Cycle campaigning

Obviously, but it's outside London, I'll have a crack at the local council if they offer some kind of scheme.

oh, I thought you were saying there was little reason to because of the kind of customers!

Quite the opposite, here's an example of what the council have to offer.

we discussed up-thread about widening the campaigning message beyond being about people on bikes and engaging with walking groups as anyone outside a car can suffer by the hands of people inside motors.

This was emailed to me yesterday from road peace:

FOUR DEATHS IN ELEVEN DAYS

Bereaved families and campaigners will call on the London Mayor to act now to tackle the menace of dangerous lorries at a vigil this Friday dedicated to pedestrians and cyclists killed by lorries

This vigil is in response to four London lorry deaths in just 11 days;

Philippine de Gerin-Ricard, a 20 year old cyclist, in Aldgate on Friday 5th July
John Fredrick Goulding, a 91 year old pedestrian, in Fulham on 8th July
a yet to be named male cyclist in his forties, in Holborn on Monday 15th July
Mohamed Mohamed, a 3 year old child pedestrian, in Northolt on Monday 15th July

All were struck and killed by lorries. Four deaths in 11 days highlight the systemic failure of London to protect its most vulnerable from its most lethal. Whilst dangerous lorries, and particularly construction vehicles, have long-been identified as being over-represented in cyclists’ deaths, it should not be forgotten that lorries kill and maim many more pedestrians.

Bereaved families and campaigners are calling once more on the London Mayor to stop these needless deaths with the immediate implementation of measures that will protect both pedestrians and cyclists from the deadliest vehicles on our streets, including;
low cost and life-saving HGV safety technology which can eliminate the blind spot should be mandatory for ALL lorries that operate in our city
lorry movements should be restricted at peak times so that people who walk and cycle can do so safely - TfL must expedite the study of the experience of cities such as Paris and Dublin, where lorry bans exist (Safer Streets for All p11).
dedicated space must be given to cyclists to minimise conflicts between the deadliest and heaviest vehicles on our streets with the most vulnerable.

The vigil is being co-ordinated by RoadPeace, the national charity for road crash victims, in association with CTC, Living Streets and the London Cycling Campaign.

Read online/download poster: http://www.seemesaveme.com/news/vigil19july.html

It is sad yet more powerful including peds and cyclists, highlighting the need to tame people who use motors, to make it harder and less convenient to drive, and to punish poor driving behavior much more severely.

Its also a clever strategy for cyclists to take up and back. Who can accuse pedestrians of things like rljing, etc. There is no call for them to pay road tax too, and they want much the same things.

Also everyone is a pedestrian.

Pedestrians pay road tax too! Wow, hadn't thought of that.

But the economic argument is a red herring.

It's about quality of life! Being able to cross the road to play, shop, whatever. Elderly people and children and women are more vulnerable to vehicle impact. Motors are repressing our freedom to have healthy lives.

We have to make it less attractive to drive ourselves and our stuff around so freely, and remove the imperative for fast flowing traffic. Roads are a massacre!

That's pretty much it, the LCC somehow managed to make it sound very superficial, which is completely the opposite.

Like the 20mph campaign, it's one step closer to a truly liveable city.

But the economic argument is a red herring.

!

The economic case for motorised cities is plain wrong. It's bad for the economy, for health, for quality of life.
People = Wallets
Follow the money

^ yet despite the evidence the motor-lobby wins the govt hearts and minds every time. How can that be changed, if facts aren't good enough?

Just find a way to get a politician's relative killed in a collision.

Always work.

^ yet despite the evidence the motor-lobby wins the govt hearts and minds every time. How can that be changed, if facts aren't good enough?

Political change is so cumbersome due the short termism of the political cycle and leaning to daily fail populism where myths rule.

The parliamentary debate in September will illustrate this when moans about rljing, lycra-clad, pavement cycling menace, lack of insurance and a license will garner exuberant parliamentary applause, while supportive facts about the, massive health savings of active travel, benefits of walking and cycling to quality of life etc. may get some sage nods but won't be headline and soundbite friendly

^^ harsh, but effective no doubt.

^ well understood, but essentially no hope of meaningful and lasting change.

Perhaps when ukplc goes the way of Detroit there'll be opportunity to reshape things.

although being pro-cycling on roads (without being segregated into a narrow bicycle-lane queue),
do quite like the concluding paragraph of the LCC-referenced ES-article by Jasmine Gardner,

[

It’s simply a matter of priorities. Assume that the greatest need is for motor traffic to flow freely through our streets and we will get nowhere. Put the bike first and suddenly it frees up a lot of options, and cars no longer have to get first refusal on space. Putting motorists first never does cyclists any favours — and much worse, it kills us.
](http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/jasmine-gardner-deaths-show-how-urgently-cyclists-need-space-8716980.html?origin=internalSearch)

and lets face it, there is never going to be enough road space for everybody in London to drive about in 'free-flow', generally the traffic moving through central London can only travel at a slow average speed due to the restricted space; which reminds me of an article by 'leading transport commentator',

[

The number of cars coming into central London must be further reduced. Everything flows from that simple concept. There are a whole host of measures which can be used to discourage car use and encourage alternatives: reducing fares, creating more cycle and bus lanes, getting rid of gyratory systems that have become speedways, expanding the congestion charge zone and making it more sophisticated, creating a universal 20 mph limit, pedestrianisation (especially of Oxford Street) and much more.
](http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/2013/03/london-is-booming-but-needs-a-transport-rethink/)

'leading transport commentator'

And candidate to be mayoral candidate for Labour.

And candidate to be mayoral candidate for Labour.

token candidate before the 2019 Izzard Campaign?!

slight aside, (loosely related to cycle campaigning via air quality), re. new buses: noticed that some new double-decker buses with '13 plates are not Boris Buses (!!) - and not even noticeably (to my glances) Hybrids (although the passing examples were pretty whiff-free) - e.g. saw today a #88 Hybrid (non-BB); seems a pretty slow BB (Boris Bus; 'KB' for Ken Bike) TFL roll-out of the New Routemaster - although have noticed that Route 24 has them now (in addition to 38);

http://www.boriswatch.co.uk/ seems to have the best infor on the New Bus for London (NBfL) - still lots of issues with them.

http://www.boriswatch.co.uk/ seems to have the best infor on the New Bus for London (NBfL) - still lots of issues with them.

yes - perhaps some more (Mayoral-leadership?!) work required still..

must say, my initial impression from a #38 trip was similar to this 71-Year-Old:

[

Ken Thomson, 71, from Southwark, said: “They haven’t thought through the design. The bus has a very low ceiling and the windows are all sealed..It makes me feel claustrophobic.”
](http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/meltdown-on-the-boris-bus-aircon-cockup-leaves-passengers-sweltering-in-30c-8690392.html)
although, as noticed first-hand at the weekend, the old Routemaster also had quite low ceilings, but at least the windows could be opened!

{apologies for the off-topicness; maybe a Boris Bus thread is needed!}

Not sure what state but great idea;

is anyone going to this?
http://www.newlondonarchitecture.org/event.php?id=523&name=london_cycling_summit
LONDON CYCLING SUMMIT
Wednesday 31 July
White Collar Factory, 210 Old Street

This special NLA event will bring together speakers from the GLA, TfL, and the boroughs, including Cycling Commissioner for London Andrew Gilligan, to update on the cycling strategies that are being implemented in London, while design and planning experts will discuss what London can learn from other cities around the world on improving infrastructure for cycling.

Not sure what state but great idea;

What about the hetro, gay and transgender cyclists, are'nt they allowed a full lane too?

LONDON CYCLING SUMMIT
Wednesday 31 July

the key questions:

• How does cycling form part of an active transportation strategy for London?
  
• How can we speed up the modal share of cycling?
  
• How are the Mayor and the boroughs working together to deliver better cycling conditions?
  
• How can walking and cycling strategies improve the quality of public space?
  
  
  

(nothing there about hetro, gay and transgender cyclists and lanes!)

Not sure if this is the right place, but every time I ride across Waterloo bridge south to north, I wonder about the clusterfuck of a junction/light sequence, for riders coming down from Wellington St, and that shared footpath, which gets you to the Strand. All of them wanting to cross the bridge north to south.
But then they get that traffic light sequence which gives them priority as they head to the bridge, but the lights at the crossing directly before the bridge are red. Which creates this uncertainty, in terms of who has priority, as I'm sure the pedestrian crossing is on the red man. So you get this mass of cyclists hovering as people, may or may not cross, before getting frustrated with the lights, and jumping them as soon as there is the slightest gap in the pedestrian traffic, even if its best that they should wait.

I've ridden across that bridge for years and that junction is shocking in its inability to provide enough time, or direction so as to increase the flow of traffic, cyclist and pedestrian without causing confusion of conflict.

Charlie LCC, Oliver, is there any work being done on this to improve it? Or will it just continue to be a clusterfuck for the foresseable?

So, given the fast response by LCC to the previous deaths (flashrides to place of death) it seems a bit odd that they are linking this one the the 2nd of September protest.

Why not another flashride?

The second of September ride should be focused on show all those who have died on our roads this year, if you want to go that way, rather than just (hopefully*) the latest

*Hopefully as in I'm being hopeful that there won't be another, rather than hoping it will be focused on the death from this morning.

Do LCC try to get permission from the relatives before they do flash rides? I think they should, and it might be the reason behind the absence of one today. I remember the vigil for Katharine Gilles being cancelled/postponed earlier this year.