Action Group Meeting - cycling deaths caused by lorries

Seemi is a good idea and one that should be worth considering, but it's not immediate. The actions of the DfT to provide fresnal lenses to HGV drivers isn't a media stunt. It's proven technology that is cheap, immediately accessible, continuous and reliable.

Just on a brief reading of the seemi proposal I can identify a number of different areas where the system is vulnerable and has severe limitations (costs, adaptations to infrastructure, absence of traffic lights, requirements of continuous power supply, planning regulations, timeliness, road structure, non-connective, lack of expectation, etc). Under the right conditions it would be worth investing in, but like the fresnal lenses it cannot be considered as a sole response.

We'll want to come away from the meeting with a clear 'something'... what we won't be able to rustle up is a clear strategy and full list of solutions.

I can speak to the person who arranged the existing lorry ban back whenever it came in on Tuesday... he should have some suggestions as to what might work (such as permits and the like). However we would be well advised to stick to a clear outcome - which might be 'fewer cyclists killed by lorries' - and keep that in our minds rather than fixate on a solution in the short term.

see-mi was just an example of a simlar solution to fresnal lenses that goes further if you put more resources to it. i see problems in the system as well but fresnal lenses are no where near as good. my point is that (i think) we are campaining for more resources to be dedicated to solving the problem...

i agree with seak's point - we need to come away with a clear message. then push on it.

i have tried interviewing the RHA for ages - they are not very keen.
This is sthg particularly I want to do, engage with the whole construction adn haulage industry.
Working group - Engagment.
I am toying with the idea of inviting my family liasion officer - although I think he is on leave- and a traffic police guy I know....

Thanks for posting this.

In addition to Bill's (no doubt) excellent 'shopping' list of people to get onto, what is the mileage in getting the Road Hauliers' Association, whatever is the LGV licensing body and traffic police to start addressing this issue with the weight it deserves? There's no one on that list from lorry drivers' perspective or the enforcement end of things. This can't turn into LGVs VERSUS cyclists, this should be LGVs AND cyclists trying to develop a new more respectful relationship. As far as I can tell, the RHA, traffic police and whichever body licenses drivers of LGVs aren't making this a priority.

about 18 months ago lcc came up with a 10 point plan for transforming cycling in london. (lcc mayor manifesto 2008).

it was broader than just the lorry issue but i thought it was a really good document. and it fits nicely on one a4 peice of paper.

maybe charlie or oliver could post it up here for us to consider and discuss whether we could use that kind of document as a reference point.

In terms of banning lorries from London even during peak hours, i think that will be a big ask especially with all the construction going on for the London olympics and that we need things like our bins collected and our supermarkets well stocked. However, as Bluequinn said earlier, it can be worth asking for big in the aim of getting a compromise.

I have info that discussions are underway to review the London Lorry Control Scheme - which was devised for environmental reasons - to look at the potential to have operating hours changed so they dont travel in the rush hour.
Any thing is possible. We just ahve to go for it. The door is open on this one, we have to find out exactly where to push.

Hey all,

I can try and get Limehouse Town Hall as a venue for the meeting? Any dates set yet? I'll have to confirm it's free but a few of us are members and it's an issue close to our hearts.

I have info that discussions are underway to review the London Lorry Control Scheme - which was devised for environmental reasons - to look at the potential to have operating hours changed so they dont travel in the rush hour.
Any thing is possible. We just ahve to go for it. The door is open on this one, we have to find out exactly where to push.

Fair call...it sounds like a genuinely good thing to call for

Lord Adonis would presumably be a good target being in charge of the UK's transport strategy.

Though I don't really know what I'm talking about.

Ha, tried to IV him too. Went to a lauch at HoC for his new strategy and collared lewis hamilton whislt I was there. Still trying to get an IV with him.
Adonis was just talking about speeding and other issues etc.

http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1060

hopefully this is the 10 point plan.

Have been thinking about this overnight and one suggestion that comes to mind is that any campaign/action that is undertaken comes from base of good information. At one point, concerned about accidents and fatalities on the road, particularly involving cyclists, Toronto comissioned a coroners report on road traffic accidents with a focus on cyclists. The report that was produced was well received by all parties for being clear, impartial and based on factual and credicle evidence.

If I may put on my cold-hearted and impassionate hat for a moment: There is one area where we can benefit from fatalities is that they are well documented. Although reports may be littered with opinion they will always contain a lot of simple facts. I think that it could well be beneficial to request a coroner to be commissioned to conduct an enquiry into all cyclist and H/LGV fatal accidents in London over the past 7-10 years to provide an impartial, factual evidence based report on the factors that affected and were related to those accidents. If nothing else it would mean that you have credible and reliable information available when approaching skeptical/cynical stakeholders although it could well provide much more as the Toronto study did.

Completely agree. Policitians dont listen to sob stories. They make policy on facts and stats, when they are indisputable and brought to their (and the public's attention). Already a couple of forum members have info and we have had someone contact us doing research on exactly this.

Working grop - Statistics.
Then we use these to influence policy. It is the starting point.

http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=1060

hopefully this is the 10 point plan.

yep. that is it.

Ha, tried to IV him too. Went to a lauch at HoC for his new strategy and collared lewis hamilton whislt I was there. Still trying to get an IV with him.
Adonis was just talking about speeding and other issues etc.

One of the reason Boris is a good person to lobby is that he is a cyclist and has nearly been taken out by a runaway lorry.

but as well as lobbying top people, if we can try to get a bit of grass roots contacting of MPs, councillors about this that helps raise awareness amongst the politicians on this issue.

hows about the sticker campaign but not on lamp post, why not the backs of lorries?

then any cyclist behind it might think about getting to close

what you think?

While I don't think I could bring much to the table for this particular meeting I do work for the National Policing Improvement Agency.

Amongst other things we produce policing manuals, for example our Specialist Operational Centre produced (together with ACPO) the current Road Deaths Investigation Manual. If any systemic issues were identified with regard to police investigation of fatal collisions involving cyclists then I could at the very least put you in touch with the policy makers.

Treadders - so good to hear from you! I have LOADS of issues re the investigation, and ask any other family of a dead cyclist and Im sure they will too. I wrote a 7 page doc challenging their conclusions.
A draft guide for familiies has been drawn up but apparently it encourages families to ask "too many" questions of the police they dont like it and want it changed, as they think it implies they dont do a good job. Dont get me started on this one....
The first thing you could do is make the Road Death Investigation Manual - a good document I have read very well - compulsory instead of advisory. I dont think many Senior Investigation Officers will have read it as well as I have. Becuase it is not mandatory, so it is nearly worthless if they dont wnat to do what it suggests. Im sure they have enough compulsory stuff to read.
Working Group - Investigation

see-mi was just an example of a simlar solution to fresnal lenses that goes further if you put more resources to it. i see problems in the system as well but fresnal lenses are no where near as good. my point is that (i think) we are campaining for more resources to be dedicated to solving the problem...

i agree with seak's point - we need to come away with a clear message. then push on it.

We want to come out of the meeting having mapped all the issues, ranked them in priority, ranked them in ease of success/implementation (ie we do easy wins first but get started on the hard slogs), ranked them in short, medium or long term action.

This will be our road map forward for sustained and long term relentless action. We will have a clear set of working groups with highly skilled and motivated people signed up, and clear tasks for each working group.

And a means to monitor progress and feed back.

I think we can achieve so much. Honestly.
We cant solve any issues in this meeting, just ID the problems and set people off to work out the best action. Eg, I dont know if we want shared road space or separate kerbed cycle lanes. There are arguments for both. But it needs research, case studies, facts, stats, and then a conclusion drawn on all that. Working group would include transport planners, safety people, etc etc. Lets not all argue all the issues, lets get the best people for each job.

We will put together what we think this should look like before the meeting as comprehesnively and accurately as possible, and then that can be our discussion document.

www.bazian.com might be an interesting group to contact regarding stat analysis.

re the freewheel on sunday.

publicity stunt ?

drag a mock coffin round.

and send a press release to all the papers ?

Ha, tried to IV him too. Went to a lauch at HoC for his new strategy and collared lewis hamilton whislt I was there. Still trying to get an IV with him.
Adonis was just talking about speeding and other issues etc.

His days are probably numbered anyway tbh.

Are you in touch with Jenny Jones? She's got and will keep great influencing power and is bound to be receptive to this.

re the freewheel on sunday.

publicity stunt ?

drag a mock coffin round.

and send a press release to all the papers ?

I'm going and would be up for a stunt. Will paint a t-shirt with something on it tomorrow. The SKY ride could be a great forum if we use it. There's always a high press presence.

I'm going and would be up for a stunt. Will paint a t-shirt with something on it tomorrow. The SKY ride could be a great forum if we use it. There's always a high press presence.

nice one. but to pull it off i think it needs more than two.

His days are probably numbered anyway tbh.

Are you in touch with Jenny Jones? She's got and will keep great influencing power and is bound to be receptive to this.

Yes, IVd JJ for our witness clip: Eilidh Cairns - Appeal For Witnesses on Vimeo

She was good. It was she that pushed my request for a review of the investigation of Eilidh's case. Which we got but they wouldnt tell us the findings! ha ha.

re the freewheel on sunday.

publicity stunt ?

drag a mock coffin round.

and send a press release to all the papers ?

dont seem to be many takers.

maybe it could be considered bad taste ?

in no way did i intend to upset anyone.

Thanks for posting this.

In addition to Bill's (no doubt) excellent 'shopping' list of people to get onto, what is the mileage in getting the Road Hauliers' Association, whatever is the LGV licensing body and traffic police to start addressing this issue with the weight it deserves? There's no one on that list from lorry drivers' perspective or the enforcement end of things. This can't turn into LGVs VERSUS cyclists, this should be LGVs AND cyclists trying to develop a new more respectful relationship. As far as I can tell, the RHA, traffic police and whichever body licenses drivers of LGVs aren't making this a priority.

One way of doing this is seeing if you can get some of the trade unions interested (Unite, GMB, URTU, RMT, off the top of my head, but there could be more). Of course, when a trucker kills or injures a cyclist due to lack of training or a lapse in concentration, it affects the driver psychologically, and therefore affects their everyday life. it may also be related to heavy pressures such as unmanageable targets and deadlines to be met that cause some to drive dangerously. thus it becomes a union issue in that respect too, in terms of workload.

So you're right - developing a more positive relationship between truckers and cyclists is in everyone's interests.

Treadders - so good to hear from you! I have LOADS of issues re the investigation, and ask any other family of a dead cyclist and Im sure they will too. I wrote a 7 page doc challenging their conclusions.
A draft guide for familiies has been drawn up but apparently it encourages families to ask "too many" questions of the police they dont like it and want it changed, as they think it implies they dont do a good job. Dont get me started on this one....
The first thing you could do is make the Road Death Investigation Manual - a good document I have read very well - compulsory instead of advisory. I dont think many Senior Investigation Officers will have read it as well as I have. Becuase it is not mandatory, so it is nearly worthless if they dont wnat to do what it suggests. Im sure they have enough compulsory stuff to read.
Working Group - Investigation

Ktee,

I am but a simple office monkey but I can ask around with some of my colleagues about how this kind of policy document gets disseminated to police forces and what is done to encourage it's adoption.

I would suggest a possible approach in this area would be to lobby the Met Police Service to adopt the Road Deaths Investigation Manual, if they haven't already (I may be able to find out if they have or not). However, I do think there is a big difference between adoption at the corporate level and actually putting policy into practice at operational level.

A good route to putting pressure on the Met Police Service would be to approach the Met Police Authority, the chair of which is that well known cyclist, Boris Johnson. The MPA and Boris in particular have a lot of power over the MPS and I'm sure he would be interested if officers were ignoring published ACPO policy.

It is a crazy situation when victims families have to chase up the police to ensure a proper investigation is carried out, I really feel for you. I'll try to find out as much as I can.