Rockets

Govt set up the idea of LTNs but they didn't implement them - that was down to local authorities and, clearly, local authorities took advantage. Now, if the local authorities did everything by the book, ran fair consultations and engaged the views of the local communities and deployed the LTNs within guidelines then they have nothing to fear surely? If they didn't do everything by the book then they only have themselves to blame. P.S. One suspects the Tories know Labour councils did not do everything by the book and I suspect Labour councils and Labour HQ are more than aware of this. You reap what you sow....but if this does bear fruit for the Tories you have to question how Labour allowed themselves to sleep walk into this trap...it was bleedingly obvious what was going on from the outset (from a perspective of Labour councils bending the rules to their advantage and ignoring local sentiment/views of constituents)

Malumbu, where did I rejoice...sharing the info is not rejoicing is it....? Is this not one part of the government's U-turn?

Ha ha.. at least 3 of these things Cllr McAsh claims are actually also the issues caused by his LTNs!

It's starting..... BBC News - Sunak vows to stop 20mph zones and review LTNs https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66965714 The government said its plan would: Review guidance on 20mph speed limits in England, to prevent their use in "areas where it's not appropriate" "Amend guidance" on LTNs "to focus on local consent", and weigh public support for those already introduced Stop councils implementing "15-minute cities", where essential amenities are always within a 15-minute walk Seek to reduce the hours where cars are banned from bus lanes Target "overzealous" enforcement of parking Consult on extending fines for disruptive street repairs which run into weekends

Spartacus - you missed the best bit of Sarah's quote which is actually beyond incredulous given how single-mode focussed London's "active travel" plans have been on cycling....;-) Oh my...if we had had a holistic plan from Sadiq, TFL and Will then London wouldn't be in the mess it is in now!!! “We need a holistic plan for how people can travel – not a plan that zooms in on one particular mode of transport. “Better public transport and safer ways for people to cycle and walk are entirely compatible with driving. “Focusing on one way of travelling is like trying to complete a jigsaw with half the pieces missing.”

Not sure where I blame Southwark and TFL for the national picture Malumbu. What I am saying is that it is exactly because this government is so awful that they are using the local picture to try to mould the national picture and Labour run administrations in Wales, London and other places are providing the fuel for the fire because of the awful way they have handled the roll-out of active travel and their "anti-car" policies. The Tories are trying to scare the living daylights out of anyone who uses a car, in the same way that the fools who voted for Brexit got scared in the run-up to that referendum. The Tories are hoping that people around the country see what Labour has done at the local level and go, nope, don't fancy that - it's the only thing the Tories have left - they're at rock bottom and will do anything to try to survive. Their strategic goal is probably to try and create a hung-parliament - cos that's the best they could hope for and remember this is just the warm-up because the date for the election has not even been set yet. Legal, that's a very good point. Once Keir gets into power centralisation might afford him more control of the far-left elements of his party and he might use it to continue the purge and Southwark would probably be the poster-child for a Labour administration that would need fixing.

It's starting - if I was a councillor and the council I would probably start donning hard hats because there's probably incoming heading their way....both from the Tories and Labour HQ

Malumbu - I don't think anyone on here has suggested they want a car-centric policy I think what you will find is that this is born from the awful way that councils around the country have treated residents - the Tories are merely trying to grab at anything they can so the blame, as far as I am concerned, lies with those who have tried to steam-roller these policies in without proper engagement with constituents - they are now reaping what they sowed. My fear from the outset has always been that the way councils like Southwark have managed this would backfire and actually set the active travel cause back significantly and, I am afraid, those fears are now starting to be realised. Who wants to bet how long it will be before the Tories turn their attention to the amount of money Sadiq and Will have spent putting in cycle infrastructure and the fact that the latest DFT figures show that there has been a continued decline in cycling numbers in London year on year - the numbers are still higher than pre-pandemic (nationally they are now lower than pre-pandemic) but probably not enough for the £1bn spend in London not to come under the microscope.

Snowy - the Tories clearly knew it would fail but it was used by them as another tool to up the "Labour's war on drivers" narrative. And look how the Labour leadership (in light of a claimed 440,000 strong petition against the measures) are having to say they will listen to concerns - what they meant to say was "we will listen and make changes if we and Labour HQ think this is going to cost us votes in the general election". Moving forward I am not sure who will be looking more closely at what happened in areas like Southwark to find the flaws in the LTN and CPZ strategies: the Tories or Labour HQ - either are likely to make it rather uncomfortable for the council and councillors as they probably know they are sitting on a ticking time bomb. Maybe we will read about it in the inevitable book from one of the councillors: "LTNs and my role in the general election" 😉 We are getting to the point where political parties start cleaning their manifestos as they go searching for votes ahead of an election - Labour's u-turn on private school tax status is a clear example of this - they are doing the maths and equating policies to votes won or lost and the Tories clearly want to make car use a massive Achilles heal for Labour. This comment below from the BBC's political correspondent in this article sums it up perfectly https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-66929515 Senedd arithmetic meant this motion was bound to fail. The 20mph law was in Labour and Plaid Cymru's manifestos. It would have required a screeching U-turn for any of their members to vote against Lee Waters. That won't surprise the Conservatives. This is part of a broader strategy to try to convince drivers that the Tories are on your side. We saw something similar with the row about the Ulez charge in London.

And we must remember that the Councillor leading these efforts is the very same Councillor who went door to door when news of the DV closure became public warning his constituents that the DV closure would mean increases in traffic on EDG and Melbourne Grove and whether they would like him to have their road closed for them.......

Agree, and they are clutching at anything they can to try and deflect from the anti-Tory mood board. I hate to credit the Tories but it is a political master-stroke as, if people start to buy it, then it puts Labour in a tight spot and makes transport policy the key election issue. If people don't buy it then the Tories are hosed but they were hosed anyway - a wounded political animal will do odd things. And Legal and FM are absolutely right, the national agenda is very relevant to the local agenda (and FM yes the govt and councils will start coming for electric cars - they will start paying roadtax from 2025). Councils like Southwark used the national agenda (Covid) to mould and manipulate the process for implementation of LTNs, CPZs etc - and they were able to hide a multitude of planning sins under the umbrella of social distancing and emergency orders. But now the Tories have clearly declared war on those who initiated the "war on cars" and the worm will likely turn because all of those planning sins could now come under scrutiny and analysis and whilst local councils won't care too much Labour HQ will because they will not want to see Labour councils getting scrutiny that adds fuel to the Tory "there's a war on cars and Labour are the ones initiating it" rhetoric. How ironic that Boris' demise has seemingly given the Tories their platform for the election.

If their question set is anything like the questions they asked in the consultation it might make for some interesting and stilted discussions!...."I am sorry resident but there is no facility to record your opposition to the CPZs you can only tell me how long you want them to run for every day...." Does anyone think this street sampling might be the council's ploy to satiate the need for a "legal consultation"? If so then we have every right to be suspicious....

Let's hope the households are randomly selected and not just those on the Labour membership list......as we know Southwark Labour targeted those Labour households when they went out to remind people about the LTN consultations......;-)

Has anyone asked Cllr McAsh what the reason is for his ward not getting the CPZ - is he just trying to ring-fence and protect his political career/longevity? As cabinet member behind the grand CPZ plan it does seem a little odd that he chose not to roll it out in his ward and I wonder how his councillor colleagues in those affected wards feel about this. It does also seem strange that the very ward where the council has told us previously that there is the pressure on parking is not part of the plan........all a bit strange.

Councils have been removing parking spaces for ages - the extension of double-yellow lines to the maximum permissible in Dulwich over the last few years is a prime example - in a desperate attempt to create parking pressures to help justify CPZs. The laughable thing is the only ward not getting a CPZ is the ward where there are some parking pressures due to the proximity to the Lane...go figure...

70 fines issued to red light jumping cyclists Malumbu...thats good news they are enforcing the rules though isn't it because red light jumping cyclists are a danger to themselves and other road users? Aren't they? I have being saying for a long time that this type of enforcement is the only thing likely to stop the persistent abusers of the rules and I hope something similar is done at junctions like Dulwich Library where red light jumping is a daily/hourly occurance.

And 70 PCNs for red light jumping cyclists at that one junction would suggest the article is not biased but that the police are trying to tackle anti-social behaviour at that junctiom much of which is red light jumping cyclists....surely Malumbu it is good that the police are taking steps to ensure the rules of the road are obeyed by everyone and that they are issuing fines for cyclists too?

Looks like some parts of the city are taking action: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/police-lycra-louts-jumping-red-lights-in-the-square-mile-b1108748.html?utm_source=newsshowcase&utm_medium=discover&utm_campaign=CCwqFwgwKg4IACoGCAowqvB9MMTRCTDIhdcBMOW8uQI&utm_content=related

As I was saying - the Tories are trying to create a "we support the car driver" narrative and actually, in terms of lifting the ban on petrol and diesel sales, this will do little to impact the direction of travel for the car industry - they are well on the EV path already - it's just a Tory tactic to try and heap pressure on Labour as they have stuck themselves clearly to the anti-car/in favour of active travel mast and the Tories clearly feel this is an Achilles heal for them - as Uxbridge demonstrated a pro-car agenda (rightly or wrongly) will get more votes. The leak of Sunak's change was clearly done by the Tories as a kite-flying exercise so they could assess how people were reacting and course-correct if necessary. Their polling must have suggested it was creating the impact they wanted. BTW VW just dropped the price of an ID3 to $18,000 (£15,000) in China yet exactly the same car starts at £36,000 in the UK - this is how much pressure the incumbents are under. Even Tesla keeps dropping their prices in China.

Have we seen the results of the council's "consultation" on the CPZs or is it still running?

Bottom-line is that the catalyst for the electrification of car models is not being driven, pardon the pun, by bans on sales of petrol and diesel cars and climate change agendas but by the very real threat posed to EU car manufacturers, and those who sell cars in Europe, by their Chinese counterparts and brands like Tesla - who embraced EVs in a way the incumbents didn't.

The problem is this has now become THE political hot potato and this was inevitable - it's a ludicrous decision but the Tories are clutching at whatever they can. Travel, and particularly that done by car, is going to become a major, if not the major, manifesto item for all parties whether they want it or not - and all of this was born in the Uxbridge by-election and the mess it created for Sadiq and Keir. I know there is another thread on 20mph in Wales but those types of decisions by Labour administrations will now become part of the election narrative. I was recently travelling along the elevated section of the Westway and that is now 20mph - which is utterly ludicrous but a very real example to everyone about what happens when ideology gets in the way of pragmatism - and this stuff sticks, which is why the Tories are making such a huge issue about motoring. They have clearly done their research that if you want to try and get people onside show them you are the champion for the driver - it will probably win you votes (at a time when they are desperate for any votes at all) and it puts Labour in a challenging position - as Labour found to theirs, and our, cost in 2019 the Islington Corbynites are not at all reflective of the lives or views of the majority and in most parts of the country people rely on their cars far more than us Londoners do.

And that does seem to be a key point that many, like megalaki84 fail to acknowledge. This overly-simplistic mantra of "you don't need a car" may apply to those saying it but doesn't necessarily apply those they are saying it to. Given a car may be the most, or second most, expensive purchase someone ever makes you can be pretty sure that they definitely need one - people don't make that sort of outlay without determining whether they need it or not.

DKHB - do you expect every group who tries to have a voice in local debates to publish their funding and membership details? Are you asking the same of Mums for Lungs or Clean Air Dulwich? And to be fair...your definition of sealioning could well be applied to many of those who support the measures too! 😉

Similar experience for me. Only word of advice is to make sure everything is clearly listed when you make the booking and check their guidance on what you can and can't put outside.