• The thing is, I can think of nothing that can be easier to police / control than stopping people cycling through tho Foot Tunnel.

    If the combined might of Greenwich and Tower Hamlets Councils can't stop a few self-important middle-aged fat blokes in bright yellow cycling through a tunnel that's about 6' wide, we don't have a chance of stopping the Jihadists!

  • The thingis, how many incidents have been caused by these cyclists? How many injuries? Is there any evidence that people don't use the tunnel because of the menace of the cyclist? If not, perhaps a few people considerately cycling through isn't that much of a big deal and they would be better off letting them do it?

  • The thing is, I can think of nothing that can be easier to police / control than stopping people cycling through tho Foot Tunnel.

    The thing is, managed permission usually works better than prohibition and enforcement. I don't know yet what the Councils are planning to do, but without doubt they wouldn't have the funding to enforce, anyway. It's open 24/7 and you can't use automated number plate technology, which is the main mechanism for passive-ish enforcement available to authorities.

    If the combined might of Greenwich and Tower Hamlets Councils can't stop a few self-important middle-aged fat blokes in bright yellow cycling through a tunnel that's about 6' wide, we don't have a chance of stopping the Jihadists!

    Generally, when you prohibit something and don't constantly enforce it, you'll get decent people following the prohibition and those people whom you really wanted to stop will only carry on doing what they've been doing. In cycle campaigning, we've seen that a lot with environments like parks, and the Foot Tunnel is similar in that respect, although obviously a completely different environment. Personally, I'll welcome permission to cycle through and will of course ride carefully and courteously.

    I'll start every post with 'the thing is' tonight. :)

About