malumbu

Write to your MP to take up with Southern/DfT/rail regulator

Lots of young kids already scoot to school. I've not seen any on e scooters.

It's populist nonsense. Why are you condoning breaking the law? Why are you an apologist for entitled motorists? Traffic calming and good citizenship doesn't work. Better enforcement does. Sunak currently denying that he is not backtracking. All you are doing is supporting that To add have you seen how much people are fined by the police for speeding? - draconian or what, I bet it works though...... I expect a fixed price penalty by a local authority without points is preferable for many

One thing we are happy to pay for. Choose your battles, and this isn't one of mine

Exciting stuff on trambuses in the ED part of the forum. Well done TfL and Mayor Khan.

To continue on the theme a better article: Speeding offences are usually enforced by the Met Police but the council said officers tend to concentrate on main roads and dual carriageways. The authority announced it was stepping in after revealing most of the complaints it receives are about drivers speeding on quieter residential streets. The council said the number of vehicles travelling over 25mph on the roads has fallen from 13per cent to 6.6pc on the roads since the introduction of the scheme. A Wandsworth Council spokesperson said, “We began this trial as part of our efforts to support the police and TfL with their speed enforcement work, and as our contribution to wider London efforts on Vision Zero. “Since the start of the trial we have seen a 1mph reduction in speeds and the number of vehicles travelling over 25mph dropping from 13pc to 6.6pc on the trial roads and up until this point have notified motorists who have been found to have breached the speed limit with a warning letter but have not issued any fines. “The Department for Transport has taken the decision to restrict access to details of registered vehicle keepers meaning we are now unable to contact drivers who are found to have been speeding. Naturally, we are disappointed with this decision and are having ongoing conversations with the Department for Transport regarding the future of the trial. “We remain committed as a council to doing all that we can to reduce the danger posed by speeding vehicles on our roads and hope that the Department for Transport recognises and supports our commitment to ensuring safety on our roads.” I've just been having a laugh at the DfT motorists policy. Only it is not funny. This is all about trying to win a few more votes by pandering to the motorists' lobby and back tracking on commitments from the last 13 years. Even you would agree Rocks. Fortunately no great bounce for those twonks in power.

Funny day, Shane goes after living for 25 years on borrowed time, Darling who will be remembered fondly by history, and the the 100 year old war criminal.

Probably worth doing a little research and if you are still angry engage with Southwark about this issue. According to the Mayor London currently has one charge point for every four registered electric vehicles in the city, compared with the national average of one charge point for every 12 vehicles. London also has the most public rapid charge points by volume and share of any European city. https://www.london.gov.uk/Mayor of London and London Councils announce thousands more electric charge points across the capital or if your street needs one why not apply? www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-projects/electric-cars?chapter=2

They are not installed on every lamppost because it costs money. Duhh.

Wot a bunch of wonkers the current government are - rather than stop Wandsworth giving out fines they should look how the current law could be used or changed to allow this. But whilst supporting the concept a few years ago they are now so frightened of upsetting the poor put upon motorists. I'll put my feelers out to find more, I've got loads of moles, that's because I'm a transport professional. Oh I hope they crash and burn in the next election, bugger all bounce from turning their back on green commitments.

,Speeding is a criminal offence therefore is a matter for the police. Government has been lobbied to decriminalise speeding, and therefore allow local authorities to enforce and potentially increase the number of cameras. Don't think government are interested.

It's a forum where we discuss issues. Some people seem unable to do this. My views are 20 mph us right but for a variety of reasons it doesn't work, primarily due to driver behaviour. That is a national issue. Locally on roads like Barry, where it is possible to get a fair speed up, then average speed cameras are the way forward. But I understand revenue from fines go to the police and a central pot, rather than used locally.

Thought you or your gang may have some views on Southwark's management of Barry Road. Beyond how bad you consider Southwark to be. Do you agree with 20mph or is this the fault of those meddling puritanical wokes like me?

Here's another one for you not to share views or engage on: Barry Road, sustainable streets - noting average speed is above 24mph https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s81653/Appendix C.pdf

Why? And how would you achieve this??? There is nobody enforcing illegal scooters and illegal e-bikes. Why on earth would they choose to stop parents using their own free choice, on a legal mode of transport?

thread on the Barry Road road race www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/193882-speeding-on-barry-road/ Barry road 20mph map https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/barryroad/supporting_documents/BarryRoad20mph_V7.pdf And report on consultation (2019) on Barry Road, sustainable streets - noting average speed is above 24mph https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s81653/Appendix C.pdf

Sounds like you ducking the issue again Rocks. Go on, I am genuinely interested on what you think on the article. "Go on Rocks!", I hear the rest of the forum say,

What do you reckon to the Guardian article Rocks?

Brick Doctor

In deed Stuka. In deed. It's good that these documents are out and provide clarity on where Southwark is going. I hope most will welcome this, On your points FM, all cyclists will have the same concerns. Roads, it is very much down to knowledge and experience, I get to know where most of the hazards are but can be a little out of my comfort zones in new area. It amuses me that some cycle lanes are not cleared of leaves, may be down the slope and fill with water, and will often include manholes and drain covers. They are of course not all like that. I've had my fair share of buckled wheels, but dare I say less so in recent years - again probably down to experience. I've always been more bothered by cycle theft, having been a victim of this four times. My bikes are security marked and I try not to leave them in places where they are more likely to be nicked. I'd love a national programme of secure parking facilities in our high streets and other places I may leave my bikes, but fear it will be piecemeal and up to local authorities. I'm not keen on having to pay unless it is very low cost - the 'manned' cycle storage facilities can be pricey for example it is £600 a year at Lower Marsh in Lambeth. I do understand the need to pay for secure storage outside your own home. I did find an American manufacturer who made racks with locks in them (combination I expect) and they had been used at some locations in the UK eg at colleges, but can't find this on a Google search. I expect this would be a subscription service, but could be provided subsidised or free. If I can't find the link hardly worth lobbying government, local authorities, LCC etc. I found this article interesting www.theguardian.com/environment/commentisfree/2023/nov/22/car-culture-car-industry-consumers-debt It's main point is debt being built up as we are encouraged to lease our cars, and go for more extravagant models rather than utility ie being sold the dream. As car manufacturing is seen to be far more important to our government rather than putting the money into active travel and businesses that support this you could even see this as government spending more on inactive travel. The article covers car culture and the manufactured culture wars. Whatever your viewpoint it is a provoking read, it could have been posted on other threads that lean towards being anti-cyclist.

Glad I was of service Here's another recent report to government, one I am sure you will agree with: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmselect/cmpubacc/1335/report.html#heading-1 My particular issue is nothing to do with funding active travel, which is the right thing to do, but that the government does sfa on hearts and minds. Extracting from the above "4. DfT’s communications to the public have not been enough to help tackle perceptions that active travel is unsafe or to encourage more people to take part. People’s perception of the safety of active travel is as important as actual physical safety. There is significant public concern around safety and this remains a substantial barrier to getting more people cycling and walking. We are not convinced that DfT’s messaging around the positive changes that have been made to improve safety, such as revisions to the Highway Code, or the benefits of active travel have been communicated effectively to the general public. There are also concerns about the impact on safety of new forms of travel such as e-scooters. DfT accepts that there is a need for greater clarity around the role of e-scooters, including a better legal framework. With the proliferation of e-scooters being used for both leisure and commuting, in and beyond the 23 current trials of rental schemes, there is a pressing need for better advice and guidance from DfT for the public and stakeholders. Recommendation 4: DfT should, by December 2023, set out to the Committee how it will lead a proactive and coordinated approach with other stakeholders to: better promote the benefits of active travel; identify and address safety concerns; and encourage more people to participate in active travel." [note the report is full of wishy washy recommendations - they need to be SMART - as I am sure you know: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound As my reports were on in different market sectors two decades ago.] I like Sustrans response following the NAO, rightly critical but unlike some not wanting to diss active travel: www.sustrans.org.uk/our-blog/news/2023/june/sustrans-says-active-travel-targets-are-in-tatters-due-to-persistent-underfunding-by-the-government Very critical of lack of funding by government in taking their goals forward, "The failure to meet Department for Transport objectives will directly impact future generations and their ability to walk, wheel and cycle safely, leaving a legacy of poor air quality and reduced public health." and "It also found that, despite the targets to increase the numbers of people walking and cycling, and the percentage of children aged five to ten walking to school, all activity levels are now lower than when the objectives were set in 2017" So rather than campaigning against LTNs and CPZs wouldn't it be better to do your bit to promote active travel. Note Sunstrans looked to a joined up approach between cycling and walking advocates, so all this bikes vs pedestrians nonsense is exactly that. Thinking outside the box, Rocks, as a cyclist why don't you become active in Soutwark LCC? You could be a sort of Geoff Norcott character bringing in some common sense. Here's one he made earlier: www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX4nlogynYI I'm back off to Piston Heads, some real gritty discussions going on, you wouldn't imagine you'd g to Piston Heads for some particularly astute criticism of GB news.

A link to the consultation and the next phase: www.london.gov.uk/talk-london/topics/transport/london-rental-e-scooter-trial/surveys/1072?utm_source=talk&utm_medium=email&utm_content=talkemaileeb&utm_campaign=impact Lots of stuff on safety, and talk of improved technology such as detecting pavement riding. There are lots with issues about e-scooters but it would be good to hear from them who use them. Personally I'm more bothered about illegal e-bikes, in particular those used by the delivery riders. But that is a subject for another thread.

From time to time there is bother at the Fox. And at times service is indifferent. A right twot owns the company. But yes it is cheap.

It's very straight, I've always wondered why.

Many use cars where there are reasonable alternatives. If drivers priced car ownership in full economic terms, including purchase price and depreciation, for many with low annual mileage other forms of transport, car hire and car clubs make better economic sense. Car ownership is not necessarily rational due to many factors - habit, status, perceived and actual convenience. Additional costs due to being charged to rent road space whilst the car is stationary makes didly squat difference to the pocket of most car owners in the area - I'm paying more for a family theatre trip and that is the cheap seats. There is total freedom of choice whether you have a car, and when you choose to drive it. Measures that are introduced are to encourage you through various means to use it more 'sensibly', responsibly (that includes restrictions such as speed and alcohol consumption) and efficiently. That is to the benefit of society and the environment. Your comment on wood burners is just daft. Although it was pretty daft for governments over the last decade or so not to restrict them further when it was known of the health impacts.