malumbu

This is the right sort of response from the BBC (Friday night comedy). Well done. Please listen before commenting. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0mfx7h4

The term accident is a cover all for things being damaged following some sort of incident, From OED: an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury. "he had an accident at the factory" and an event that happens by chance or that is without apparent or deliberate cause It's overused and more often than not there is a better term eg 'collision' rather than 'accident'. Worse still is describing something as 'accidental' which is often used as an excuse. Unintentional is far more appropriate. I didn't know. But that is no excuse. If you are not observing your surroundings including street signs then it is clearly your fault. And you should not be making excuses for you and others. If you find it difficult to look out for signage then perhaps you should not be driving. You can argue that the size of fines is disproportionate, that 'decent and careful' drivers are victimised when the real perpetrators get away with it, that there should be more discretion (as I have in the past). But please do not say enforcement is only there to make money.

I assume this is a joke/tongue in cheek. Otherwise was a strange statement. Accident? What are they driving with their eyes shut? Checking their WhatsApps? Scrolling through Tinder?? Maybe they were distracted by aliens. No such thing as an accident.

Agree on priorities but not sure what you mean by novelty of car free days, they've been around a long time, in fact some street markets on the high street such as Deptford still exist. My point made may times is that the UK has been too carcentric for the last 70 years making our roads /pavements more pedestrian friendly is a good thing, Going off on a tangent parking - legally and illegally - on the pavement gets my goat. Particularly prelevant over the border in Lewisham, and the cars driving on the pavement on Honor Oak today to get round the closed road (Thames Water just again) was shocking.

As Ex says this quickly becomes weaponsised, and there have been numerous anti cycling/cyclist threads over recent years. @Blah Blah my approach is very different, reducing risk by positioning myself appropriately on the road, loads of communication including eye contact with other road users, and knowing what is around me. Making myself visible is of course part of this. Our roads are pretty well lit, so others should see cyclists - not an excuse for having no lights but I expect that most of us have cycled occasionally when we have forgotten our lights, left a little later than expected, batteries have bone etc and we cycle accordingly ie with a greater sense of the traffic. Someone said that cars have blind spots. What is that nonsense? That is why there are mirrors but that does not excuse you of looking over your shoulder when turning and you will fail your test otherwise. Interestingly my most recent close pass was from a 197 bus. Hopefully TfL/London buses will respond appropriately. I've had very few incidents with buses over the years. And a driving instructor today, who I gleefully told they would fail their test driving like that.

Well apolitical if that is an OK word for you. Sorry if my choice of words was incorrect. But on my original point if it wasn't for the Telegraph dragging this up, and yes they do have an agenda, an no they are not apolitical/impartial whatever, we;d be none the wiser. But as it made no difference to Trump's election campaign that why would he have a case in the American courts? Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of the programme

One more cyclist one less driver. Big picture.

The above was a factual comment. He has dismissed every initiative and proposal for reducing vehicles, improving road safety and on my speculative suggestion, the shopping experience. And what on earth is the laughing emoji for? I'm not telling a joke. What do you think, in principle (forget the bus routes and parking) of having Lordship Lane full of pedestrians on the odd occasion? You know, like when they do this for street parties.

Good heavens, what a closed mind you have. Car free days have been popular across the world for forty years or more. Just an idea, not developed beyond that. Yes I expect Barry Road. That's where buses go when LL is closed I believe. Do you not recall the fuss when they closed the North side of Trafalger Square. Now almost everyone loves it. Oxford Street next.

There has been some good discussion on this threat then you spoil it with a toxic and unhelpful post. There are plenty of people that I am not fond of on the box but I don't post on line. By all means start your own thread on said person, or a better home would be X where others will no doubt go off on one too.

I'd do a trial closing LL one Saturday a month to traffic. It's not beyond our imagination to do this, and find an appropriate route round this for buses and essential vehicles.

Thanks for all these updates. I'll avoid driving through these roads in school start/end times in future. That wont be difficult as I never have.

Less cars on the street Mass mobility Many like them otherwise they wouldn't be used. But then again I am not a cynic.

The BBC is one of the finest, if not the finest, broadcasters in the world. They have been admired by many across the world for their journalism. There have been numerous arrests since their recent expose on convenience shops that cover ups for criminals - money laundering, contraband, illegal workers and the like. By no means perfect and some of what they have done in the modern world is questionable - the website often comes across as tabloid or sensationalist, as do some of their documentaries, and at times it is full of low grade game shows, fly on the wall etc which bring the punters and money, including overseas, in but is not quality TV. In their desperation for 'balance' they've given too much air time and credibility to some more extreme views, which contributed to Brexit and some of the rise in right wing parties. I wish they'd say 'the convicted criminal' every time they talk about Yaxley Lenon. The programme was clumsy, why it didn't go through proper clearance including the lawyers, I don't know. But it created zero stir at the time. Zero. And had no impact on the election, so Trump has no case. I hope they don't cave in like many of the US corporations and media. Oh and well done to South Park using the small p*nis defence in ridiculing him. What I expect is as the Beeb is pretty centrist in it;s reporting in riles some of those who thrive on the toxic populism we have seen since Trump mark 1 and Brexit. How sad.

Friends and family in the 'States always say how wonderful it is to be in Britain and see our news coverage. It's all partisan out there. The BBC manages to simultaneously p off the left and the right so must be doing something right.

Hadn't realised that the Panorama programme that people are up in arms about was over a year ago. There wasn't much fuss at the time so why drag it up. Unless you hate Britain, hate liberals, hate the BBC, want a divided country, support the most powerful person in the world despite his many failings. The programme was clumsy, but the vast majority of us know that Trump had an influence. So the Telegraph has played into his hands.

I tried a Lime bike once, too heavy and bulky for me but I understand that many really like them. And very much support the concept.

Well I am a transport professional, and whilst I wouldn't die in a ditch like @Earl Aelfheah in challenging @Rockets in the latter's profession of innocence (he was in a bus lane), generally I agree with much of what they post. I'm also in support on what others say, Snowy, March and the like and I am particularly impressed in @exdulwicher posts. Sue is right. This thread is spent, it has no relevance any more.

Great, you should have a go on a Limebike @CPR Dave

Well I am a trained cyclist, had advanced car training, and had motorcycle training that went well beyond what they do now, and I very much disagree with you. Reasons for causing collisions include your frame of mind, leaving things to the last second or trying to save a couple of minutes. The sort of things they discuss on Speed Awareness Courses, You shouldn't go into these things with a closed mind. We can always learn. I've been involved in fleet driver training and heavy vehicle driver training. Neither as a trainer I hasten to add. But if you are that competent perhaps you should be giving the speed awareness courses. A serious comment.

The current wave of xenophobia is due to powerful/influential people stirring up hatred. It;'s what happened in the past, think 1930s Germany. It seems to be even easier now as so many get their information from social media, whether it is right or wrong. The media seeking so called balance will bring some nutter on, they don't then bring a nutter on to counteract that. They now seem to turn to Reform at the first opportunity. So your life is 'shite', let;s blame someone else. Whilst sounding a bit like a Tory, taking some ownership/personal responsibility would be a start. There are some situations where that may be more challenging, in deindustrialised 'left behind' wasteland we can't all get on our bikes and find work. But I loathe how it is now popular to blame those of us from relatively modest backgrounds, like me, who did see education and knowledge as a way to self improve. Now we are seen by some as smug liberals......

@Sephiroth you made some interesting points on the economy, on the Lammy thread. Thought it worth broadening the discussion. Reeves (irrespective of her financial competence) clearly was too downbeat on things when Labour came into power. But could there have been more honesty on the liklihood of taxes going up (which they have done, and will do in any case due to the freezing of personal allowances). It may have been a silly commitment not to do this, but were you damned if you do and damned if you don't?

I'd quit this thread, let those who just want to slag Labour off have their own thread. Your views on the economy are worth debating. I'm just stunned how there wasn't this level of noise with the last government. I could try to get some dirt on Badenoch but she is pointless Whilst I am not a fan of the Daily Mirror at least there is some respite from Labour bashing. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/grenfell-hillsborough-families-make-powerful-36175862 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/nigel-farage-facing-parliamentary-investigation-36188612

The AA is a commercial organisation (and the RAC) providing services - they would come up with slogans, that helps get business. Founded in 1905, it provides vehicle insurance, driving lessons, breakdown cover, loans, motoring advice, road maps and other services. The association demutualised in 1999, to become a private limited company, and from 2014 a public limited company (PLC). In 2002 the AA Motoring Trust was created to continue its public interest and road safety activities. Of particular interest going back to its origins: In 1910, in a legal test case (Betts vs. Stevens) involving an AA patrolman and a potentially speeding motorist, the Chief Justice, Lord Alverston, ruled that where a patrolman signals to a speeding driver to slow down and thereby avoid a speed trap, then they would have committed the offence of 'obstructing an officer in the course of his duty' under the Prevention of Crimes Amendment Act 1885.[9][10] The organisation then introduced a coded warning system, used until the 1960s, whereby an AA patrolman would salute the driver of a passing car which showed a visible AA Badge unless there was a speed trap nearby, on the understanding that their officers could not be prosecuted for failing to salute.[11] The AA Handbook stated that "It cannot be too strongly emphasised that when a patrol fails to salute, the member should stop and ask the reason why, as it is certain that the patrol has something of importance to communicate." So its origins can hardly be said to supporting road safety. I am a transport expert. I also enjoy making tongue in cheek comments. I've just agreed with your first point, But as I am a transport professional I know it is COBR. Cobra is just the way the media present it. I had some dealings with Sir Edmund in the 00s when he was at the RAC foundation. Sadly he has gone all "poor old motorist" populist at the moment, The stuff on EVs and the congestion charge is really unhelpful.

Wow, didn't know that https://www.theaa.com/about-us/aa-history