first mate

Nope, never had a prosecution or FPN.

Where there is a will there is a way. I did not say this is already happening but CEO's might be given the power to issue fines via another instrument. We have fewer police but you can bet your bottom dollar we will soon have more CEO's.

The punishment for riding a bike on the pavement is an immediate £30 fixed penalty notice fine. This is charged under Schedule 3 and Section 51 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988. Typically speaking, only a very small percentage of cyclists in the UK receive a fine for cycling on the pavement. When they observe a cyclist violating the law, the majority of police officers will inform them verbally that they are infringing the law and should stop using the pavement. Repeat offenders or those who endanger pedestrians or others may, however, be prosecuted. Yet, cyclists appear to frequently jump red lights with over 4,000 cyclists being issued Fixed Penalty Notices after being caught jumping red lights or ignoring other road signs in 2013.[3]The Institute of Advanced Motorists have also revealed in their research that 57% of cyclists admit to running red lights[4] whilst a YouGov poll revealed that 35% of cyclists at least “occassionally” ignore red lights[5]. But if it is illegal for a cyclist to jump a red light, as it is for any other road user, why do so many cyclists think that it is acceptable and frequently do it?

Well yes, so let's have some enforcement please, instead of objecting to any sort of policing of cycling behaviour. As I have said before, the inevitable upturn in CEO's necessary to 'police' CPZ infractions are well placed to 'police' cycling too. You are welcome to suggest that, when you lobby your MP.

But they do, and in increasing numbers.

Pots and kettles Mr C. Do you disagree with me? Should cars and scooters, e-bikes and cyclists all be allowed to go through red lights whenever they choose?

The "latest evolution" does not by default supersede what has gone before.

Absolutely anyone that goes through a red light with any type of vehicle should be reported.

Rockets, what an insightful article. I especially noted the bit below. Amsterdam is held up as the cycling model to move towards. It is hoped their mistakes are at least noted and learned from. It is already patently obvious that some cycling behaviour on pavements in ED, including hire cycle dumping, is deeply alienating and stressful for some sections of society and not at all in line with Southwark's Equal streets policy and proclamations. "group of students from Hong Kong studying public policy at the University of Amsterdam’s summer school this summer found that people with disabilities experience these areas as stressful and dangerous, and go out of their way to avoid them. The people they interviewed said that drivers and cyclists do not slow down or take other road users into account, exploiting their relative speed and the lack of formal traffic regulations to ignore more vulnerable pedestrians."

I think we all knew what Spartacus meant. Owned scooters or bikes are unlikely to be dumped around the place willy nilly, in the same way as share or hire scooters and bikes. The behaviour can hardly be said to be 'good' for the environment and it seems that is why they have now been banned in Paris. As is often the case, other cities that have endured these schemes for longer may follow suit. This thread is meant to be discussion about LTNs.

What a coincidence, rather like the unintelligible YouTube upload of the recent Council Assembly, where Cllr McAsh did his 'reverse ferret' on CPZ. This is the democratic process in Southwark.

It will be interesting to see what happens this winter. It felt like there was a big downturn in cycling last year, once the weather turned. On the plus side, perhaps there will be fewer Lime bikes just lying around.

When it gets to winter keep an eye out for running engines to keep those inside warm. I've seen it before.

Thanks Admin, good call.

It is ironic that parents of children whose lungs we are meant to be saving are sometimes the worst offenders. I also wonder how many will also fly off for their holidays this summer.

Sounds legal speak for just squeaked by, to me.

Is there more news on the two petitions against CPZ? Are they going to combine or present separately?

For some, not all.

Maybe for some, others not so much. CPR Dave, apparently there are issues with the CPZ site. Can this be checked? Duwlich Hill - this one has the most signatures: https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=50000037&RPID=9133390&HPID=9133390 Nunhead - this one has 460 signatures. If it can get to 500 I think it has to go to a debate in cabinet which will really show them the strength of feeling and given what's just happened in Uxbridge it might make them have a think... https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=50000035&RPID=9133395&HPID=9133395

Don't worry, I don't think anyone thinks you have headed up and all powerful cyclists lobby. But the cycling lobby groups have had the ear of Southwark Council for some time and at one point you could even see the incredibly chummy, mutually backslapping communications between them. Lobby groups can be very powerful, not even worth debating that. It just so happens, in this case, that the needs and agendas of each help further the other. I don't know what you mean by JFK. Was he a cyclist? Bit left-field Mal, even for you.

Thanks CPR Dave.

But I don't think Rocks does do that, however much you want to create that impression. And he is himself a cyclist, so it doesn't quite make sense. You seem ever so sensitive about any hint of criticism around cycling behaviour; almost in denial. I think most of us who are not convinced by the LTN, CPZ, 'cycling rules' agenda, at least in so far as local implementation is concerned, have also expressed issues with car driving behaviour. I know I have. The title of this thread suggests that your focus is not local or is it?

I think there is little doubt that once they have dealt with diesel and then petrol cars they will go after EVs. Catherine Rose has said as much. They just don't want private cars in the borough, unless owned by a large hire car company.

Go to opposethecpz.org

Not so refreshing when it is ill thought out and undemocratic.