Politics of London cycling

[growingvegetables]

Not sure why I (in Leeds) got this in my email - may be of more use/interest south of Watford Gap!

"I'm writing to you to alert you to a GLA funded organisation called London Travel Watch who claim to represent cyclists' while actively campaigning against protected space for cycling.

London Travel Watch pitch themselves as the 'voice of London's transport users', and identify cyclists as one of the groups they speak for, but advocate polices most cyclists are specifically opposed to. We feel this is totally inappropriate, however few cyclists have even heard of this organisation so we wanted to let you know. Details and links to their policies http://saveourcyclists.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/london-travel-watch-systematically.html.

We need to send a message that most cyclists want protected space for cycling. If you're able, please join Stop Killing Cyclists' protest this Friday on Blackfriars Road to support real cycle campaigners and demand protected cycling.

No More Coffins Protest this Friday from 5 pm - 6:30 pm"

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

I was surprised to get it too and I live in London. Lower in the email there's this text:

Fred Smith started this campaign on the 38 Degrees Campaigns by Youwebsite. If there's an issue close to your heart that you'd like to campaign on, you can start your campaign here.



You received this email because you signed the petition 'Save Our Cyclists'. If you don't want to receive emails from the 'Save Our Cyclists' campaign in the future, please unsubscribe.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

London's cycling sectarian tribes, you gotta love 'em. Squabbling amongst themselves about who is right and who is wrong whilst people go under the wheels of another truck.

 

[Markymark]

As a Londoner I would suggest getting it right is very important in minimising the number of us under lorry wheels.

 

[martint235]

Edit: I wrote a post then decided I couldn't be bothered. Campaigns like this and the LCC will always generate noise. I'll just go and cycle instead and just pray they don't screw things up so badly we end up with enforced segregation

 

[srw]

As a Londoner I would suggest getting it right is very important in minimising the number of us under lorry wheels.

The number is already tiny. Time for my favourite exposition of risk assessment again?

Oh go on, why not.
http://www.gicentre.net/blog/2013/11/24/risk-cycling-and-denominator-neglect

 

[Markymark]

The number is already tiny. Time for my favourite exposition of risk assessment again?

Oh go on, why not.
http://www.gicentre.net/blog/2013/11/24/risk-cycling-and-denominator-neglect

It's not quite as simple as that. The main problem with cycling (and transport in general) in London is the congestion. The deaths due to lorries is grossly disproportionate and that is wrong. It needs to be remedied. But as you say, the overall numbers are low. However, it is this danger that is given as the main reason for more not cycling. Remove this danger (however low it actually is in reality), and more will cycle. This will have a huge positive impact for people moving around London by first reducing congestion. Second, reducing stress on public transport and thirdly, reducing stress in health care.

So it is vitally important this issue is addressed.

 

[Pete Owens]

It's not quite as simple as that. The main problem with cycling (and transport in general) in London is the congestion. The deaths due to lorries is grossly disproportionate and that is wrong. It needs to be remedied. But as you say, the overall numbers are low. However, it is this danger that is given as the main reason for more not cycling. Remove this danger (however low it actually is in reality), and more will cycle. This will have a huge positive impact for people moving around London by first reducing congestion. Second, reducing stress on public transport and thirdly, reducing stress in health care.

So it is vitally important this issue is addressed.

But the reason that tht higher relative risk from trucks is not that there is a greater likelyhood rof getting squashed by a truck in London, but that the risks from other traffic are so low due the to low speed environment. A high proportion of deaths due to HGVs is exactly what you expect to see in a safe environment - trucks are also disproportionately involved in cyclist deaths in the NL.

 

[Markymark]

But the reason that tht higher relative risk from trucks is not that there is a greater likelyhood rof getting squashed by a truck in London, but that the risks from other traffic are so low due the to low speed environment. A high proportion of deaths due to HGVs is exactly what you expect to see in a safe environment - trucks are also disproportionately involved in cyclist deaths in the NL.

So making them safer (eg visibility all around, proper punishment for poor driving) etc would lower that risk and encourage more to cycle which will help London keep moving.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Who are these 'most cyclists' of which people talk?
Most cyclists would like free beer. But it's not going to happen. I would like a big wide segregated space many metres wide with no cars .... less call it a road without cars for the sake of argument. But what would we actually get? A metre or so of crap unswept surface, with dodgy junctions at either end and some kind of lethal rubber armadillos keeping the cars away.
The reality is that most cyclist probably don't want what they'll be offered.

In the mean-time there is so much that can be done to improve ROADS and ROAD_USAGE that we have already at a fraction of the cost .....

NURSE!

 

[glenn forger]

https://www.periscope.tv/w/1PlJQwQRXedKE

live stream.