Spartacus

Blimey Billy I never took.you as part of the tin foil hats brigade

And when there's an accident on the south circular, then there's gridlock in the area creating more pollution. But I take it from your reaction that you are not confident that putting the question to the vote will go in favour of the square....

Simple solution Billy Let's have a referendum vote locally on a single issue Keep the square or reopen the junction. No politics involved as its then not about Labour or Tory supporters. Only locally registered people (addresses within a mile of the square to allow those who need to use it have their say) and the results are binding to the council. Then we can finally see if it really is, as you claim, a minority voice! Are you up for it or scared of the results ?

Laughing at the sales pitch It has keypad entry and you can operate it from an app if you want to let your cleaner or nanny in. If you've just spent 2.2 million, can you afford a cleaner and a nanny or will the mortgage to huge to afford both?

Question. Has the social media experiment failed ? Most of the time it is not social. Most of the time it is not media in the traditional sense. Children can feel peer pressure because of it. (as can adults.) Does it enrich or blight our lives ? Discuss.

I'm curious, and I agree we don't detect traffic crime as well.as we should and that includes all forms of transport, how can we improve on detection. This is important to understand with falling police numbers and officers already stretched beyond breaking. It's not just about speeding offences, therefore more cameras isn't the only solution

https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/escooter-experiment-failed-ban-lime-madrid-melbourne-paris-b1181689.html Scary stats on accidents

Lol Both ask a small subset of people a question and both can be used to extrapolate a % of the wider population think xyz No difference at all apart from the methodology of collecting the data!

Think this clearly shows my point 72% of londoners want more LTNs Extrapolated fron a survey of 1,035 people out of 8.9 million. Hardy enough to say 72% of Londoners ! https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2024/09/11/70-of-londoners-want-more-low-traffic-neighborhoods-finds-new-survey/ Cyclomedia’s survey was carried out by independent research agency Multiscope in June across 32 European cities with 12,000 respondents.

Sparacus Gets paint pot out Spartacus Puts lick of paint on walls, cleans taps till they look like new Siartacus rubs hands together thinking of £2million in the bank Estate agent and market pops Soartacus' bubble

The second result ? I didn't give an actual example but I was pointing out that official surveys where they say thing like "94% of londoners or people" are normally based on surveys of say 2,000 and extrapolated up to then represent the population. The same method should therefore be used on consultations where only a small number of eligible residents responded 🤔 Therefore to respond to GOPs last post, there is no evidence but statistically speaking if we extrapolate the small no of responders to represent the consultation area then the conclusion is that the 68% is representative of the whole. It's how surveys and consultations have to be used But 8 out of 10 EDF posters agree with me, based on a survey of 5 people 😉

Someone will buy them Maybe not at the asking price but time will tell

No That wasn't what I was highlighting I didn't dismiss the post, I simply pointed out that trying to dismiss a consultation with only a minority responded is contradictory compared to accepting a positive response where only a very tiny minority of people are surveyed. One result is as important as the other!

Billy I'm not supporting or citing stats I'm simply pointing out that dismissing a consultation result because only a small no of people bothered is akin to dismissing a (for example) tfl survey that supports or objects to something based on only a handful of londoners responding. You can't be high handed with one and not the other.

I always find it interesting when the argument used here is wheeled out. A percentage of a small subset of residents objected based on those who responded. Therefore it doesn't represent everybody. It's actually using the same logic as recent highlighted surveys did which cited x% of people surveyed agreed or disagree with the results. These surveys are based on a small subset of people, normally around 2,000 who bothered to answer the question. Therefore before dismissing objections because you say only 68% of x residents who responded (for example) in an area objected, make sure that you also apply that same pinch of salt to official support of schemes that say things like. The majority of residents like LTNs (again based on a small survey subset) Statistics are fun !

https://www.timeout.com/london/news/its-official-the-uks-best-burger-is-served-in-a-peckham-pub-091024 Congratulations to the Montpelier on winning this award

There's been a crackdown on the illegal ebikes rides by delivery drivers by the police in certain areas of Southwark. Where they have been modified for speed, they fall foul of the rules which class them as motorbikes and require insurance and a licence. Now that's an area that needs tightening up and the stable door firmly closing on.

According to Bromley, it's not made a positive difference https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/sadiq-khan-ulez-expansion-pollution-levels-report-bromley-b1180676.html Guess the truth depends on where you stand at the time

Something really needs to change BBC News - E-bike rage in the borough that's had enough - and how it might be solved https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly9jqd5765o

Interesting The RAC Report is actually debunking the myth that electric vehicles are producing higher levels of brake and tyre emissions. The road noise report is easy to debunk if we all go electric, as they are so much quieter than petrol or diesel cars. The impact of traffic jams is about the only point that sort of stands on its own two feet, however with modern technology (jam avoidance map systems) and the potential of the introduction of self driving cars, i suspect it's only a short lived argument.

Explain your rational for wanting a reduction in car journeys. If it's purely pollution then in a few years that won't be an issue as we should all be driving electric vehicles. If its reducing collisions and accidents, again technology is starting to remove that risk. So what's your main drive to reduce car journeys ?

Personally, there's something fishy going on here 😅

That's a good point @Penguin68 Post covid, working patterns have changed so that may have had some impact over the past 4 years. Equally the implementation of LTNs may also be a factor in the 40% drop (not just the ULEZ) As said, it would be good to see the series from 2019btill now to see if the second year was a random result or not and what has happened since otherwise saying a 40% drop but not knowing if it was sustained is a misleading statement @malumbu I agree, if more kids are walking or cycling then its good for their health, but if more kids ate swapping cars for bises, not so healthy (this is focusing on exercise and obesity) but equally a reduction in school runs isn't a bad thing environmentally

That's what i would have assumed, however the report says "The researchers collected data from the period June 2018 to April 2019, prior to ULEZ implementation, and again in the period June 2019 to March 2020, the year after implementation of the ULEZ but prior to COVID-19-related school closures." Obviously there might have been some impact during the latter months, but to exclude that it would still be helpful to see comparisons against the last 3 years compared to the 2019 base line. The danger is they are doing a one year later comparison rather than showing an ongoing trend so the report, whilst interesting, may not paint the full picture.

I read that report Earl Interesting that the second comparison coveted the 2020 period when covid hit and we went into lockdowns. Not sure if it had an impact on children not using cars or not. Would be interesting to also see a similar comparison with last year's figures and this year's figures against the baseline to see if the reduction has been maintained or if parents have now switched to ulez compliant cars and back to their old habits.