malumbu

Good to hear that it is being used

In the great scheme of things running a red light is less serious than hand held mobile device or excessive speeding ie beyond that where a speed awareness course is usually the penalty. Many drivers run red lights, many traffic lights do not have cameras. It feels like many are either pretending that motorists do not regularly break the law or that it is trivial.

I had a look on Google for commitments by the major parties to address 'antisocial cycling' but couldn't find anything. I expect we will hear more in coming months, judging by the anti cycling sentiment of the Tories, Reform and the 'odd' independent running for London Mayor. Sunak has already made it clear that he is anti public transport, anti environment and pro driving. To remind you of the current manifesto: We will support commuter cycling routes, so that more people can cycle safely to work and more families can go out together. We will create a new £350 million Cycling Infrastructure Fund with mandatory design standards for new routes. We will extend Bikeability – cycling proficiency training – to every child. And we will work with the NHS to promote cycling for healthier living. They will fail on the latter but I hope that most of you agree that getting kids to do it right will reduce some of the issues people are articulating here. Funny how you look back with some nostalgia to Johnson and Gilligan. Well on cycling, and the environment, in any case. And some pretty revolutionary stuff on social prescribing - encouraging and supporting active travel rather than tranqulisers: "more personalised care – linking GPs with wider forms of community support, such as social prescribing, could allow care to be more personalised which would help reduce the need for people to have more expensive, invasive medical treatment" https://www.gov.uk/government/news/patients-to-receive-better-care-as-nhs-and-social-care-systems-link-up

Go to a busy junction which doesn't have cameras and you will see one, two or three cars running the light after it has changed. The one by the Rye is a typical one, frustrating for those that don't have a right filter so limited chance to manoeuvre before traffic comes from the other road. I sense that some are so concerned about bikes that they have a distorted view. Has anyone looked at government policy on poor cycling standards? Information campaigns? Training? Enforcement? I have other priorities although big issues with illegal e bikes, lack of training for Uber riders etc and the need to get them properly employed with fair terms and conditions. As they can sell on their jobs, and Uber etc have no responsibility for those that take over, we will get a serious injury between a food delivery rider on an illegal e bike sooner or later where there is no responsibility beyond the rider with limited finances.

Hopefully an upbeat thread - there's a lot of negativity about cyclists but do share your positive views and stories. I was asked about the stats on cycleways - I wouldn't normally post anything from the Mail but the first 3/4 of this article are very positive: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13163631/Londons-cycle-lanes-QUADRUPLED-Sadiq-Khan.html And nice infographics. Total length of cycleways are 360 km a small fraction of the London road network, Johnson went for the grandiose cycle superhighways with some road space lost to segregated cycle lanes (not a lot in total length but these are the schemes often referred to by those less happy) From my experience Khan's new routes have tended to link up quiet roads, that were often already closed to through traffic, with the occasional shared off road section such as around Millwall FC. There's a family cycleride along the newly completed Cycleway 4 next Sunday https://lcc.org.uk/events/lll-cycleway4/ huge cycles, penny farthings and reverse pedaling bikes are not compulsory!

It was a little militant when it started 30 years ago but morphed quickly into a celebration of cycling. Very much a rebel but not sure of its cause at the beginning. I'm putting up a separate thread on the joy of cycling as this one is to discuss ULEZ, although it feels like it's all been said.

Saying cyclists are the most antisocial people in London isn't helpful. Nor is the Standard referring to cyclists as lycra clad louts Yes we can have an adult conversation. But emotive knee jerk nonsense is not going to achieve this and just plays into the hands of those wanting a manufactured culture war

Sorry to hear and glad you and hopefully bike OK and doesn't put you off cycling. Please do inform the police even if that sounds a waste of time. Do consider going to the Motor Insurance Bureau, the slush fund set up by insurers for untraced/uninsured motorists.

Incidentally 360 km of cycle network in London vs 20,450 km of normal roads.

Government did not actively promote diesel cars. I have had to refute this many times on this forum. People bought diesels as they liked them. The industry reacted by making more models. The common rail injection system introduced in the late 90s made them much more like petrol cars than tractors to drive, with better low end torque and fuel economy. Vehicle excise duty was rightly based on carbon emissions, as climate change is the biggest concern. Its a piffly amount compared to the savings in fuel and maintenance for high mileage/long distance drivers who drove diesels, compared to a petrol equivalent. If you want to blame somebody blame the motor industry for not doing more to reduce emissions, gaming the standards (ie doing what they needed to meet standards knowing that this was not delivered on the road), and providing better information for purchasers. Or the international standards organisations for getting their test procedures wrong. Ironically the VW emissions scandal has led to far more realistic test procedures and the latest diesel cars are far cleaner than previous models. Successive governments should have provided better consumer information but wanted to be technologically neutral. That could be applied more to the coalition government onwards where it was known the Euro 4 and Euro 5 that were introduced in the mid 00s and early 10s to address the problem were failing to deliver cleaner air in terms of nitrogen oxides (they were successful in reducing particulate matter). The simple messages should have been - driving up and down the motorway all day, diesel may be best, small journeys around town - petrol. Or drivers in urban areas who mainly did short journeys for not buying Fiat Cinequcentos (Top Gear reviewed city cars about ten years ago and finished the programme with a street parked with these as they were by far the best). But we are where we are and well done to Johnson for proposing the ULEZ and Khan for delivering it.

What a sweeping statement and gross generalisation. What do you base this on (a) a dislike of cyclists (b) your casual observations? Rather than demonise a significant number of people consider how we can get on better together. There is too much conflict in society egged on my nonsense alarmist articles in papers like the Standard.