One hundred and seventy motorcycle and scooter riders brought traffic to a halt for an hour on Friday 24th in many West End streets – in a ‘peaceful legal protest’ ride round Marble Arch.
The demonstration was planned to show Westminster City Council what riders think of a new scheme to charge £1.50 for each time a motorcycle is parked on a street throughout the central London borough which includes London’s West End. TC notes that all participants were given strict instructions to “abide by all traffic regulations and traffic signals” by Chairman Warren of the ‘no-to-bike-parking-fees’ campaign group which was recently formed to fight the attempt by Westminster to impose the new charging scheme.
Go to notobikeparkingfees.com for more from them or here for what Westminster have to say. TC notes that the council for one of the richest areas in Britian say this move represents ‘progress’ in developing motorcycle parking in urban centres. However, the underlying message for motorbike and scooter riders is stark. Pay £1.50 by mobile phone to park each time you do – or pay a £40-£60 fine which doubles after 14 days…
25th October 2008
by Leon Mannings
Swindon is the first UK council to stop paying for speed aka ‘safety’ cameras as they are not cutting deaths and serious injuries enough to justify a £320,000 per year investment of rate payers’ money.
This bold move is the first time a UK transport authority has had the courage to properly look at the grim facts about ongoing failures to reduce road deaths and dramatically redirect policy accordingly – instead of continuing a slavish acceptance of vogue theories that have been used to justify the spread of speed cameras throughout Britain. And following an invitation for LM to contribute to a TV debate on the issue for ITV West (link below), TC can reveal that there were two crucial drivers for the momentous decision. First was a council pledge to not only cut road deaths but check the facts to see if their policies were working. Second is having the courage to acknowledge that despite vogue theories about the great benefits of speed cameras, in practice the facts show that speed cameras have failed to cut road deaths in the area. These facts were explained by Councillor Peter Greenhalgh, the Conservative member for highways, transport and strategic planning. “What speed cameras are not doing is reducing the number of people being killed”. He went on to reveal the grim realities in practice. “In fact, the number of people dying on Swindon’s roads is actually on the increase”. Greenhalgh accepts that speed cameras catch people who are speeding and in this sense they work but more importantly acknowledges that “they are not stopping people dying on our roads”. This is however not surprising when the real causes of fatalities and serious injuries are properly examined. As the councillor added, “Government statistics show that only six per cent of deaths are caused by speeding.” A spokesman for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents said that it would be “monitoring the results” to see if any fatalities occurred on Swindon roads where cameras once stood. Go here to see LM’s contribution to TV coverage of this story by ITV West
24th October 2008
by Leon Mannings
Do you agree with the Transport Innovation Fund proposals? This is set to be The question for voters in Manchester’s referendum on plans for the largest Congestion Charging scheme on the planet. See the latest on this from the Drivers Alliance . Go here for the proponents’ view of plans.
20th October 2008
by Leon Mannings
Residents and businesses in Manchester have been asked whether they want to pay a new ‘Congestion Charge’ tax to drive on the public highways they have already paid for – in exchange for massive government ‘investment’ in public transport development. But that is merely in theory. In practice, as the Manchester Evening News points out today, consultation respondents were not asked anything of the sort. In practice they were invited to answer a much better spun but perhaps beguilingly soothing question: “Do you agree with the proposals?” And ‘the proposals’ that were mostly mentioned involve billions of pounds for lovely trams, buses and bicycle tracks. But TC notes that the hugely attractive sounding £2.75bn ‘investment’ carrot for Manchester to accept a new road user tax is via the government’s Transport Innovation Fund (TIF). And, in practice beneath the government’s spin, TIF is really just a clever scheme to ‘encourage’ city burghers to impose Road Pricing or Work Place Parking schemes, and so the huge investment sum is in practice for Manchester simply a funding package for a massive debt that will take thirty years to pay off… Meanwhile, the time has gone for Londoners to ‘have their say’ in consultations about the controversial Western extension of the capital’s Congestion Charging scheme – that the previous Mayor Livingstone imposed despite a massive 75% opposition to the extension plan at the time. TC notes that the new Mayor Johnson has at least made TfL offer a straight choice between keeping the extension or binning it. Go here to see. But TC suggests that the biggest questions to ask for the people of Manchester, London or indeed anywhere that road pricing is being considered are these. Has the London Congestion Charging scheme really reduced traffic congestion to an extent that justifies the extra tax on drivers? And, Who can be trusted to say what effect it will have on most peoples lives in Manchester? So far, the information offered in ‘support’ of consultations by promoters of the Manchester charging scheme and TfL have been met with significant criticism and doubts over claims regarding the actual and likely success of road user charging schemes in deliverring tangibly better transport for most people and goods. All TC will say for now is that TfL themselves admit that congestion is now as bad in London as it was before Congestion Charges were imposed…
20th October 2008
by Leon Mannings
Reducing the number of UK trains that are officially ‘overcrowded’ will be done in one deft stroke by the DfT as a new standard for “acceptable loading of passengers on trains” is set for operators. The new benchmark triples the number of passengers who can be ‘acceptably’ forced to stand by raising the standard from 10 per 100 seats to 30 standing per 100 seats. Centro, the public transport authority in the West Midlands, is reported to have complained to the National Audit Office (NAO) that this move “would result in even worse conditions on trains in the region and encourage people to travel by car”. Go here for more on this in The Times. And, although TC notes that UK rail passengers may feel that this enough bad news for one week, more looks likely soon as a £3.2 Billion gap in funding is heating up a row between Network Rail (NR) and it’s regulator, the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR). NR want £31bn to operate and improve the rail network over the next five years but ORR says it should only get £27.8bn. Go here to see more on this in the Financial Times. But the most distasteful news to reach TC today and perhaps for all rail travellers emerges from a study of passenger’s personal hygiene. It turns out that “one in four commuters” have unseemly and potentially toxic substances on their hands, having failed to wash them off after engagement in essential bodily functions that are generally best kept private. According to the BBC, the study from which this news emerges also suggests that the prevalence of this particular hazard gets worse the further North you travel. Go here for the full report.
15th October 2008
by Leon Mannings
The demonstration was planned to show Westminster City Council what riders think of a new scheme to charge £1.50 for each time a motorcycle is parked on a street throughout the central London borough which includes London’s West End. TC notes that all participants were given strict instructions to “abide by all traffic regulations and traffic signals” by Chairman Warren of the ‘no-to-bike-parking-fees’ campaign group which was recently formed to fight the attempt by Westminster to impose the new charging scheme.
Go to notobikeparkingfees.com for more from them or here for what Westminster have to say. TC notes that the council for one of the richest areas in Britian say this move represents ‘progress’ in developing motorcycle parking in urban centres. However, the underlying message for motorbike and scooter riders is stark. Pay £1.50 by mobile phone to park each time you do – or pay a £40-£60 fine which doubles after 14 days…
