Now I know I am over simplifying this, and things are far more complex than meet the eye, however I wanted to put something out there. Something many others have probably thought, then dismissed as a "it will never happen, so why bother asking" moment.
Years ago there was a push to get more people cycling in London. Commuting, short journeys and even sight seeing. There was clearly a need to give people a way to do this with ease. Along came the Boris Bike / Barclays Bike / Santander Bike, bicycle hire scheme.
Bikes, complete with infrastructure, a support network and an easy to rent system. The idea was a huge success and continues to grow.
Now we find ourselves at another fork in the road, this time it is cars. With rising levels of pollution, and falling target levels, it is getting to a critical point now where something has to change. So I am led to believe at least. Introducing the Ultra Low Emissions Zone or ULEZ. 15 years on from the Congestion Charge being introduced, another zone is being set up. Again it is emissions based, and all older cars which are Euro 5 or less will find their journeys costing a levy of £12.50.
This new measure comes into effect in April 2018.
The issue here is, the alternatives are find a public transport route, and fall foul to the over crowding, unreliability and inconvenience of public transport, or "simply" replace your car with one which is exempt from the charge. You know, that money you were saving for a rainy day! For those without saving, or unable to get credit to buy a new car, which of you believe the figures touted about by the Mayors Office for people earning below the "Living Wage", it will be quite a lot of people paying £62.50 a week or £241 a month to drive their car into work in London.
Funnily enough, if you were to lease a new EV, you would probably spend about the same sort of money per month. The differences being, the car would be new, and the air quality would be affected positively by the change of vehicle.
So here is my question. Would it not be sensible to roll out a government incentivised rental or lease scheme to these people, and anyone else wishing to clean up their journey?
It is all well and good saying that the revenue from the ULEZ will go into sorting the issue out. But surely as long as you allow the cars to keep making the journey, regardless of the levy imposed, the pollution levels remain the same?
I find it hard to believe that a bulk purchase of EV's for short use journeys, similar to ZipCar would not be positive both financially and for the air quality. Surely using the bikes as a business model, there is gain to be had. Because of the introduction of these vehicles and their use, the infrastructure such as charging points on the streets and in car parks would be encouraged to increase also. Using existing parking structures for rental locations would make them more secure, easier to find, and easier to park when you reach the end of your journey, much like the bikes again.
For the long term users, who use a car daily for their journey, and would incur the maximum wrath of the ULEZ, but are unable to lease via more established methods such as private car leasing schemes, maybe such vehicles could be made available on a month to month basis, and returned to the pool of vehicles available for rental if their monthly lease is discontinued.
I know this is all pie in the sky, and easy to say without knowing the numbers, but the facts are simple.
With the push for more people to move over to EV's, the infrastructure is far too weak to support it right now. If 10,000 people bought EV's and started driving to London daily next month, there would be a severe lack of charging points etc. A scheme such as this would get the ball rolling surely.
Seeing more EV's on the road, and the support structure in place would surely encourage those who need convincing that EV's are the way ahead.
And most importantly, the change of vehicle, rather than the financial levy, would improve the air quality for all, which is the end goal here anyway, right?
Given the choice of paying £12.50 to drive my own car, for a short journey in the ULEZ, or using a newer, smaller, easier to park car into the ULEZ, I know which I would prefer. Best part being, if I decide to go drinking with friends, I can get a train home and not be tempted to drink drive to get MY car back home.
So many positives. I am sure with the buying power of a national or local government, the prices the vehicles could be secured for would be way below private consumer prices, not to mention the lack of taxes on the new purchase. Given that medium sized companies are able to secure fleets for silly low prices, I don't see why this would not be viable for a similar or lesser cost than the ULEZ charge, while being cleaner. Did I mention it would cut pollution, and quickly?
So there you have it. My idea.
Showing posts with label mayor of london. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mayor of london. Show all posts
Friday, January 5, 2018
Thursday, November 30, 2017
Get London cycling...
It is becoming a very popular and repetitive message right now, especially from the Mayor of London's office, and to a degree, a very understandable one too. I have been commuting to and from work by bike for almost a year now, and have to say I really enjoy it. A bit of exercise, limited frustrations with traffic, and no messing about finding parking when I arrive at work. What's not to love?
Well, hopefully, if I can stay on topic, and not get too caught up in my pet hates, I can address that a bit.
Let's start with the obvious and most popular reason not to (other than can't be bothered, or it's too far), it's too dangerous! There are a growing number of bicycle accidents on London's roads, that is a fact. But it goes hand in hand with the fact that the number of cyclists on London's road it booming too. Statistically, accidents per number of journeys has probably not changed much at all. However, thanks to social media, and the mainstream media reporting more, we are far more aware of these accidents. The issue is less with the number of them, and more with the causes for me. And that is one of the points I wanted to touch on, so let's do that.
As I said, the number of cyclists on the roads is increasing. Even I have seen that in the year I have been cycle commuting. Now I would like to say that is a good thing, but sadly, the rise in numbers, seems to have come at a price. A rise in the number of idiots cycling. Let's get this bit straight from the start. Cyclists are ROAD users, not where ever the hell I want to ride users. They are bound by similar rules to other road users, obeying traffic signals, using lights, riding with consideration for others. Or at least that is the idea. Sadly, it is far from the case.
Instead, the the roads have seen an increase in carefree, ignorant, law breaking idiots. And there is no way to just look and identify them, they come from all walks of life. From broken down old rusty bikes, being ridden by scruffy people, to high end carbon fibre road bikes, ridden by budding Wiggo's, wearing all the gear. The attitudes are the same. Red lights are for cars, other peoples space is their own problem, pedestrians (I will come back to them) are fair game, and other cyclists are the enemy. Not forgetting, every journey is a TDF stage! The list of stupid behaviour is endless.
Most evenings, more for fun than necessity, I will use Jamaica Road as part of my journey home. The reason for this is a simple one, idiot watching. The same can be done on Old Kent Road too, and many other spots on London's road network. Seeing large groups of cyclists, on a whole range of bikes, wearing a whole range of sensible to stupid riding gear, and with wide variations in personal protection equipment, varying on their concerns for their own lives. Bright lights, hidden lights, dull lights, non functioning lights, flashing, static.... And that is just the ones WITH lights. Then of course you have the dark clothes wearing, " I don't need lights" champs of the road. The mix really is quite spectacular.
All that said, having a good bike, and wearing the right gear is no the the end of it. People very well dressed and prepared for their ride, lit up well, will then decide traffic lights are not for them, and throw themselves out into a busy crossroads, as their time is too important to wait another 30 seconds. 30 seconds wait, or 3 weeks in hospital (if you are lucky enough to survive) Hmmm tough one that eh ! Let's pause there for a moment and look at light jumpers. There are a few kinds.
Light jumpers.
There are various kinds of people who jump lights, from all walks of the cycling community.
Flying pass, no point slowing down, it's do or die.... And through they go without touching the brakes.
Give way, no intention on coming to a complete halt, but will slow enough to check for oncoming traffic, before deciding whether or not to ride out in front of them. Either way, they will get across the junction before the light goes green again.
Creepers, they will stop, for a short moment. But then as the second tick away, the bike begins to roll, the crossing phase is over, and off they go. I'm not affecting anyone, seems to be the attitude.
RASL, we have the ASL (advanced stop line) on a lot of junctions for cyclists to be seen and get away first. But for some, that is not enough, so they ride forward of that, to the very cusp of the junction. On some junctions, now totally unable to see the signals anymore. This kind usually turn into creepers when they realise they can't see the light change.
There are of course more kinds of light jumpers, but let's stick with the basics.
For other cyclists, as I have almost learned the hard way a couple of times now, the fly passers are a real danger. I will stop for lights, sometimes rolling up quite fast. Sadly this means people behind with no intention of stopping will assume that you are like them, and try and follow you closely. Unfortunately, as I am stopping, this puts me, and many other fellow cyclists at the risk be being rear ended at speed by another cyclist!
The others jumping red lights run the risk of course of being in collision with a vehicle or a pedestrian. All of which we know can result in catastrophic injuries for all parties. Not to mention haunting memories for anyone who bears witness to the events.
I want to go out on a limb here, and say that I believe a large percentage of cycle vs something accidents involve a cyclist doing something stupid. That is not to say it is always the case, but I would hazard a guess that it is a trend that is on the rise. The sheer number of cyclists I see jumping red lights every journey (10-15 miles) is truly stunning. Each one obviously of the mindset that it won't be them. Sadly, every day it seems, one of them is wrong, with a varying degree of severity for the outcome.
There are other dangers out there too, not just red lights. Being visible this time of year is important, as it is in the dark all year round. So lights which are bright, and obvious enough to be both seen, and picked out from the flood of lights on a busy London street in the evening, is important. Clothing helps too of course. But equally importantly, is road positioning. Not putting yourself up the inside of large vehicles, not squeezing through stupid gaps, while the traffic is moving and you are in a blind spot for the drivers of the vehicles.
As much as it pains some people to do so, sometimes it is better to pull over for a moment, let a large vehicle pass you, and continue when it is safe. It is actually quite heartwarming seeing the vehicle flash its lights to say thank you. It keeps you safe, and keeps the traffic moving. Rather than taking the moral high ground and refusing to let them pass safely. I find myself doing this more and more these days,
Again, I would love to know the percentage of accidents which involve a cyclist putting themselves in danger moments before the accident. Being stationary beside a big vehicle is never a good thing, and we are encouraged not to. However, you can't control the situation when a lorry decides to pull up close to you are lights or in traffic. Common sense is a two way thing, sadly only one party is vulnerable. It is another of the most scary and common things to see when cycling, the situations some get themselves in, all for the sake of being just a few seconds quicker to their destination. I don't think the "I'm in a race" mentality helps there.
I think now is a fair time to say this. I don't consider myself perfect. I have made mistakes, I have apologised to road users when I have done something stupid, and am still learning how to navigate the roads of London at peak times. It is fair to say that the majority, although a very slim one on some days, of cyclists are considerate, law abiding, and try their best to be seen and be safe during their journeys. This is not bashing cyclists, just the idiots.
Which brings me back around to the start. Get London cycling. I am sure more would, if the statistics didn't make it such a scary thing to do. But taking the above points into account, and my own experiences, it is cyclists themselves who make cycling dangerous. Riding dangerously, causing other road users, including other cyclists to swerve, stop suddenly etc, then putting them in danger. I lost track of the number of times I have had near misses with cyclists. And of course pedestrians who refuse to accept that cyclists exist, and just walk out in front of you. That's is for another day!
The other issue, (sorry this isn't over with yet) is infrastructure. One of my biggest gripes, and something I keep saying I am going to start taking pictures of and moaning about it more, is infrastructure. Each borough plans its own cycle paths and facilities for bicycles, some doing it quite well, others doing it just to abide by the rules and expectations, with no interest in making any form of sensible path or route. Then add to the mix the roads managed by TfL, and you have a complete mishmash of solutions, with varying degrees of success.
Pinch points in roads squeezing cyclists and motorists together, caused by over sized traffic islands.
Cycle lanes which suddenly stop mid road, and just leave you to your own devices.
Cycle paths on the INSIDE of pavements, leaving you on the wrong side of the path for when you rejoin the road.
Cycle paths which run through the entrance to side turnings.
I even came across one the other day on the Old Kent Road, by the flyover, which has road markings directing you onto and along a raised island, then suddenly ends, with a high kerb to just fall off the end of.
The planning phase of some of these projects is simply mindless and appalling. Not to mention thoroughly unappealing for cyclists.
Which gives us the answer to a common frustration of motorists who scream "get on the cycle path".... Well, cyclists would, if it was safe and sensible to do so, but in some cases, it's just not.
This is especially the case with places like the roundabout on Queenstown Rd at the end of Chelsea Bridge. A staggered phase of traffic lights allowing "safe passage" for cyclists. Great idea, shame the phase seems to take about 5 minutes, so most cyclists end up using the main carriageway instead. Just more proof that some of these solutions are really not thought out at all.
I would love the Mayor of London and TfL to take notice of this planning issue, and put together some minimum requirement for ALL borough councils. Some guidelines on how cycle paths should be considered and constructed. Rather than each group dreaming up their own solutions, leaving cyclists to contend with different ideas as they ride borough to borough, have the same principals as the actual roads, and all follow the same rules. It can't be that hard to do, surely? Minimum widths, considerations for marking the end of lanes clearly, signs to advise traffic cyclists will merge, cycle paths rejoining the road at sensible places, not in the middle of bus stops as on Southwark Park Road.
There are so many people on both sides of the fence. Motorists sick of seeing huge chunks of roads eaten up by large and sometimes excessive cycle path plans. Watching the roads shrink, the queues build, all the while being "blamed" for the state of the congestion and pollution, while the road network shrinks in various ways. As the frustrations grow, the environment for cyclists becomes more threatening, and in the midst of it all, the Mayor bleats on about cars bad, bikes good, get riding.
We live in an old city, with limited capacity for transport, housing etc. But instead of making the best of it all, it seems some are hell bend on making it worse, for the sake of introducing legislation to "make things better". Egos are at work here, both behind the scenes, and on the roads, and it is those egos which lead to mistakes, accidents, and monumental issues which are reaching the point of being beyond rectification.
On the other hand, we have some militant cyclists, who not content with sharing the roads, want to own them. Demanding all these priority cycleways, and other strange changes to the road infrastructure. It is human nature to want your own way, but there has to be compromise. Maybe if we start with the basics we can get it a little more bearable for all.
Sensible, well considered and consulted (with actual cyclists) infrastructure changes. Usable cycle paths and lanes, rather than greedy, obnoxious ones, or ones that are no use to man nor machine.
More manpower to enforce light jumpers, and rule breakers. I know there is a small and effective team from the Met who do their best. But the problem is bigger than they can cope with , and is becoming seriously out of control now. Something else maybe the Mayor would like to look at. Surely it is in the best interest of the favoured form of transport? Make it safer, make it more appealing. And reduce the negativity towards cyclists by others. It is always sad when a pedestrian or motorist thanks you for being considerate, and stopping or giving way to them. It should not be like that!
So dear Mayor of London....
I totally appreciate the drive to get more people cycling. Personally I am glad I made the change, and even in the snow today, over the 8-9 miles I will do each way, it has been a nicer way to travel (even at 1c).
But the setting is wrong. Some of the cycling solutions out there are poor, badly maintained, or just unusable. No one is on the same page, resulting in lots of confusion about how the lanes and paths work. Too many cooks so to speak. and no one following the same recipe.
I would happily endorse the message to get more people cycling, if some of the issues out there could be addressed, especially the bad cyclists. It is not right that they get away with their stupidity, and be allowed to carry on endangering other people.
I am sure I have missed off lots that I meant to say, so will no doubt revisit this topic soon. But in the meantime, stay safe cyclists, and for those who can't behave on their bikes. Please, get a bus!
Well, hopefully, if I can stay on topic, and not get too caught up in my pet hates, I can address that a bit.
Let's start with the obvious and most popular reason not to (other than can't be bothered, or it's too far), it's too dangerous! There are a growing number of bicycle accidents on London's roads, that is a fact. But it goes hand in hand with the fact that the number of cyclists on London's road it booming too. Statistically, accidents per number of journeys has probably not changed much at all. However, thanks to social media, and the mainstream media reporting more, we are far more aware of these accidents. The issue is less with the number of them, and more with the causes for me. And that is one of the points I wanted to touch on, so let's do that.
As I said, the number of cyclists on the roads is increasing. Even I have seen that in the year I have been cycle commuting. Now I would like to say that is a good thing, but sadly, the rise in numbers, seems to have come at a price. A rise in the number of idiots cycling. Let's get this bit straight from the start. Cyclists are ROAD users, not where ever the hell I want to ride users. They are bound by similar rules to other road users, obeying traffic signals, using lights, riding with consideration for others. Or at least that is the idea. Sadly, it is far from the case.
Instead, the the roads have seen an increase in carefree, ignorant, law breaking idiots. And there is no way to just look and identify them, they come from all walks of life. From broken down old rusty bikes, being ridden by scruffy people, to high end carbon fibre road bikes, ridden by budding Wiggo's, wearing all the gear. The attitudes are the same. Red lights are for cars, other peoples space is their own problem, pedestrians (I will come back to them) are fair game, and other cyclists are the enemy. Not forgetting, every journey is a TDF stage! The list of stupid behaviour is endless.
Most evenings, more for fun than necessity, I will use Jamaica Road as part of my journey home. The reason for this is a simple one, idiot watching. The same can be done on Old Kent Road too, and many other spots on London's road network. Seeing large groups of cyclists, on a whole range of bikes, wearing a whole range of sensible to stupid riding gear, and with wide variations in personal protection equipment, varying on their concerns for their own lives. Bright lights, hidden lights, dull lights, non functioning lights, flashing, static.... And that is just the ones WITH lights. Then of course you have the dark clothes wearing, " I don't need lights" champs of the road. The mix really is quite spectacular.
All that said, having a good bike, and wearing the right gear is no the the end of it. People very well dressed and prepared for their ride, lit up well, will then decide traffic lights are not for them, and throw themselves out into a busy crossroads, as their time is too important to wait another 30 seconds. 30 seconds wait, or 3 weeks in hospital (if you are lucky enough to survive) Hmmm tough one that eh ! Let's pause there for a moment and look at light jumpers. There are a few kinds.
Light jumpers.
There are various kinds of people who jump lights, from all walks of the cycling community.
Flying pass, no point slowing down, it's do or die.... And through they go without touching the brakes.
Give way, no intention on coming to a complete halt, but will slow enough to check for oncoming traffic, before deciding whether or not to ride out in front of them. Either way, they will get across the junction before the light goes green again.
Creepers, they will stop, for a short moment. But then as the second tick away, the bike begins to roll, the crossing phase is over, and off they go. I'm not affecting anyone, seems to be the attitude.
RASL, we have the ASL (advanced stop line) on a lot of junctions for cyclists to be seen and get away first. But for some, that is not enough, so they ride forward of that, to the very cusp of the junction. On some junctions, now totally unable to see the signals anymore. This kind usually turn into creepers when they realise they can't see the light change.
There are of course more kinds of light jumpers, but let's stick with the basics.
For other cyclists, as I have almost learned the hard way a couple of times now, the fly passers are a real danger. I will stop for lights, sometimes rolling up quite fast. Sadly this means people behind with no intention of stopping will assume that you are like them, and try and follow you closely. Unfortunately, as I am stopping, this puts me, and many other fellow cyclists at the risk be being rear ended at speed by another cyclist!
The others jumping red lights run the risk of course of being in collision with a vehicle or a pedestrian. All of which we know can result in catastrophic injuries for all parties. Not to mention haunting memories for anyone who bears witness to the events.
I want to go out on a limb here, and say that I believe a large percentage of cycle vs something accidents involve a cyclist doing something stupid. That is not to say it is always the case, but I would hazard a guess that it is a trend that is on the rise. The sheer number of cyclists I see jumping red lights every journey (10-15 miles) is truly stunning. Each one obviously of the mindset that it won't be them. Sadly, every day it seems, one of them is wrong, with a varying degree of severity for the outcome.
There are other dangers out there too, not just red lights. Being visible this time of year is important, as it is in the dark all year round. So lights which are bright, and obvious enough to be both seen, and picked out from the flood of lights on a busy London street in the evening, is important. Clothing helps too of course. But equally importantly, is road positioning. Not putting yourself up the inside of large vehicles, not squeezing through stupid gaps, while the traffic is moving and you are in a blind spot for the drivers of the vehicles.
As much as it pains some people to do so, sometimes it is better to pull over for a moment, let a large vehicle pass you, and continue when it is safe. It is actually quite heartwarming seeing the vehicle flash its lights to say thank you. It keeps you safe, and keeps the traffic moving. Rather than taking the moral high ground and refusing to let them pass safely. I find myself doing this more and more these days,
Again, I would love to know the percentage of accidents which involve a cyclist putting themselves in danger moments before the accident. Being stationary beside a big vehicle is never a good thing, and we are encouraged not to. However, you can't control the situation when a lorry decides to pull up close to you are lights or in traffic. Common sense is a two way thing, sadly only one party is vulnerable. It is another of the most scary and common things to see when cycling, the situations some get themselves in, all for the sake of being just a few seconds quicker to their destination. I don't think the "I'm in a race" mentality helps there.
I think now is a fair time to say this. I don't consider myself perfect. I have made mistakes, I have apologised to road users when I have done something stupid, and am still learning how to navigate the roads of London at peak times. It is fair to say that the majority, although a very slim one on some days, of cyclists are considerate, law abiding, and try their best to be seen and be safe during their journeys. This is not bashing cyclists, just the idiots.
Which brings me back around to the start. Get London cycling. I am sure more would, if the statistics didn't make it such a scary thing to do. But taking the above points into account, and my own experiences, it is cyclists themselves who make cycling dangerous. Riding dangerously, causing other road users, including other cyclists to swerve, stop suddenly etc, then putting them in danger. I lost track of the number of times I have had near misses with cyclists. And of course pedestrians who refuse to accept that cyclists exist, and just walk out in front of you. That's is for another day!
The other issue, (sorry this isn't over with yet) is infrastructure. One of my biggest gripes, and something I keep saying I am going to start taking pictures of and moaning about it more, is infrastructure. Each borough plans its own cycle paths and facilities for bicycles, some doing it quite well, others doing it just to abide by the rules and expectations, with no interest in making any form of sensible path or route. Then add to the mix the roads managed by TfL, and you have a complete mishmash of solutions, with varying degrees of success.
Pinch points in roads squeezing cyclists and motorists together, caused by over sized traffic islands.
Cycle lanes which suddenly stop mid road, and just leave you to your own devices.
Cycle paths on the INSIDE of pavements, leaving you on the wrong side of the path for when you rejoin the road.
Cycle paths which run through the entrance to side turnings.
I even came across one the other day on the Old Kent Road, by the flyover, which has road markings directing you onto and along a raised island, then suddenly ends, with a high kerb to just fall off the end of.
The planning phase of some of these projects is simply mindless and appalling. Not to mention thoroughly unappealing for cyclists.
Which gives us the answer to a common frustration of motorists who scream "get on the cycle path".... Well, cyclists would, if it was safe and sensible to do so, but in some cases, it's just not.
This is especially the case with places like the roundabout on Queenstown Rd at the end of Chelsea Bridge. A staggered phase of traffic lights allowing "safe passage" for cyclists. Great idea, shame the phase seems to take about 5 minutes, so most cyclists end up using the main carriageway instead. Just more proof that some of these solutions are really not thought out at all.
I would love the Mayor of London and TfL to take notice of this planning issue, and put together some minimum requirement for ALL borough councils. Some guidelines on how cycle paths should be considered and constructed. Rather than each group dreaming up their own solutions, leaving cyclists to contend with different ideas as they ride borough to borough, have the same principals as the actual roads, and all follow the same rules. It can't be that hard to do, surely? Minimum widths, considerations for marking the end of lanes clearly, signs to advise traffic cyclists will merge, cycle paths rejoining the road at sensible places, not in the middle of bus stops as on Southwark Park Road.
There are so many people on both sides of the fence. Motorists sick of seeing huge chunks of roads eaten up by large and sometimes excessive cycle path plans. Watching the roads shrink, the queues build, all the while being "blamed" for the state of the congestion and pollution, while the road network shrinks in various ways. As the frustrations grow, the environment for cyclists becomes more threatening, and in the midst of it all, the Mayor bleats on about cars bad, bikes good, get riding.
We live in an old city, with limited capacity for transport, housing etc. But instead of making the best of it all, it seems some are hell bend on making it worse, for the sake of introducing legislation to "make things better". Egos are at work here, both behind the scenes, and on the roads, and it is those egos which lead to mistakes, accidents, and monumental issues which are reaching the point of being beyond rectification.
On the other hand, we have some militant cyclists, who not content with sharing the roads, want to own them. Demanding all these priority cycleways, and other strange changes to the road infrastructure. It is human nature to want your own way, but there has to be compromise. Maybe if we start with the basics we can get it a little more bearable for all.
Sensible, well considered and consulted (with actual cyclists) infrastructure changes. Usable cycle paths and lanes, rather than greedy, obnoxious ones, or ones that are no use to man nor machine.
More manpower to enforce light jumpers, and rule breakers. I know there is a small and effective team from the Met who do their best. But the problem is bigger than they can cope with , and is becoming seriously out of control now. Something else maybe the Mayor would like to look at. Surely it is in the best interest of the favoured form of transport? Make it safer, make it more appealing. And reduce the negativity towards cyclists by others. It is always sad when a pedestrian or motorist thanks you for being considerate, and stopping or giving way to them. It should not be like that!
So dear Mayor of London....
I totally appreciate the drive to get more people cycling. Personally I am glad I made the change, and even in the snow today, over the 8-9 miles I will do each way, it has been a nicer way to travel (even at 1c).
But the setting is wrong. Some of the cycling solutions out there are poor, badly maintained, or just unusable. No one is on the same page, resulting in lots of confusion about how the lanes and paths work. Too many cooks so to speak. and no one following the same recipe.
I would happily endorse the message to get more people cycling, if some of the issues out there could be addressed, especially the bad cyclists. It is not right that they get away with their stupidity, and be allowed to carry on endangering other people.
I am sure I have missed off lots that I meant to say, so will no doubt revisit this topic soon. But in the meantime, stay safe cyclists, and for those who can't behave on their bikes. Please, get a bus!
Thursday, February 16, 2017
#LondonIsOpen (and toxic)
There is no secret that I find the Twitter feed of the current London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, very annoying. Constantly bleating on about things, then falling silent when questions are asked, or the tables turned.
One of the original things that really got on my nerves was the constant tweets stating how there would be less strikes and more negotiations under his watch, cutting the number of transport strikes drastically. Boris had called for them to be almost banned, Sadiq felt that negotiation was the way forward.
For days on end there were almost hourly tweets about his pledge and how there were less strikes. Until of course strike season hit, aka holiday season. Then the shit hit the fan and the strikes begun. On the odd occasion when agreement was reached, they would be cancelled or postponed, and Twitter would hear all about how HE had prevented travel chaos, and was so much better than Boris..
Then the tables turned, and strike after strike has hit various transport networks, and silence from the mayor. The occasional "we are disappointed" tweet, but nothing strong worded, demanding further talks or how out of order it was. Certainly no boasts about his involvement in the talks, in fact the opposite. Avoiding having any involvement at all.
Then there is the demand that TfL have control over Southern Rail. Again, another bandwagon jumped aboard before knowing the full story. Granted Southern is a joke, especially with their strikes also, but their services leave a lot to be desired too. Something needs to be done, but with the shambles that is under his control already, I am not sure that adding another pony to the stables is the right move. Again, we heard so much about "I want to take control" but no comments on the strikes that cripple London each time. Obviously the negotiating skills used with the tube unions don't work, so stay out of it. Wise move!
That said, when Southern rejected the idea of handing over to TfL, they DID say be part of our talks, and help us with your ideas on how it could be improved.
With London's best interests at heart, naturally Mr Khan said NO, I want nothing to do with it, and refuse to be a part of this. Nice one Sadiq!
Then my favourite bit of it all. As you can tell from the blog title.. #LondonIsOpen.
Put on most posts from the mayors office, this seems to be the favourite tag of the moment.
My only thought on it is summed up by this scene from Blades of Glory..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eRRab36XLI
I don't even know what that means
No one knows what it means, but its provocative
No it's not!
Quite simple, words!
Ringing back to the Brexit referendum, when people started somehow saying that the UK was shutting the world out and didn't want to trade with them, the mayors office coined the phrase and tag #LondonIsOpen
Somehow suggesting that the world thought we were closed for some reason. Not once has it ever been suggested that London didn't want to trade with anyone, or that London was somehow closed for refurbishment. Windows painted out, so no one could see what was happening.
Nope, in fact London has never been closed, and in some ways, suggesting it is open creates an air of negativity towards it.
After that was all done with, the tag remained, and is now used on absolutely everything, from business to events etc. Which when promoting an event which has already been arranged is a bit pointless, as the organisers clearly know London Is Open, or they couldn't have booked it ! Duh!
Speaking of events, that is my next and final grip, mixed in with #LondonIsOpen
Recently, along with being open, the mayor has also identified that London is toxic. Very toxic in fact. To the point of issuing warnings suggesting people don't go outdoors unless really necessary at times, and saying how we are failing, and people are dying each year in London BECAUSE of the pollution.
Now I am no neigh sayer here, I know full well that we live in a very busy city, packed with vehicles and other things churning out toxins all day long. I certainly notice the difference when I visit Wales or the Spanish Mountains. But there seems to be some confusion from the mayors office about how bad it really is.
Day after day, Twitter is flooded with comments about how the government need to give people thousands of pounds towards replacing their diesel car. The same diesel car they were given money towards in the last scrappage scheme. The government needs to act on the pollution, taxes levied and increases to the tolls for the congestion zone. Advising how many people die annually because of the air etc.
And then, in the nest breath (a very toxic one of course) we get told about events being held, in Central London, in the open air, and how people should flock to them, because after all #LondonIsOpen.
I have posted a few examples of the contradictions below. And before you say anything, I am all for London hosting events, I love cycling in London, and spending time in town, so have nothing against it. But you can't be the champion of champions for London, aka the mayor, and scaremonger people into believing we are living in a city which has toxic smog daily, air quality warnings and sirens, and environmental wardens walking around in high vis uniforms so they can be seen through the smog.
THEN expect your same audience on Twitter to flock to events you are promoting. That's just dumb. Get a story and stick to it.
Smog and toxic
https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/831929385741668377
https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/830718056959709185
https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/830367140733714432
London’s dirty air is a public health crisis. I’m committed to tackling this. Read more about my plans here:
Older people & adults & children with lung or heart problems should avoid strenuous physical exercise, particularly outdoors.
Meanwhile... Positives
https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/832198886102093825
On 26 Feb we're turning Trafalgar Square into London's biggest cinema for a very special Oscar-night screening of #TheSalesman #LondonIsOpen << There it is!!
https://twitter.com/TfL/status/831862211303845888
https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/831823169858203650
So... #LondonIsOpen AND #LondonIsToxic
In short, I guess what I am trying to put across in this entry is quite simple.
Stop talking shit Sadiq. Do what is right for London and its people, stop scaring people with over exaggerated stories, and then contradicting yourself by saying we need to bring people to London for events, tourism etc. Don't you see that by bleating on about air quality, you scare people away, not bring them here. Its the exact same media channel and audience that you speak through and to, but somehow you expect them to be positive.
London IS open, London is proud. It is a diverse yet united city who has been and still is respected globally by millions of potential tourists. Walk in the streets in town and you will see just how open London is, without having to use a damn hashtag and believe it spreads a message of positivity. It really doesn't. London is not a convenience store which has an Open/Closed sign. It is a city right up there on the world stage, historic, respected, and a magnet to people around the world. Stop pretending that YOU are single handedly making the difference, you really aren't.
#RantOver
One of the original things that really got on my nerves was the constant tweets stating how there would be less strikes and more negotiations under his watch, cutting the number of transport strikes drastically. Boris had called for them to be almost banned, Sadiq felt that negotiation was the way forward.
For days on end there were almost hourly tweets about his pledge and how there were less strikes. Until of course strike season hit, aka holiday season. Then the shit hit the fan and the strikes begun. On the odd occasion when agreement was reached, they would be cancelled or postponed, and Twitter would hear all about how HE had prevented travel chaos, and was so much better than Boris..
Then the tables turned, and strike after strike has hit various transport networks, and silence from the mayor. The occasional "we are disappointed" tweet, but nothing strong worded, demanding further talks or how out of order it was. Certainly no boasts about his involvement in the talks, in fact the opposite. Avoiding having any involvement at all.
Then there is the demand that TfL have control over Southern Rail. Again, another bandwagon jumped aboard before knowing the full story. Granted Southern is a joke, especially with their strikes also, but their services leave a lot to be desired too. Something needs to be done, but with the shambles that is under his control already, I am not sure that adding another pony to the stables is the right move. Again, we heard so much about "I want to take control" but no comments on the strikes that cripple London each time. Obviously the negotiating skills used with the tube unions don't work, so stay out of it. Wise move!
That said, when Southern rejected the idea of handing over to TfL, they DID say be part of our talks, and help us with your ideas on how it could be improved.
With London's best interests at heart, naturally Mr Khan said NO, I want nothing to do with it, and refuse to be a part of this. Nice one Sadiq!
Then my favourite bit of it all. As you can tell from the blog title.. #LondonIsOpen.
Put on most posts from the mayors office, this seems to be the favourite tag of the moment.
My only thought on it is summed up by this scene from Blades of Glory..
I don't even know what that means
No one knows what it means, but its provocative
No it's not!
Quite simple, words!
Ringing back to the Brexit referendum, when people started somehow saying that the UK was shutting the world out and didn't want to trade with them, the mayors office coined the phrase and tag #LondonIsOpen
Somehow suggesting that the world thought we were closed for some reason. Not once has it ever been suggested that London didn't want to trade with anyone, or that London was somehow closed for refurbishment. Windows painted out, so no one could see what was happening.
Nope, in fact London has never been closed, and in some ways, suggesting it is open creates an air of negativity towards it.
After that was all done with, the tag remained, and is now used on absolutely everything, from business to events etc. Which when promoting an event which has already been arranged is a bit pointless, as the organisers clearly know London Is Open, or they couldn't have booked it ! Duh!
Speaking of events, that is my next and final grip, mixed in with #LondonIsOpen
Recently, along with being open, the mayor has also identified that London is toxic. Very toxic in fact. To the point of issuing warnings suggesting people don't go outdoors unless really necessary at times, and saying how we are failing, and people are dying each year in London BECAUSE of the pollution.
Now I am no neigh sayer here, I know full well that we live in a very busy city, packed with vehicles and other things churning out toxins all day long. I certainly notice the difference when I visit Wales or the Spanish Mountains. But there seems to be some confusion from the mayors office about how bad it really is.
Day after day, Twitter is flooded with comments about how the government need to give people thousands of pounds towards replacing their diesel car. The same diesel car they were given money towards in the last scrappage scheme. The government needs to act on the pollution, taxes levied and increases to the tolls for the congestion zone. Advising how many people die annually because of the air etc.
And then, in the nest breath (a very toxic one of course) we get told about events being held, in Central London, in the open air, and how people should flock to them, because after all #LondonIsOpen.
I have posted a few examples of the contradictions below. And before you say anything, I am all for London hosting events, I love cycling in London, and spending time in town, so have nothing against it. But you can't be the champion of champions for London, aka the mayor, and scaremonger people into believing we are living in a city which has toxic smog daily, air quality warnings and sirens, and environmental wardens walking around in high vis uniforms so they can be seen through the smog.
THEN expect your same audience on Twitter to flock to events you are promoting. That's just dumb. Get a story and stick to it.
Smog and toxic
https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/831929385741668377
https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/830718056959709185
https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/830367140733714432
London’s dirty air is a public health crisis. I’m committed to tackling this. Read more about my plans here:
Older people & adults & children with lung or heart problems should avoid strenuous physical exercise, particularly outdoors.
Meanwhile... Positives
https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/832198886102093825
On 26 Feb we're turning Trafalgar Square into London's biggest cinema for a very special Oscar-night screening of #TheSalesman #LondonIsOpen << There it is!!
https://twitter.com/TfL/status/831862211303845888
https://twitter.com/MayorofLondon/status/831823169858203650
So... #LondonIsOpen AND #LondonIsToxic
In short, I guess what I am trying to put across in this entry is quite simple.
Stop talking shit Sadiq. Do what is right for London and its people, stop scaring people with over exaggerated stories, and then contradicting yourself by saying we need to bring people to London for events, tourism etc. Don't you see that by bleating on about air quality, you scare people away, not bring them here. Its the exact same media channel and audience that you speak through and to, but somehow you expect them to be positive.
London IS open, London is proud. It is a diverse yet united city who has been and still is respected globally by millions of potential tourists. Walk in the streets in town and you will see just how open London is, without having to use a damn hashtag and believe it spreads a message of positivity. It really doesn't. London is not a convenience store which has an Open/Closed sign. It is a city right up there on the world stage, historic, respected, and a magnet to people around the world. Stop pretending that YOU are single handedly making the difference, you really aren't.
#RantOver
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)