malumbu

Which was why Johnson brought in LTNs, and many local authorities bid for the money. Yes, a shame, how quickly things reverted back to the bad old days...

Rather alarmist. There is unlikely to be snow this week, but even if there is that is natural and wildlife adjust accordingly. There are fewer insects to eat due to what humans have done to the planet over the decades. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_in_insect_populations In particular: Habitat Loss and Fragmentation: Agricultural Chemicals: Climate Change: Pollution: Invasive Species: There is even a case for not feeding birds due to the spread of disease through feeders, greenfinch population was decimated. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/jan/24/should-we-stop-feeding-birds-what-happens-if-we-do-and-does-it-spread-disease I do feed the birds but keeping a watching eye on the evidence. And I try to grow insect and bird friendly plants including attempts at a meadow. There could also be an argument for not keeping cats as these may decimate bird populations. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/14/cats-kill-birds-wildlife-keep-indoors You will need squirrel proof feeders and even then you may have the starlings and green squwaky things eating most of the food left out for small birds.

Oh please, not another anti LTN thread..... So the hidden agenda (is it hidden?) is that the OP wants school lanes reopened. That is a very sad view that motorists come before school childrens' safety. As for the post, fire away with an FOI. Don't just talk about it. Be my guest. As someone who has worked in transport I can tell you some more. I've posted many times on this forum, and in the past before COVID we had some interesting conversations on the Lounge. Firstly - you could ask the question about congestion as a whole. London has had road congestion even in the days of the horse and cart (where at one point there was a worry that we'd have roads full of horse manure). Local authorities may have in-house expertise or use traffic consultants, I expect the latter. Standard transport assessment models are likely to be used developed by academics and consultancies. Reduction of soot emissions from cars (fine particulate matter) has been significant in the last 30 years as emission standards have become more effective. Particulates come from a variety of sources and since the reduction from transport other sources, in particularly combustion - and in this respect wood burners, are now the main areas of concern. Modern petrol and diesel cars come with stop start so should not sit their idling unnecessary whether you are on a main road or a back road. UNLESS YOU TURN THIS OFF. I haven't a clue why turning would be an issue, When you drive you often turn round bends, at junctions etc. Odd question. Brakes produce larger particulates, the size that will not pass through the lungs into the cardiovascular system. The average driver cannot drive smoothly, have a look at any speed bump and nine out of ten will speed up, brake, speed up, brake. If drivers thought about the waste of fuel, wear and tear on the car and impact on their passengers the world would be a better place. Your time would be better spend on how you could encourage less and smarter driving. The main issue from transport emissions is from oxides of nitrogen. Post VW scandal newer diesels are far cleaner. If we are truly interested in improving our air the best thing all drivers could do living in towns and cities is to consider drive less, followed by driving better and driving a better car in terms of the environmental impact. I've long since worked that out.

You find fault in so many things. I live within a short walk of the P13, I can see the good side of it. And I use it. And other local buses. It's three or four times an hour. Yes I'd like it to be more but happy to schedule things around it. I'd like it to run later too.

Rather a glass half full view Use it occasionally to go all the way to Tulse Hill and Streatham. At the right time of day most excellent. Virtually all of us carry these pocket computers around with us linked to most of the computers in the world that give us fairly reliable information on the next bus.

I'm commenting again about the broader picture. I commuted by cycle for 20 years through Peckham Rye (west) and Rye Lane, it was (and still is) pretty horrid during peak times. I'm not aware if and how the new scheme will affect that commute. But I am interested in the political angle following the ex-councillor's interjection. A simple AI response for the two main left parties: LDs The Liberal Democrats' position on driver behaviour focuses on enhancing road safety, reducing environmental impacts, and promoting, or, in some cases, regulating the use of cars in favor of greener alternatives. Their approach combines technological solutions, support for safer infrastructure, and stricter penalties for dangerous driving. Greens The Green Party of England and Wales positions itself to drastically reform driver behaviour through stricter regulations, reduced speed limits, and a shift toward sustainable, low-emission, and active travel, with an ultimate goal of zero road fatalities Infrastructure and Road User Hierarchy: The party prioritizes a "road hierarchy" that places walking, cycling, and public transport above private motor vehicles. They plan to cancel new road-building programmes, using the funds to improve walking and cycling infrastructure. So both fall short of a totally radical rethink of our attitude to the motor car. And how technology could, and hopefully should, see the end of the need for a private car in most urban environments freeing up 100s of miles of road space. I'm sure that an earlier search mentioned the presumed liability, as adopted in some European countries, being something that LDs supported. This is where the road user higher up the hierarchy eg car/motorcycle, or Truck/car would be presumed liable if there was a collision. Perhaps James Barbour would know more.

Sorry wasn't able to delete my quote. Anyway the line I was trying to refer to was the one about stressed drivers being dangerous. I've lived in London for decades and before that visited family. There has always been congestion, and thus from what you say 'stressed drivers" Rather than blaming this on congestion, and as we can't rid this from London unless we build far more roads, get rid of all restrictions etc, we should be looking at driver behaviour. Anyone who has done a speed awareness course, something that I was engaged in rather obliquely, will appreciate the advice on how to not be stressed. Back to my continual point that for the last 60 years there as a nation we have been too pro-driver and there needs to be a reset. If any party is brave enough to do this. I sense Lib Dems possibly and Greens more likely. Maybe another chance LDs after blowing the last one as a centre left coalition following the next GE.

@Spartacus I comment on something James Barbour said, and Rockets butts in. I tell Rockets to Butt out and then you butt in. Who will be next? Do you have any views on the cycle training video?

@CPR Dave why on earth have you posted on this thread. Your views are wrong and you seem totally ignorant about cycling. I expect you represent many drivers, one reason why there should be compulsory retraining for drivers. In over ten years I've avoided using the T word; but for the first time I believe this is trolling.

Surely he can defend himself? @Rockets why don't you do something useful and have a look at the cycle training video. I'd appreciate your views and this would be good use of your time.

@Moondoox agree and please see my post on the cycling training thread where a (presumably motorist) is criticising cycle training. @Rockets I'd appreciate your views on the cycle training video, presumably you cycle/cycled with young family

You really haven't a clue @CPR Dave You appear to hate cyclists and are not looking at this with an open mind. You should welcome the work of Barnaby, other instructors, and government and local authorities for supporting cycle training. First six minutes First minute. Explanation of position including keeping a good distance from parked cars. At this point no vehicles coming in the other direction and Barnaby adopts quite a wide position in order to support his 7 year old son. Talk about ride buddies, ie more experienced cycling 1 min 30 seconds, a right turn from a major road with car coming in other direction. The two cyclists wait in the appropriate position and his son, due to age, does a slightly hooked turn. Would you really criticise a 7 year old who is confident enough to cycle on the road? How sad of you. 2 minutes, further discussion about the need to be in the centre of your lane/away from parked cars 2 mins 20 Barnaby doubles up in order to reduce the hazard to himself and his son, they move position to give cars plenty of space when passing in the other direction. 3 minutes 20 Barnaby talks about the benefits of doubling up as per rule 66 of the Highway Code: You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. 3 minutes 44, the two move position to the left to allow the patient driver following them to overtake, and as important thank them for their patience (again under rule 66: Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so) Move off road into the park Return to the road on the 6 minute where Barnaby talks about taking his son on the road, and asks viewers to comment. All excellent and positive advice. Why on earth can you not see this?

@James Barber From my casual observation you appear to take a poltical stance, ie that everything Southwark does under Labour control is wrong. @CPR Dave I doubt if you have posted anything positive on this forum

@alice why is it funny to smear academics? Do you agree with Trump about paracetamol? Or with Piers Corbyn about the Covid vaccine and that Climate Change is fake? I'm making a serious point. I look forward to hearing your take.

Nope as some of us discussed for some reason the judge was swayed by a load of bolloxs from some NIMBY's with money and time on their hands.