Rockets

Given the comments coming out of Labour HQ about ULEZ in light of the Uxbridge by-election only a political fool would suggest they are not concerned about the perceptual impact this could have on their election campaign....a clear bump in the road they don't need (no matter how far ahead they are). Labour HQ knows they have to overturn a big majority and cannot afford any distractions. Uxbridge was a massive wake-up call.

It is often not what is in front you that causes the problems but what comes further down the road.....

Sadiq may be heading into more troubled waters as Labour HQ aren't at all happy that ULEZ is costing them votes at a time when they need to be showing that they are not a divided party and this sort of thing is behind them. It will be interesting to see if party politics come into play now, this regional issue has far reaching national implications. As I said before ULEZ is a huge political football and the stakes could not be higher.

That is beyond inconsiderate and they deserve a ticket.

It was in the judges' summing up...its a shot across the bow. But do you not think Labour HQs headache now actually gets worse on the back of this judgement? A result against them might have been the best result for them.

According to the BBC... The judge also takes a pop at the consultation process, but ultimately sides with Sadiq Khan again: "While the consultation conducted was not in-depth, it was lawful." Article share tools Councils will probably take heed as this is a bit of a shot across the bow from the judge.

Judge was critical of consultation process which could be interesting.

There used to be a really good one and I have no idea what happened to it as it used to plot really good cycling routes, it was long before all the cycle super highways so may have been closed down but it was brilliant.

Of course they are...Southwark see this ourely as a revenue generation tool....greewashing for revenue...they are the party of the working people....and putting those 48 wardens to work is solely because they need to give 48.people a new job - for this they should be applauded....

Bad driving is a problem. Bad cycling is a problem. I laugh when I see people saying it would be nice if some of the pro-driving lobby could acknowledge problems. Many do. Many fewer from the pro-cycling lobby will do the same on their side of the fence, they are far more likely to try and throw in a...Well cars kill more people than bikes do....perhaps the problem is on the anti-car lobby side. The fact this thread even exists is probably the best example of whataboutery out there....no one has ever done anything other than acknowledge there is bad driving out there but some seemingly want to try to make a very childish point.

Don't hold your breath...Southwark is one the Labour councils most likely to resist and fight against Keir and his sensible centrist politics. Momentum and the far left is still strong in Southwark and they don't have the best track record for listening to the electorate.

Joe, thanks for the clarification. Very glad to see that deliberate attempts to derail threads has been added to the list of no-nos. Following on from this isn't that part of Rye Lane closed to through traffic?

Yes that is a good thing when it comes to idling engines but not when it comes to delivery drivers. You can't make a delivery (other than small Amazon parcels) in two minutes so those who have shopping delivered within CPZ areas may find the drivers struggle. I think the "we have listened to businesses" is a smoke screen and this is about maximising revenue opportunities and targeting delivery drivers as an opportunity to raise more funds. Yesterday Keir was trying to tell everyone Labour are the party of working people....hmm....

The problem is there is no consistency in the new rules, some are now two minutes, some are now immediate. Perhaps designed to add confusion? Will also probably lead to confusion by traffic officers as different rules now apply in different circumstances for different bays. 5 minutes seemed to be a universally accepted sensible rule so seems like other motivations are behind this and I very much suspect that is more revenue generation. Is 5 mins not the rule everywhere else? I don't like it when councils deliberately go against the norm, like yellow line parking on Sundays which is enforced by some and not others.

Thats awful but be careful, that's not East Dulwich, and by the rules of the forum that could mean this thread is lounged.

I suspect the 5 minute grace peruod has reduced the number of tickets they can issue and with CPZs coming they know from other boroughs that they can increase the number of fines significantly. They have probably run the revenue numbers of 2 vs 5 minutes and like what they see. How charitable of them.....;-)

Have you checked when Community can do the install? It took us close to 9 months to get connected by BT after we placed the order. Do you a fibre cable to your property already as most require new cabling from the fibre box on the pavement outside your home.

I bet some people now wish they hadn't started the whole "I think this LTN subject should be lounged/is getting repetitive/is not relevant to ED" pleads to admin......hindsight hey....

Ha ha.....I wondered what sort of reaction I would get when the tactics you have used so often are played back to you...and you didn't disappoint......;-)

It was pretty dangerous to those 5 people killed.....which, as First Mate says, brings us back conveniently to the purpose of the thread....

Is this thread not repetitive to the thread Malumbu started on Road User standards and therefore should be amalgamated into a single thread under admins rules.....sorry couldn't resist.....I appear to have caught a dose of Malumbu lounge police-itis.;-)

Ha ha...where did I ever say that the cyclists were THE problem with danger on our roads....trying to put words into my mouth I see - a tactic oft used by many erstwhile posters on this forum! 😉 Also, your part clipping of quotes to suit your agenda is awfully reminiscent of tactics used by other some posters - hang on, might you be someone posting under a second account name? I am pretty sure you're not that daft as some of the new features of the forum might expose you and such behaviour is banned....... I could spend time trying to explain the concept of deaths per mile travelled and what that means for the cycling numbers you shared (and thanks for sharing that graph and clarifying that this is deaths accounted for by mode as I am shocked as to how high the cycling figures are/were, especially when compared to motorcycles) but you are clearly here for the argument so I will let you try to work it out for yourself...

By miles travelled HGV and vans are by far the highest killers on our roads - although your table may put that into question. Are the stats you quote deaths caused by? Then that 5 for cyclists is not good news for your argument and why people are so concerned about people cycling on paths. Everything else you quote is a motorised vehicle and if motorcycles kill 10 people and cycling 5 then the death per mile travelled stat will likely look very bad for cycling and may actually put it on a par with HGVs and vans. Not trying to be a gatekeeper of anything - just trying to highlight your brazen attempt to throw in a "yeah but..." distraction on a thread about cycling on paths....but thanks for your update because it actually puts into laser focus the need for people to stop cycling on paths.

I think it's only fair that the new thread carries the names of those pro-LTN lobbyists that worked so hard to make this happen! 😉 Perhaps we can create a virtual plaque like the founder's names on the wall of the Picturehouse with a roll of honour! It will be interesting to see how the various threads perform as that is probably a good indicator of how important these issues are in the local community. What was interesting was that many people who have been long-time members of the forum were starting to get involved in the discussion around CPZs so it wasn't just the usual pro-/anti-LTN suspects suggesting much of the content was news-worthy and of interest, which had been cited as a reason for some threads moving.

He probably needed to change from Marxist to socialist to ensure his longevity within his own party such is the purge of the Corbynistas....... This will trickle down to activities like CPZs and LTNs - if Labour thinks people are turning against their local and regional policies they will need to course-correct. In the same way Labour used the national agenda to steer the local council elections we are probably now going to see local issues steering the regional and national election agenda. Khan can't do a U-Turn on ULEZ can he - the fiscal hole he is in would get even deeper if he did surely? Gotta love politics but we are the political football in all of this!