsessed transport organisation, it is the product of evil genius!
And if one needs any further proof, then look no further than this...
Between the rambling about the commission of the report, and how cycling is super, Boris was quite convinced that 20mph was a bad idea. Of course he means a bad idea for people deciding to drive through central London, as opposed to a bad idea for everyone else who decides that this is a ludicrous method of transport in the centre of a large metropolis and opts for something else.
The arguments for 30mph appear as incoherent as anything I have heard from TfL and Boris. And, believe me, it is up against some pretty stiff competition. The reasoning appears to run thus: the average speed is 12mph, so 30 mph limit won't be a problem and that somehow restricting traffic to 20mph, when the average speed is 12 mph is going to cause congestion and upset the holy grail of smoothing traffic flow. All arguments about how 20mph may actually aid traffic flow since it reduces bunching and accidents is met by bluster equivalent in argumentative validity to a small child holding their fingers in their ears and shouting "LALALA".
Then Boris mentioned that he understood the issues of Blackfriars bridge as he cycled it often. So, if the Mayor of London - who TfL reports into - cycles the bridge, finds it dangerous and yet still won't do anything about it, what hope anyone else? This set me thinking - it would almost appear that TfL are advising the Mayor to make his life more dangerous. Once the connection was made it was obvious! Someone at TfL doesn't like Boris and is trying to get rid of him! What better way than a road "accident"? Where better than on the UK roads, where no-one needs to take any responsibility for their actions in a car?
Someone needs to tell Boris he is a marked man, and, in true James Bond style, the villains have come up with a complicated and dastardly plan to rid themselves of him. The continued marginalisation of cycling and walking in London isn't due to incompetence and stupidity of a car obsessed transport organisation, it is the product of evil genius!
And if one needs any further proof, then look no further than this...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)