What nobody seems to be mentioning when it comes to #Uxbridge is that the Tory candidate ran on an anti-ULEZ expansion ticket when it was actually Grant Shapps who made the ULEZ expansion a requirement of the TFL funding agreement. Doublespeak.
I live in the UK's most congested city, Edinburgh, yet we have the the best public transport system in Scotland and the city is about as walkable as they come. Cycling is getting there. A small, rich minority cause congestion for everyone else.
There are very few reasons for driving here or in central London. But very large chunks of the population don't have this opportunity to make the switch. Public transport and walking cycling provision in our regional cities is pathetic - compare Liverpool to any French city. That has to come first.
What Khan and others need to do is to offer this carrot, and fast. We could have fully funded HS2 if we hadn't frozen fuel duty over the last few years. We need to explain that building more roads induces more demand, rather than sating it.
Inducing more demand is a good thing.
That's how you get economic growth. Greater aggregate demand.
You're in danger of becoming the kinetic equivalent of the telephone sanitisers in Hitchhiker's Guide. It may add to the growth figures but wastes energy on doing nothing very useful much of the time.
Except the people driving from A to B aren't doing so for the sake of it, but because they want to do something that is productive to then.
Whether that be working, or shopping, or recreation.
Which of those do you want to do without? Which of those is a bad thing to have more of?
Because you are not only causing a traffic jam but also slowing everyone else down, including those who aren't so selfish.
I’m struggling to see how Sunak has concluded the next election isn’t a done deal based on these results.
Yes they held Uxbridge by 495 votes - but the swing against them was also massive and they overturned the biggest majority they ever have in Selby, a seat which indicates they can win in the seats they need to.
As far as I can see, all this confirms is that Labour won’t win a super majority but instead quite possibly a large majority.
Sunak sounds like Corbyn after Labour won in Peterborough, not looking at how the votes changed and how narrowly they held it.
The Tories are in big trouble.
They are. But he got an unexpected bit of good news to try to boost morale.
Interesting byelections results. In terms of next year's general election, they don't change anything...
...However, in the long term, it's very disturbing. It demonstrates the kind of opposition which can be rallied to environmental policies and how easily the Conservatives could be seduced into leading it.
Is ULEZ an environmental issue at the ballot, or a cost of living issue? I think the latter.
If the Tories think this opens the door to an anti-environment strategy for the GE they’re off their collective rocker. This is about brass in pocket, is will the GE be.
ULEZ and all these other similar pretend envirovental schemes are just politician's wanting to pretend to do something whilst taxing us more. The clowns don't look to introduce proper schemes that woudl work and actually save pollution but just knee jerk photo ops and money grubbing. Glasgow council are having to spend a fortune as most of their vehicles don't comply with the rules they introduced and all their trucks that take cars away are same and so they have to hire outside companies. You could not make up how useless and incompetent these people are.
Uxbridge does stand out, because it was expected that the Tories would lose all three but, this is cold comfort for the Tories who are still staring down the barrel of a heavy election defeat.
Uxbridge tells everyone what tactics to use. It won't be pretty. Just note how people are not voting/campaigning over petrol cars generally. That's because the target for stopping new sales is 2030. If it was 2024 there would be 10 million votes in it. ULEZ, a comparative triviality is NOW not future. Go figure, bet accordingly.
(Prediction: the 2030 petrol car date won't survive.)
I think it will (or at most, delayed by a year or two). The difference is - as someone else posted upthread - that ULEZ has happened too fast for people to plan and purchase accordingly to avoid it. Not only was the ICE ban announced further ahead than most people's car purchase interval, it also won't affect those who already had one.
In any case, as long as the car industry believes the date, it'll be a done deal as investment decisions in manufacturing EVs will long-since have been made.
Yes. I expect the deferring to be quietly announced within the next couple of years for those reasons, in line with the gradual deferring of all green targets both nationally and globally. (BTW as a top scientist was saying yesterday, a probably ghastly outcome in terms of temperature rise is already baked in).
Good morning, one and all. Interesting set up by election results, and of course congratulations.to HYUFC for calling Uxbridge correctly. However, there’s another feature that nobody appears to have commented upon. The LibDem vote in Selby and Uxbridge collapsed as did the Labour vote in the west country. Are we actually seeing tactical voting?
Yes.. and I think we did in previous high-profile by-elections too (eg North Shropshire where Lab was safely second but realised LDs were best-placed to hoover up disaffected Tories).
But that's easier in a by-election where (a) there's a smaller and more active turnout, (b) waaaay less national noise meaning the message can get out and (c) a willingness to dick around because the future govt isn't at stake. It's ambitious to think the same effect can be mobilised in a GE.
To the same degree certainly. I think it'd be reasonable to suggest it means Selby and Somerton are likely to be regained by the Tories, but similar seats around 10k or so are very much in play.
Some of the Tory losses might be interesting to watch at the General. I agree the norm would be for them to spring back, but if their polling remains in such a hole, a lucky by-election winner might be able to make a name for themselves.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
You are talking s***e as usual.
As someone who does 30,000 miles a year I take no s*** from a Sunday driver. I can tell you my worst blackspots. M42 around Solihull. M6 Junction 9 to the M54, the entire M25., the Brynglas Tunnel. I wouldn't dream of driving in central London anymore, Birmingham, an hour from Bristol Street to the M5. I could go on all day. If one needs to make an appointment one cannot rely on the motorcar, and use a smart motorway and if there has been an accident one can be, one, two, three hours late.
It is not the golden age of motoring, that is long gone.
You make my point for me. There's a reason you drive 30k miles a year, its because driving works, and nothing else does.
If one needs to make an appointment, the only thing one can rely upon is the motorcar, in almost the entire country.
Yes traffic may be shit in a few places. Shit happens. I can tell you absolutely eg if there's an accident on the M6, or the M56, or the M62 it can lead to sudden gridlock in towns used as a ratrun to avoid the motorway traffic, or worse a motorway closure.
But despite that, its still by far the best option.
The private motorcar, is in almost all circumstances, like democracy. Its the worst option available - except for all other options that have yet been tried.
But I am telling you it doesn't work. There are too many cars on the road. Private motoring is unsustainable from the practical point of view.
It wasn't like this 50 years ago, although it has been getting considerably worse year on year over the last 40. We are at gridlock. It has to change.
You may enjoy the freedom of the open road from a traffic jam, but I don't.
Here's a novel solution - build more roads.
If roads are at capacity, build extra capacity. Same as any other transportation.
Build new motorways, new roads, wider roads, extra lanes, new bridges - whatever is required.
Yes there's extra people on the roads, that's because *drumroll* there's extra people in the country. We used to have 50 million people in the country, we now have 70 million, but where's the new motorway capacity that has been built to cope with the influx of extra people living here?
I don't enjoy traffic jams, but they're also quite often easy to avoid, especially if you can be flexible with your hours and with modern phones or satnavs giving traffic alerts it can still be quite possible to be driving at reasonable speeds and traffic jams are the exception not the norm for me.
But yes, something has to change, and that something is extra road capacity. Not magicking away cars with pixie dust and pushbikes.
More roads generate more traffic. The M25 is proof in point. And coming from the North West do you never use the series of car parks prefaced with M6. (60, 61, 62 etc, etc) it is chaos for most of the day? P.S. I'd love an M4 Southern Relief Road at Newport, but that would have busted the entire transport budget for Wales for the next five years.
We need to get about, but as someone who uses private transport all day every day, the private car is unsustainable.
"More roads generate more traffic" - great!
More traffic is a good thing. It's more transportation, more activity, more convenience, more business. Why oppose that?
More traffic spread over more roads is less traffic per road, not more, overall like a supermarket opening extra checkouts not forcing everyone through just one checkout.
The private car is only unsustainable if you haven't considered every other option which is even less sustainable.
They do though. See LA - massive highways, huge congestion. Compare with Venice - no roads, no congestion.
You have a weird zero-sum take on this that doesn't consider how infrastructure interacts with demand.
Another example you see all the time: "There are no cyclists on xx High Street - why are we wasting money on a cycle lane ". One if the main reasons why people don't cycle is a lack of safe provision.
Los Angeles population 3.5 million Venice population 0.265 million
Yeah that's comparable. 🤦♂️
Drivers in LA will be travelling faster than cyclists in Venice, with or without congestion.
Not that congestion is that big of a problem in most of the country. Certainly not with enough road building.
Point of order: Los Angeles is much, much bigger than that. (There are 90 odd cities inside Los Angeles, and you are merely looking at one. Total Metro area population is 12-20 million people, depending on how you draw it.)
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
Essentially, yes. I think that in a few years time we will se significant safety improvements on Welsh roads, and I think opponents are actually - behind the "my personal freedom to do XYZ" smoke-screen - worried that it will be shown to work. Just as LTNs have been working for well over half a century now.
Driving at more than 20mph (or usually less) in residential roads is purely a cultural expectation, and that can change.
One of the UK road safety outliers is the proportion of people killed on our roads who are pedestrians, and a
In London we are not looking at 20mph for "tight residential streets" but for nearly all roads, including main roads into the centre. If this is the right policy then lets discuss it as 20mph is the speed limit for all roads in cities, not that 20mph is the speed limit for tight residential streets, as we are already well past that point.
(Very stupid if true. And if his board did not approve it, then potentially gross misconduct. Why do this shit when you're the world's richest man?)
The same reason the super rich dodge taxes they could easily afford to pay and argue over paying people. If you operate in a way that treats rules as a hindrance you shouldn't have to follow, as Musk often does, then you're likely to break one's that are perfectly reasonable as well as the dumb ones.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
Essentially, yes. I think that in a few years time we will se significant safety improvements on Welsh roads, and I think opponents are actually - behind the "my personal freedom to do XYZ" smoke-screen - worried that it will be shown to work. Just as LTNs have been working for well over half a century now.
Driving at more than 20mph (or usually less) in residential roads is purely a cultural expectation, and that can change.
One of the UK road safety outliers is the proportion of people killed on our roads who are pedestrians, and a
I have no problem with 20mph zones around schools and 'tight' residential streets but to mandate all 30mph zones as 20mph is ill thought out just as ULEZ is in outer London
One of the problems here in the Vale are older bus-riding residents enthusiastic about extending the 20 zones further than the Council's have planned. In my village a specific central village location was selected for the "20 is plenty" programme.. I have no problem with that. The oldsters are lobbying Vale Council to encompass the entire village with a twenty. The problem is, as in St Brides Major, "the village" encompasses a mile of countryside.
What nobody seems to be mentioning when it comes to #Uxbridge is that the Tory candidate ran on an anti-ULEZ expansion ticket when it was actually Grant Shapps who made the ULEZ expansion a requirement of the TFL funding agreement. Doublespeak.
The Tories are con artists, Labour failed to mention this loudly.
File under true, but doesnt matter. It is a vote against the people in charge and not listening, similar to the ones in Yorkshire and Somerset in that regard.
(Very stupid if true. And if his board did not approve it, then potentially gross misconduct. Why do this shit when you're the world's richest man?)
The same reason the super rich dodge taxes they could easily afford to pay and argue over paying people. If you operate in a way that treats rules as a hindrance you shouldn't have to follow, as Musk often does, then you're likely to break one's that are perfectly reasonable as well as the dumb ones.
Besides, you don't get to become rich and to stay rich by spending money you don't have to.
Just listening to JRM on R4 and it reminded me, thinking of his seat and the potential by election in Mid Beds, that hopefully Labour has learnt a lesson from these by elections re the swing to Lab & LDs.
If Labour fight Mid Beds hard the outcome is more likely to be a Tory hold. Just because you are in 2nd place does not make you the party with the best chance of winning if there is an anti Tory mood. Many Tories are more comfortable placing their protest vote with the LDs than Lab and the LDs are much, much, much better than Lab at by elections.
I don't believe that Lab can win seats like Mid Beds or JRMs seat. The LDs can, but not if Lab play a spoiler role.
Although more relevant to by elections it can impact seats in a GE and there is still a chance that Lab might need the LDs after the GE.
I refer the hon member to North Shropshire.. where second-placed Lab voters obligingly lent their votes to be rid of Paterson.
I live in the UK's most congested city, Edinburgh, yet we have the the best public transport system in Scotland and the city is about as walkable as they come. Cycling is getting there. A small, rich minority cause congestion for everyone else.
There are very few reasons for driving here or in central London. But very large chunks of the population don't have this opportunity to make the switch. Public transport and walking cycling provision in our regional cities is pathetic - compare Liverpool to any French city. That has to come first.
What Khan and others need to do is to offer this carrot, and fast. We could have fully funded HS2 if we hadn't frozen fuel duty over the last few years. We need to explain that building more roads induces more demand, rather than sating it.
Inducing more demand is a good thing.
That's how you get economic growth. Greater aggregate demand.
You're in danger of becoming the kinetic equivalent of the telephone sanitisers in Hitchhiker's Guide. It may add to the growth figures but wastes energy on doing nothing very useful much of the time.
I think he's trying to hit every economic fallacy in the textbook.
It's strange how many people consider driving good for economic activity. It's a cost, space and time sink. The only thing you can buy out of a car window is a McDonald's. An Edinburgh tram has 250 customers on it - that's equivalent to a a traffic jam nearly a mile long.
Perhaps my attitude to this comes from actually growing up in the countryside. It was amazing moving to a city and finding that thousands of people could spend their time having fun and spending money rather than driving for hours to get to the cinema in Inverness.
Oh great, now we are onto use trams as a solution.
There are a grand total of zero trams in my town, nor any demand for them. So which invisible tram should I magic up with my pixie dust?
Yes cities can be different. But most of the country IS NOT IN A CITY.
A large majority of people (80%) DO LIVE IN CITIES
AND THEY SHOULD ALL HAVE A TRAM
Meanwhile the inquiry into what went wrong with Edinburgh's trams is due any year now. I am beginning to suspect Lord Hardie want to publish it posthumously.
Great money earners, for chums of the establishment, these enquiries. Like winning the lottery.
I live in the UK's most congested city, Edinburgh, yet we have the the best public transport system in Scotland and the city is about as walkable as they come. Cycling is getting there. A small, rich minority cause congestion for everyone else.
There are very few reasons for driving here or in central London. But very large chunks of the population don't have this opportunity to make the switch. Public transport and walking cycling provision in our regional cities is pathetic - compare Liverpool to any French city. That has to come first.
What Khan and others need to do is to offer this carrot, and fast. We could have fully funded HS2 if we hadn't frozen fuel duty over the last few years. We need to explain that building more roads induces more demand, rather than sating it.
Inducing more demand is a good thing.
That's how you get economic growth. Greater aggregate demand.
You're in danger of becoming the kinetic equivalent of the telephone sanitisers in Hitchhiker's Guide. It may add to the growth figures but wastes energy on doing nothing very useful much of the time.
I think he's trying to hit every economic fallacy in the textbook.
It's strange how many people consider driving good for economic activity. It's a cost, space and time sink. The only thing you can buy out of a car window is a McDonald's. An Edinburgh tram has 250 customers on it - that's equivalent to a a traffic jam nearly a mile long.
Perhaps my attitude to this comes from actually growing up in the countryside. It was amazing moving to a city and finding that thousands of people could spend their time having fun and spending money rather than driving for hours to get to the cinema in Inverness.
I know what you mean only too well, growing up in a small burgh with an hour's bus ride to St Andrew Square.
TBF the Edinburgh and hinterland buses are much better, on the whole, than almost anywhere else, being cooncil buses, and the trams are finally beginning to be useful, though the delays were shameful - we should have had the Granton and Gilmerton lines long ago, and be planning for some of the outer towns too.
Interesting byelections results. In terms of next year's general election, they don't change anything...
...However, in the long term, it's very disturbing. It demonstrates the kind of opposition which can be rallied to environmental policies and how easily the Conservatives could be seduced into leading it.
Is ULEZ an environmental issue at the ballot, or a cost of living issue? I think the latter.
If the Tories think this opens the door to an anti-environment strategy for the GE they’re off their collective rocker. This is about brass in pocket, is will the GE be.
ULEZ and all these other similar pretend envirovental schemes are just politician's wanting to pretend to do something whilst taxing us more. The clowns don't look to introduce proper schemes that woudl work and actually save pollution but just knee jerk photo ops and money grubbing. Glasgow council are having to spend a fortune as most of their vehicles don't comply with the rules they introduced and all their trucks that take cars away are same and so they have to hire outside companies. You could not make up how useless and incompetent these people are.
ULEZs have been here forever.
Now it has a new name, some people are pretending that it is a new idea.
It's one simple idea - filtering to prevent through traffic, which is a core feature of pretty much every new housing development since 1965.
The first filtered traffic scheme I can recall was in Nottingham in the mid 1970s that I walked past on my way home from junior school. It is still there, and is excellent.
Opponents of ULEZs are denying the ratrun-free benefits of new developments, to those who live in pre-war housing.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
You are talking s***e as usual.
As someone who does 30,000 miles a year I take no s*** from a Sunday driver. I can tell you my worst blackspots. M42 around Solihull. M6 Junction 9 to the M54, the entire M25., the Brynglas Tunnel. I wouldn't dream of driving in central London anymore, Birmingham, an hour from Bristol Street to the M5. I could go on all day. If one needs to make an appointment one cannot rely on the motorcar, and use a smart motorway and if there has been an accident one can be, one, two, three hours late.
It is not the golden age of motoring, that is long gone.
You make my point for me. There's a reason you drive 30k miles a year, its because driving works, and nothing else does.
If one needs to make an appointment, the only thing one can rely upon is the motorcar, in almost the entire country.
Yes traffic may be shit in a few places. Shit happens. I can tell you absolutely eg if there's an accident on the M6, or the M56, or the M62 it can lead to sudden gridlock in towns used as a ratrun to avoid the motorway traffic, or worse a motorway closure.
But despite that, its still by far the best option.
The private motorcar, is in almost all circumstances, like democracy. Its the worst option available - except for all other options that have yet been tried.
But I am telling you it doesn't work. There are too many cars on the road. Private motoring is unsustainable from the practical point of view.
It wasn't like this 50 years ago, although it has been getting considerably worse year on year over the last 40. We are at gridlock. It has to change.
You may enjoy the freedom of the open road from a traffic jam, but I don't.
Here's a novel solution - build more roads.
If roads are at capacity, build extra capacity. Same as any other transportation.
Build new motorways, new roads, wider roads, extra lanes, new bridges - whatever is required.
Yes there's extra people on the roads, that's because *drumroll* there's extra people in the country. We used to have 50 million people in the country, we now have 70 million, but where's the new motorway capacity that has been built to cope with the influx of extra people living here?
I don't enjoy traffic jams, but they're also quite often easy to avoid, especially if you can be flexible with your hours and with modern phones or satnavs giving traffic alerts it can still be quite possible to be driving at reasonable speeds and traffic jams are the exception not the norm for me.
But yes, something has to change, and that something is extra road capacity. Not magicking away cars with pixie dust and pushbikes.
More roads generate more traffic. The M25 is proof in point. And coming from the North West do you never use the series of car parks prefaced with M6. (60, 61, 62 etc, etc) it is chaos for most of the day? P.S. I'd love an M4 Southern Relief Road at Newport, but that would have busted the entire transport budget for Wales for the next five years.
We need to get about, but as someone who uses private transport all day every day, the private car is unsustainable.
"More roads generate more traffic" - great!
More traffic is a good thing. It's more transportation, more activity, more convenience, more business. Why oppose that?
More traffic spread over more roads is less traffic per road, not more, overall like a supermarket opening extra checkouts not forcing everyone through just one checkout.
The private car is only unsustainable if you haven't considered every other option which is even less sustainable.
They do though. See LA - massive highways, huge congestion. Compare with Venice - no roads, no congestion.
You have a weird zero-sum take on this that doesn't consider how infrastructure interacts with demand.
Another example you see all the time: "There are no cyclists on xx High Street - why are we wasting money on a cycle lane ". One if the main reasons why people don't cycle is a lack of safe provision.
Los Angeles population 3.5 million Venice population 0.265 million
Yeah that's comparable. 🤦♂️
Drivers in LA will be travelling faster than cyclists in Venice, with or without congestion.
Not that congestion is that big of a problem in most of the country. Certainly not with enough road building.
Point of order: Los Angeles is much, much bigger than that. (There are 90 odd cities inside Los Angeles, and you are merely looking at one. Total Metro area population is 12-20 million people, depending on how you draw it.)
Yes, but so, I think, is Venice. Comparing the size of urban areas is fraught with difficulties. But LA is clearly much bigger than Venice however you measure it. And Venice is clearly a special case.
I’m struggling to see how Sunak has concluded the next election isn’t a done deal based on these results.
Yes they held Uxbridge by 495 votes - but the swing against them was also massive and they overturned the biggest majority they ever have in Selby, a seat which indicates they can win in the seats they need to.
As far as I can see, all this confirms is that Labour won’t win a super majority but instead quite possibly a large majority.
Sunak sounds like Corbyn after Labour won in Peterborough, not looking at how the votes changed and how narrowly they held it.
The Tories are in big trouble.
I suspect the Tory takeaway will be more absurd, bad for the nation, negative s*** wins elections. Now that might be good for Lab and LD.
Just listening to JRM on R4 and it reminded me, thinking of his seat and the potential by election in Mid Beds, that hopefully Labour has learnt a lesson from these by elections re the swing to Lab & LDs.
If Labour fight Mid Beds hard the outcome is more likely to be a Tory hold. Just because you are in 2nd place does not make you the party with the best chance of winning if there is an anti Tory mood. Many Tories are more comfortable placing their protest vote with the LDs than Lab and the LDs are much, much, much better than Lab at by elections.
I don't believe that Lab can win seats like Mid Beds or JRMs seat. The LDs can, but not if Lab play a spoiler role.
Although more relevant to by elections it can impact seats in a GE and there is still a chance that Lab might need the LDs after the GE.
Mogg's seat was Labour between 1997 and 2010.
If Labour don't target it its effectively an admission they cannot win a majority.
It was a new seat in 2010 @another_richard. I don't know how it compares to the old seat(s), but realistically if there were a by election here who do you think the main challenger would be?
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
Isn't that a teeny weeny bit depressing, though?
After all, most of those measures are about reducing the harms that cars do. ULEZ attempts to deal with some specific localised air pollution. Reducing speed limits makes accidents less likely and less harmful. That sort of thing. Tilting the balance between the benefits drivers get from driving and the costs that society pays.
One lesson of Uxbridge is that, at least in some seats, that's politically unacceptable. And whilst there's something in the "wrong moment" argument, the experience is that car restraint measures are rarely popular in advance. And there are plenty of other measures that any government is going to have to take in the next few years.
Are will still so pampered as a nation that we're going to spit out any nasty medicine?
The intention of a policy - reduction of pollution - may be good. While the implementation/methodology is bad.
What is politically unacceptable is saying that “those people who are poor and screwed over by this policy - well, the aim of the policy is good. So on consideration, and after some thought FUCK YOU, FUCKERS”.
Something to understand as well. Those with cars in
I did a YouGov which asked if I approved of the decriminalization of cannabis.
Well I don't.
I support its legalisation.
What I oppose is the idea of decriminalization - the idea of something being illegal but the law not being applied.
Whilst I broadly agree with your point, I think you are slightly misunderstanding what decriminalisation is.
It doesn't mean "being illegal but the law not being applied". It means it becomes a civil rather than criminal offence.
So, for example, a parking ticket is a civil rather than criminal matter - poor parking doesn't give you a criminal record. But if you park on a double yellow line, you'll fairly quickly learn that the (civil) law is still very much applied.
The fatal flaw in decriminalisation is that they real problems of drugs relate to supply. Not giving someone a minor criminal record for having a splif is a fail - but the real harm to society is the huge amounts of easy money fed into the criminal system.
I can't say I'm surprised that the government should perform worse than its poll rating, in a by-election. Governments usually do.
Absolutely, especially against the Lib Dems who remain masters of by election campaigns.
I think Rishi will think, it could have been worse. Murmurings about replacing him, never loud, will die away. But the Tories are still on track for a heavy defeat. I am currently estimating them losing 100-120 seats, not a wipe out by any means but a loss of power that may well get worse in the election after that. The pendulum has turned.
CON 240 seats or so at the next GE is entirely plausible and in line with my own expectations. So not a wipeout.
So LAB to get the overall majority or maybe fall just short, Keir will be PM in any case as LAB will do a deal with LDs, their 20-25 seats will be enough to provide a stable government through confidence and supply.
Overall a very bad night for the Conservatives, but it could have been worse. My take from this and the local elections, is that there is a certain kind of seat, suburban, or semi-urban, well-off but not liberal, where the Conservative vote is pretty sticky. Places like Uxbridge, Broxbourne, Old Bexley, Dartford, Harlow, Basildon, the seats in Dudley. The difference in by-elections and local elections in the mid 90's is that you could not point to anywhere that the Conservatives were bucking the trend.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
You are talking s***e as usual.
As someone who does 30,000 miles a year I take no s*** from a Sunday driver. I can tell you my worst blackspots. M42 around Solihull. M6 Junction 9 to the M54, the entire M25., the Brynglas Tunnel. I wouldn't dream of driving in central London anymore, Birmingham, an hour from Bristol Street to the M5. I could go on all day. If one needs to make an appointment one cannot rely on the motorcar, and use a smart motorway and if there has been an accident one can be, one, two, three hours late.
It is not the golden age of motoring, that is long gone.
You make my point for me. There's a reason you drive 30k miles a year, its because driving works, and nothing else does.
If one needs to make an appointment, the only thing one can rely upon is the motorcar, in almost the entire country.
Yes traffic may be shit in a few places. Shit happens. I can tell you absolutely eg if there's an accident on the M6, or the M56, or the M62 it can lead to sudden gridlock in towns used as a ratrun to avoid the motorway traffic, or worse a motorway closure.
But despite that, its still by far the best option.
The private motorcar, is in almost all circumstances, like democracy. Its the worst option available - except for all other options that have yet been tried.
But I am telling you it doesn't work. There are too many cars on the road. Private motoring is unsustainable from the practical point of view.
It wasn't like this 50 years ago, although it has been getting considerably worse year on year over the last 40. We are at gridlock. It has to change.
You may enjoy the freedom of the open road from a traffic jam, but I don't.
Here's a novel solution - build more roads.
If roads are at capacity, build extra capacity. Same as any other transportation.
Build new motorways, new roads, wider roads, extra lanes, new bridges - whatever is required.
Yes there's extra people on the roads, that's because *drumroll* there's extra people in the country. We used to have 50 million people in the country, we now have 70 million, but where's the new motorway capacity that has been built to cope with the influx of extra people living here?
I don't enjoy traffic jams, but they're also quite often easy to avoid, especially if you can be flexible with your hours and with modern phones or satnavs giving traffic alerts it can still be quite possible to be driving at reasonable speeds and traffic jams are the exception not the norm for me.
But yes, something has to change, and that something is extra road capacity. Not magicking away cars with pixie dust and pushbikes.
More roads generate more traffic. The M25 is proof in point. And coming from the North West do you never use the series of car parks prefaced with M6. (60, 61, 62 etc, etc) it is chaos for most of the day? P.S. I'd love an M4 Southern Relief Road at Newport, but that would have busted the entire transport budget for Wales for the next five years.
We need to get about, but as someone who uses private transport all day every day, the private car is unsustainable.
"More roads generate more traffic" - great!
More traffic is a good thing. It's more transportation, more activity, more convenience, more business. Why oppose that?
More traffic spread over more roads is less traffic per road, not more, overall like a supermarket opening extra checkouts not forcing everyone through just one checkout.
The private car is only unsustainable if you haven't considered every other option which is even less sustainable.
They do though. See LA - massive highways, huge congestion. Compare with Venice - no roads, no congestion.
You have a weird zero-sum take on this that doesn't consider how infrastructure interacts with demand.
Another example you see all the time: "There are no cyclists on xx High Street - why are we wasting money on a cycle lane ". One if the main reasons why people don't cycle is a lack of safe provision.
Los Angeles population 3.5 million Venice population 0.265 million
Yeah that's comparable. 🤦♂️
Drivers in LA will be travelling faster than cyclists in Venice, with or without congestion.
Not that congestion is that big of a problem in most of the country. Certainly not with enough road building.
Point of order: Los Angeles is much, much bigger than that. (There are 90 odd cities inside Los Angeles, and you are merely looking at one. Total Metro area population is 12-20 million people, depending on how you draw it.)
Yes, but so, I think, is Venice. Comparing the size of urban areas is fraught with difficulties. But LA is clearly much bigger than Venice however you measure it. And Venice is clearly a special case.
There's a Venice in LA which is not making this argument as clear as it might be. Unless that's what people are on about
Uxbridge reminds us the next GE is not a done deal, and if you want the Tories out you need to get out and vote, and take care as to where you place your cross.
In some respects a better night for anti-Tories than the clean sweep we expected.
That Tories will want to weaponise that Uxbridge result. The problem is, the Tories are committed to banning new ICEs from 2030 (I know that’s to do with climate rather than air quality, but it’s the same effect). I wonder if they might now ditch that and dare Labour to keep that pledge.
It's not an ICE ban as PHEVs will still be available until 2035. There probably won't be any pure ICE offerings from any major OEMs anyway by then so it's irrelevant what this scumbag government does or doesn't do on the issue.
Here in Spain I've hired my usual Fiat Panda. Except this is a new one with the mild hybrid system. Which is *interesting*. Previous 1.2 4-pot replaced by 1.0 3-pot turbo with a bigger battery and now 6 gears.
What that means is that instead of a drivetrain which would run forever, we have a ludicrous thing with a power band absurdly narrow. And a nagging indicator for when you should change gear. Which isn't when it says. And the mild hybrid? As well as cutting the engine at traffic lights, it also advises you to coast in neutral - again with the engine off.
Frankly they have ruined a thoroughly good car. I am an advocate for proper hybrids and EVs, but this is my first "mild" hybrid and its bloody awful.
Are you going to do a youtube video on it ?
Sounds like you should given the issues.
My Wife's EV is great. A good car which gives excellent performance and, for the extra we paid for it, the saving on fuel is large
I wasn't going to do - taking a month off YouTube to recharge the batteries and to think about how I rejig the channel going forward. But now you come to mention it, thats a very good idea. Small petrol hybrid vs EV. One is horrible to drive, the other is brilliant to drive.
I can't stress enough that once you've changed to an electric drivetrain, you'll never want to go back to gears. Even if the running cost was the same - and as you point out it isn't - the driving experience of an EV is just so much better.
There are plenty of small hybrids that are fine to drive. Series hybrids etc…
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
When I switched to cycle commute, I consdiered e-bike, but instead bought a conventional for two main reasons: - cost - exercise
Before purchase, I tried the route on my wife's hybrid and decided it was very doable, being largely flat. I knew the cycle would take a bit more time* compared to driving and wanted that to be compensated for with exercise so I could - and I have - cut down on time spent on other exercise in the week.
I'd switch though if either my commute got longer** or I started to struggle with the cycle as I get older.
*the five miles closest to work and 3 miles closest to home are actually faster on a bike. Some years ago I lived within 5 miles of the office in a different direction and that was faster by bike than by car, too. currently it's the 8 mile stretch in the middle where the cars can average ~50mph and I can do probably an everage of 18-19 that makes the car quicker.
**my 15 mile each way cycle is about the limit I'd want to do on a conventional bike, I think. Last year due to a closure on my route I had a substantal detour that took it up to 18 miles and that was a bit too much, both in time and energy on a conventional bike - I stuck with it, but only because I knew it was a short term thing. 15 miles I can do in under an hour door to door, with traffic and stopping included. The 18 miles on a different route was closer to 1:15
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
I have an e-cargo bike. I have had 4 small children in it - more than I've ever had in a car. Alternatively several people can ride their own bicycles! I know this is a very difficult solution to think of. I can fit a hell of a lot of shopping in it. For journeys up to 5 km it's easily quicker and more convenient than a car, also for most journeys up to 8km or more. Admittedly I live in a city (as do millions of others). For someone to think a bicycle is only for leisure is pretty bizarre.
As is believing that because more electric cars are coming in the future that means there are no environmental problems.
Same here. We live in a small rural town. Last year I bought an e-cargo bike. Since then I think I’ve driven the car three times in the whole year, and the bike pretty much every day on the school run (6 miles there and back on hilly Cotswold roads). The bike is cheaper, faster and all round more convenient. We almost certainly won’t replace the car when it dies.
The main thing holding cycling back in Britain is lack of proper infrastructure. It’s slowly being built in inner cities and is creeping out to the suburbs and occasional peri-urban/rural clusters. There was a really interesting (and largely unreported) development in south Oxfordshire this week where councillors turned down their own council’s fully funded £300m relief road plan, largely on the basis that building more roads just leads to more traffic. Given the demographic there is an opportunity to do something new and much less car centric there instead.
Just listening to JRM on R4 and it reminded me, thinking of his seat and the potential by election in Mid Beds, that hopefully Labour has learnt a lesson from these by elections re the swing to Lab & LDs.
If Labour fight Mid Beds hard the outcome is more likely to be a Tory hold. Just because you are in 2nd place does not make you the party with the best chance of winning if there is an anti Tory mood. Many Tories are more comfortable placing their protest vote with the LDs than Lab and the LDs are much, much, much better than Lab at by elections.
I don't believe that Lab can win seats like Mid Beds or JRMs seat. The LDs can, but not if Lab play a spoiler role.
Although more relevant to by elections it can impact seats in a GE and there is still a chance that Lab might need the LDs after the GE.
I refer the hon member to North Shropshire.. where second-placed Lab voters obligingly lent their votes to be rid of Paterson.
Exactly. Worryingly Lab seem to be getting too excited by places like Mid Bed and wanting to get stuck in. To do so would be very silly and counter productive.
I can't say I'm surprised that the government should perform worse than its poll rating, in a by-election. Governments usually do.
Absolutely, especially against the Lib Dems who remain masters of by election campaigns.
I think Rishi will think, it could have been worse. Murmurings about replacing him, never loud, will die away. But the Tories are still on track for a heavy defeat. I am currently estimating them losing 100-120 seats, not a wipe out by any means but a loss of power that may well get worse in the election after that. The pendulum has turned.
CON 240 seats or so at the next GE is entirely plausible and in line with my own expectations. So not a wipeout.
So LAB to get the overall majority or maybe fall just short, Keir will be PM in any case as LAB will do a deal with LDs, their 20-25 seats will be enough to provide a stable government through confidence and supply.
Overall a very bad night for the Conservatives, but it could have been worse. My take from this and the local elections, is that there is a certain kind of seat, suburban, or semi-urban, well-off but not liberal, where the Conservative vote is pretty sticky. Places like Uxbridge, Broxbourne, Old Bexley, Dartford, Harlow, Basildon, the seats in Dudley. The difference in by-elections and local elections in the mid 90's is that you could not point to anywhere that the Conservatives were bucking the trend.
Fair point, but how many seats like that are there? More than the Liberals had when they retreated to their celtic redoubts, but nowhere near enough to win.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
I've never understood the "that's cheating" meme. It's assistance, which keeps movement going and enables travel over longer distances where safe travel is possible.
Plus in this country (for example) we have many millions of people who *can't* get a driving license due to eg age or medical conditions. An example is epilepsy. They (which may eventually include me depending on diabetic complications of eyesight) need safe and practical forms of travel.
Given that in this country we have invested almost nothing in non-car mobility except for a spurt in the 1930s, one in the 1970s, and another one in the last decade or so, we have a long way to go to catch up.
The infrastructure is cheap. Rishi's bribe to motorists of cutting 5p off fuel taxes for one year cost £2.4bn, which is more than the total spent on mobility infrastructure in London over 20 years.
Yet all we hear from the moto-lobby is an unending whinging noise.
As others may have said, a footnote is the feeble showing of Reform/Reclaim when it comes to a crunch. L/LD mutual discipline held up well, but as expected Green voters ignored the progressive alliance stuff (their Uxbridge votes were enough to give the antiULEZ candidate victory, in fact) - in Somerton they were over 10%.
I live in the UK's most congested city, Edinburgh, yet we have the the best public transport system in Scotland and the city is about as walkable as they come. Cycling is getting there. A small, rich minority cause congestion for everyone else.
There are very few reasons for driving here or in central London. But very large chunks of the population don't have this opportunity to make the switch. Public transport and walking cycling provision in our regional cities is pathetic - compare Liverpool to any French city. That has to come first.
What Khan and others need to do is to offer this carrot, and fast. We could have fully funded HS2 if we hadn't frozen fuel duty over the last few years. We need to explain that building more roads induces more demand, rather than sating it.
Inducing more demand is a good thing.
That's how you get economic growth. Greater aggregate demand.
You're in danger of becoming the kinetic equivalent of the telephone sanitisers in Hitchhiker's Guide. It may add to the growth figures but wastes energy on doing nothing very useful much of the time.
I think he's trying to hit every economic fallacy in the textbook.
It's strange how many people consider driving good for economic activity. It's a cost, space and time sink. The only thing you can buy out of a car window is a McDonald's. An Edinburgh tram has 250 customers on it - that's equivalent to a a traffic jam nearly a mile long.
Perhaps my attitude to this comes from actually growing up in the countryside. It was amazing moving to a city and finding that thousands of people could spend their time having fun and spending money rather than driving for hours to get to the cinema in Inverness.
Oh great, now we are onto use trams as a solution.
There are a grand total of zero trams in my town, nor any demand for them. So which invisible tram should I magic up with my pixie dust?
Yes cities can be different. But most of the country IS NOT IN A CITY.
A large majority of people (80%) DO LIVE IN CITIES
AND THEY SHOULD ALL HAVE A TRAM
The problem you have is that even in cities that do have a tram system the coverage is often poor. So in Nottingham when the system was introduced a decade ago they charged all the local firms £250 a year per parking space to pay for it.
Boots with 3000 spaces that would have been liable pointed out that the trams didn't run close to their factory and that many of their employees worked shift patterns that weren't served by the trams. They asked for discussions over the levy which would cost them £750,000 a year.
The council said no so Boots - whose factory straddled the city/county boundary - moved their car park from one end of the site to the other, moving it out of the city and avoiding the levy entirely
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
You are talking s***e as usual.
As someone who does 30,000 miles a year I take no s*** from a Sunday driver. I can tell you my worst blackspots. M42 around Solihull. M6 Junction 9 to the M54, the entire M25., the Brynglas Tunnel. I wouldn't dream of driving in central London anymore, Birmingham, an hour from Bristol Street to the M5. I could go on all day. If one needs to make an appointment one cannot rely on the motorcar, and use a smart motorway and if there has been an accident one can be, one, two, three hours late.
It is not the golden age of motoring, that is long gone.
You make my point for me. There's a reason you drive 30k miles a year, its because driving works, and nothing else does.
If one needs to make an appointment, the only thing one can rely upon is the motorcar, in almost the entire country.
Yes traffic may be shit in a few places. Shit happens. I can tell you absolutely eg if there's an accident on the M6, or the M56, or the M62 it can lead to sudden gridlock in towns used as a ratrun to avoid the motorway traffic, or worse a motorway closure.
But despite that, its still by far the best option.
The private motorcar, is in almost all circumstances, like democracy. Its the worst option available - except for all other options that have yet been tried.
But I am telling you it doesn't work. There are too many cars on the road. Private motoring is unsustainable from the practical point of view.
It wasn't like this 50 years ago, although it has been getting considerably worse year on year over the last 40. We are at gridlock. It has to change.
You may enjoy the freedom of the open road from a traffic jam, but I don't.
Here's a novel solution - build more roads.
If roads are at capacity, build extra capacity. Same as any other transportation.
Build new motorways, new roads, wider roads, extra lanes, new bridges - whatever is required.
Yes there's extra people on the roads, that's because *drumroll* there's extra people in the country. We used to have 50 million people in the country, we now have 70 million, but where's the new motorway capacity that has been built to cope with the influx of extra people living here?
I don't enjoy traffic jams, but they're also quite often easy to avoid, especially if you can be flexible with your hours and with modern phones or satnavs giving traffic alerts it can still be quite possible to be driving at reasonable speeds and traffic jams are the exception not the norm for me.
But yes, something has to change, and that something is extra road capacity. Not magicking away cars with pixie dust and pushbikes.
More roads generate more traffic. The M25 is proof in point. And coming from the North West do you never use the series of car parks prefaced with M6. (60, 61, 62 etc, etc) it is chaos for most of the day? P.S. I'd love an M4 Southern Relief Road at Newport, but that would have busted the entire transport budget for Wales for the next five years.
We need to get about, but as someone who uses private transport all day every day, the private car is unsustainable.
"More roads generate more traffic" - great!
More traffic is a good thing. It's more transportation, more activity, more convenience, more business. Why oppose that?
More traffic spread over more roads is less traffic per road, not more, overall like a supermarket opening extra checkouts not forcing everyone through just one checkout.
The private car is only unsustainable if you haven't considered every other option which is even less sustainable.
They do though. See LA - massive highways, huge congestion. Compare with Venice - no roads, no congestion.
You have a weird zero-sum take on this that doesn't consider how infrastructure interacts with demand.
Another example you see all the time: "There are no cyclists on xx High Street - why are we wasting money on a cycle lane ". One if the main reasons why people don't cycle is a lack of safe provision.
Los Angeles population 3.5 million Venice population 0.265 million
Yeah that's comparable. 🤦♂️
Drivers in LA will be travelling faster than cyclists in Venice, with or without congestion.
Not that congestion is that big of a problem in most of the country. Certainly not with enough road building.
Point of order: Los Angeles is much, much bigger than that. (There are 90 odd cities inside Los Angeles, and you are merely looking at one. Total Metro area population is 12-20 million people, depending on how you draw it.)
Yes, but so, I think, is Venice. Comparing the size of urban areas is fraught with difficulties. But LA is clearly much bigger than Venice however you measure it. And Venice is clearly a special case.
There's a Venice in LA which is not making this argument as clear as it might be. Unless that's what people are on about
It's actually slightly larger area wise than the main island of Venice Italy.
I always wonder about things like that. It's not dissimilar to Jo Swinson's exuberant self-confidence before the election that saw her lose her own seat.
As others may have said, a footnote is the feeble showing of Reform/Reclaim when it comes to a crunch. L/LD mutual discipline held up well, but as expected Green voters ignored the progressive alliance stuff (their Uxbridge votes were enough to give the antiULEZ candidate victory, in fact) - in Somerton they were over 10%.
Uxbridge does stand out, because it was expected that the Tories would lose all three but, this is cold comfort for the Tories who are still staring down the barrel of a heavy election defeat.
Uxbridge tells everyone what tactics to use. It won't be pretty. Just note how people are not voting/campaigning over petrol cars generally. That's because the target for stopping new sales is 2030. If it was 2024 there would be 10 million votes in it. ULEZ, a comparative triviality is NOW not future. Go figure, bet accordingly.
(Prediction: the 2030 petrol car date won't survive.)
A European angle. There is massive pressure in the German car industry for a delay to end of ICE. They have a big battery supply problem - having left investment in battery factories rather late.
I think it quite probable that they will get their way. Which means, since the Germany dominates economic matters in the EU, that the EU would probably follow suit.
So the next government might have the situation of pressure from the EU to harmonise on a later end of ICE date.
Good morning, one and all. Interesting set up by election results, and of course congratulations.to HYUFC for calling Uxbridge correctly. However, there’s another feature that nobody appears to have commented upon. The LibDem vote in Selby and Uxbridge collapsed as did the Labour vote in the west country. Are we actually seeing tactical voting?
Yes.. and I think we did in previous high-profile by-elections too (eg North Shropshire where Lab was safely second but realised LDs were best-placed to hoover up disaffected Tories).
But that's easier in a by-election where (a) there's a smaller and more active turnout, (b) waaaay less national noise meaning the message can get out and (c) a willingness to dick around because the future govt isn't at stake. It's ambitious to think the same effect can be mobilised in a GE.
To the same degree certainly. I think it'd be reasonable to suggest it means Selby and Somerton are likely to be regained by the Tories, but similar seats around 10k or so are very much in play.
Given that Somerton and Frome had a history of voting LD more often than that, and the successor seat of Glastonbury and Somerton is likewise inclined, I doubt whether it will revert to the Conservatives. Shropshire North will be a much tougher prospect, for the same reason in reverse.
Labour also has a a decent chance of holding the new Selby seat, as the successor seat is slightly more favourable to them than the old Selby and Ainsty seat.
As others may have said, a footnote is the feeble showing of Reform/Reclaim when it comes to a crunch. L/LD mutual discipline held up well, but as expected Green voters ignored the progressive alliance stuff (their Uxbridge votes were enough to give the antiULEZ candidate victory, in fact) - in Somerton they were over 10%.
Loving the name of the Uxbridge Green candidate though!
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
Isn't that a teeny weeny bit depressing, though?
After all, most of those measures are about reducing the harms that cars do. ULEZ attempts to deal with some specific localised air pollution. Reducing speed limits makes accidents less likely and less harmful. That sort of thing. Tilting the balance between the benefits drivers get from driving and the costs that society pays.
One lesson of Uxbridge is that, at least in some seats, that's politically unacceptable. And whilst there's something in the "wrong moment" argument, the experience is that car restraint measures are rarely popular in advance. And there are plenty of other measures that any government is going to have to take in the next few years.
Are will still so pampered as a nation that we're going to spit out any nasty medicine?
The intention of a policy - reduction of pollution - may be good. While the implementation/methodology is bad.
What is politically unacceptable is saying that “those people who are poor and screwed over by this policy - well, the aim of the policy is good. So on consideration, and after some thought FUCK YOU, FUCKERS”.
ULEZ has become, in the eyes of some poorer people, a tax which has little or no cost on the well off. Who own expensive, frequently updated cars. And/Or can afford to life in the areas with the best public transport connections to their white collar jobs and don’t need a vehicle for work.
Something to understand as well. Those with cars in the “next tranche”, that tightening ULEZ will ban, are convinced that the next step is coming very soon and will be done in the same way. So far more than the 10% of car owners with non compliant vehicles are upset about this.
It is perfectly possible to come up with a way to reduce emissions that doesn’t do this. The ULEZ implementation was picked because it was cheap and easy - for the politicians and those running the system. Producer interest vs Consumer.
What would you suggest?
In nearly all the studies, the majority of the non CO2 pollutants were emitted by small sub categories of vehicles.
A while back, ancient rattling buses were a big offender. Which was why the then Major of London ordered hybrid replacements.
Heavy goods vehicles were another.
A subset of cars and small vehicles - badly maintained and clapped out - was another.
So one approach would be incremental on the worst actual offenders. Combined with a better directed scrapage scheme.
Consider these two tales - a relative drives a £90k EV. No congestion charge. No problems with ULEZ of course. When he wants to park in central London, he finds a dedicated EV charging bay - even if he’s doesn’t need to charge.
A friend of my wife lives next door to Uxbridge. 1st generation immigrant. Fought her way up to a low level white collar job. Nearly everyone around her is in manual or factory type work. She lives in a house that is close to Heathrow and with poor public transport links - because that is what she could afford. The bus is useless - since the conversion of bus lanes into cycle lanes, he buses move at the speed of traffic. On the high streets. If you live where she does, you have a car. So she pays car tax, fuel tax, parking etc.
Converting bus lanes to cycle lanes seems an odd thing to do. Aren't bus lanes generally also used as cycle lanes anyway?
I'd be interested to see a couple of examples of that - the usual best solution is to reduce parking lanes or traffic lanes. as we saw on Kensington High Street until RHBC turned the cycle track back into car-parking which threw all the motor vehicles and several thousand cycles back together in the former motor lanes.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
When I switched to cycle commute, I consdiered e-bike, but instead bought a conventional for two main reasons: - cost - exercise
Before purchase, I tried the route on my wife's hybrid and decided it was very doable, being largely flat. I knew the cycle would take a bit more time* compared to driving and wanted that to be compensated for with exercise so I could - and I have - cut down on time spent on other exercise in the week.
I'd switch though if either my commute got longer** or I started to struggle with the cycle as I get older.
*the five miles closest to work and 3 miles closest to home are actually faster on a bike. Some years ago I lived within 5 miles of the office in a different direction and that was faster by bike than by car, too. currently it's the 8 mile stretch in the middle where the cars can average ~50mph and I can do probably an everage of 18-19 that makes the car quicker.
**my 15 mile each way cycle is about the limit I'd want to do on a conventional bike, I think. Last year due to a closure on my route I had a substantal detour that took it up to 18 miles and that was a bit too much, both in time and energy on a conventional bike - I stuck with it, but only because I knew it was a short term thing. 15 miles I can do in under an hour door to door, with traffic and stopping included. The 18 miles on a different route was closer to 1:15
I Am about 6 miles each way and have a hybrid, a Carrera Crossfire. I am nearly 60 now and it is becoming more and more of a struggle especially going home as the last part is uphill. Fine in the morning going in though !!!
I did think about Swytch but their consumer reviews are awful.
I have been thinking of an electric bike. When I first started cycling in it was about 25 minutes when it was about 20 in a car. Now it is nearer 30 minutes.
Just listening to JRM on R4 and it reminded me, thinking of his seat and the potential by election in Mid Beds, that hopefully Labour has learnt a lesson from these by elections re the swing to Lab & LDs.
If Labour fight Mid Beds hard the outcome is more likely to be a Tory hold. Just because you are in 2nd place does not make you the party with the best chance of winning if there is an anti Tory mood. Many Tories are more comfortable placing their protest vote with the LDs than Lab and the LDs are much, much, much better than Lab at by elections.
I don't believe that Lab can win seats like Mid Beds or JRMs seat. The LDs can, but not if Lab play a spoiler role.
Although more relevant to by elections it can impact seats in a GE and there is still a chance that Lab might need the LDs after the GE.
I refer the hon member to North Shropshire.. where second-placed Lab voters obligingly lent their votes to be rid of Paterson.
Exactly. Worryingly Lab seem to be getting too excited by places like Mid Bed and wanting to get stuck in. To do so would be very silly and counter productive.
I'd argue that the Selby result, showing huge strength outside the metropolis. shows the mid-Beds poll was credible. Somerton was obvious LibDem territory, but mid-Beds is less so.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
Isn't that a teeny weeny bit depressing, though?
After all, most of those measures are about reducing the harms that cars do. ULEZ attempts to deal with some specific localised air pollution. Reducing speed limits makes accidents less likely and less harmful. That sort of thing. Tilting the balance between the benefits drivers get from driving and the costs that society pays.
One lesson of Uxbridge is that, at least in some seats, that's politically unacceptable. And whilst there's something in the "wrong moment" argument, the experience is that car restraint measures are rarely popular in advance. And there are plenty of other measures that any government is going to have to take in the next few years.
Are will still so pampered as a nation that we're going to spit out any nasty medicine?
No the lesson is not that the nation is pampered or that change is impossible. The lesson is to bring more people with you on the change journey by listening to concerns and adapting original goals slightly to accomodate them.
Labours biggest weakness is a lack of understanding of, and even concern for, the lives and economics of those who are just above the welfare level. These should be natural Labour supporters but the party has been out of touch with them for decades so many have ended up Tories.
The way ULEZ and other traffic changes have been pushed through is another example of this, yet again the same group of just managing get the least support, are most impacted, and then told they are being pampered.......
I live in the UK's most congested city, Edinburgh, yet we have the the best public transport system in Scotland and the city is about as walkable as they come. Cycling is getting there. A small, rich minority cause congestion for everyone else.
There are very few reasons for driving here or in central London. But very large chunks of the population don't have this opportunity to make the switch. Public transport and walking cycling provision in our regional cities is pathetic - compare Liverpool to any French city. That has to come first.
What Khan and others need to do is to offer this carrot, and fast. We could have fully funded HS2 if we hadn't frozen fuel duty over the last few years. We need to explain that building more roads induces more demand, rather than sating it.
Inducing more demand is a good thing.
That's how you get economic growth. Greater aggregate demand.
You're in danger of becoming the kinetic equivalent of the telephone sanitisers in Hitchhiker's Guide. It may add to the growth figures but wastes energy on doing nothing very useful much of the time.
I think he's trying to hit every economic fallacy in the textbook.
It's strange how many people consider driving good for economic activity. It's a cost, space and time sink. The only thing you can buy out of a car window is a McDonald's. An Edinburgh tram has 250 customers on it - that's equivalent to a a traffic jam nearly a mile long.
Perhaps my attitude to this comes from actually growing up in the countryside. It was amazing moving to a city and finding that thousands of people could spend their time having fun and spending money rather than driving for hours to get to the cinema in Inverness.
"Libertarians are like house cats: absolutely convinced of their fierce independence while utterly dependent on a system they don't appreciate or understand."
Our resident pirate’s celebration of the car fits this definition perfectly. Cars are utterly dependent on a system of societal support that everyone pays for, whether they are car users or not. Depending on the car for personal travel is a society-level choice, not an absolute.
The issue, politically, is that at the individual level, for many, it isn’t a choice. Given the pressure on housing supply in this country people have to live where the housing is: what other choice do they have? Barty is absolutely correct that this means that for a many, many (probably a bare majority?) of people in this country that means depending on the car for personal transport for their daily needs - work, pleasure, shopping etc etc. To not have access to a car is to be impoverished & reliant on the whims of others.
It matters not one jot that they would be happier & healthier if they used public transport & the bicycle. They can’t - the entire system that allows them to exist in society requires this portion of the population to have a car. There is no functional bus service & no cycling infrastructure that doesn’t put them directly in the way of 44 ton artics on narrow rural A roads.
Squaring this circle is a challenge & Uxbridge demonstrates how easy it is for a politician to use people’s dependence on the car as a political tool: Expect more of this culture war politics I guess?
Uxbridge reminds us the next GE is not a done deal, and if you want the Tories out you need to get out and vote, and take care as to where you place your cross.
In some respects a better night for anti-Tories than the clean sweep we expected.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
Isn't that a teeny weeny bit depressing, though?
After all, most of those measures are about reducing the harms that cars do. ULEZ attempts to deal with some specific localised air pollution. Reducing speed limits makes accidents less likely and less harmful. That sort of thing. Tilting the balance between the benefits drivers get from driving and the costs that society pays.
One lesson of Uxbridge is that, at least in some seats, that's politically unacceptable. And whilst there's something in the "wrong moment" argument, the experience is that car restraint measures are rarely popular in advance. And there are plenty of other measures that any government is going to have to take in the next few years.
Are will still so pampered as a nation that we're going to spit out any nasty medicine?
The intention of a policy - reduction of pollution - may be good. While the implementation/methodology is bad.
What is politically unacceptable is saying that “those people who are poor and screwed over by this policy - well, the aim of the policy is good. So on consideration, and after some thought FUCK YOU, FUCKERS”.
Something to understand as well. Those with cars in
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
Isn't that a teeny weeny bit depressing, though?
After all, most of those measures are about reducing the harms that cars do. ULEZ attempts to deal with some specific localised air pollution. Reducing speed limits makes accidents less likely and less harmful. That sort of thing. Tilting the balance between the benefits drivers get from driving and the costs that society pays.
One lesson of Uxbridge is that, at least in some seats, that's politically unacceptable. And whilst there's something in the "wrong moment" argument, the experience is that car restraint measures are rarely popular in advance. And there are plenty of other measures that any government is going to have to take in the next few years.
Are will still so pampered as a nation that we're going to spit out any nasty medicine?
The intention of a policy - reduction of pollution - may be good. While the implementation/methodology is bad.
What is politically unacceptable is saying that “those people who are poor and screwed over by this policy - well, the aim of the policy is good. So on consideration, and after some thought FUCK YOU, FUCKERS”.
ULEZ has become, in the eyes of some poorer people, a tax which has little or no cost on the well off. Who own expensive, frequently updated cars. And/Or can afford to life in the areas with the best public transport connections to their white collar jobs and don’t need a vehicle for work.
Something to understand as well. Those with cars in the “next tranche”, that tightening ULEZ will ban, are convinced that the next step is coming very soon and will be done in the same way. So far more than the 10% of car owners with non compliant vehicles are upset about this.
It is perfectly possible to come up with a way to reduce emissions that doesn’t do this. The ULEZ implementation was picked because it was cheap and easy - for the politicians and those running the system. Producer interest vs Consumer.
What would you suggest?
In nearly all the studies, the majority of the non CO2 pollutants were emitted by small sub categories of vehicles.
A while back, ancient rattling buses were a big offender. Which was why the then Major of London ordered hybrid replacements.
Heavy goods vehicles were another.
A subset of cars and small vehicles - badly maintained and clapped out - was another.
So one approach would be incremental on the worst actual offenders. Combined with a better directed scrapage scheme.
Consider these two tales - a relative drives a £90k EV. No congestion charge. No problems with ULEZ of course. When he wants to park in central London, he finds a dedicated EV charging bay - even if he’s doesn’t need to charge.
A friend of my wife lives next door to Uxbridge. 1st generation immigrant. Fought her way up to a low level white collar job. Nearly everyone around her is in manual or factory type work. She lives in a house that is close to Heathrow and with poor public transport links - because that is what she could afford. The bus is useless - since the conversion of bus lanes into cycle lanes, he buses move at the speed of traffic. On the high streets. If you live where she does, you have a car. So she pays car tax, fuel tax, parking etc.
Converting bus lanes to cycle lanes seems an odd thing to do. Aren't bus lanes generally also used as cycle lanes anyway?
Yes, they were.
The new policy is to use the road space to create segregated, barrier protected cycle lanes.
This puts buses in the main traffic flow. It used to be that you would see the buses cruising past traffic jams. In a number of areas, that is no longer the case
In the poorer areas of London buses are the main public transport - house prices/desirability are essentially a function of access to the Tube and local school quality. So this is policy that has hit a section of the poor.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Bicycles are also widely used for commuting. When I lived in Germany, I used to cycle 5 miles to work every day, unless the weather was particularly bad. As well as saving me money, this kept me fit and left more space on the roads for those who needed to use their cars.
I would commute by bicycle here in the UK, but it's simply too dangerous and unpleasant, so that's another car added to the rush-hour traffic.
The idea that bikes are inherently recreational rather than utility vehicles is quite silly. They ought to be a perfectly good way of making practical 2-10 mile journeys (like commutes). They can (like cars!) absolutely be recreational too.
I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting replacing cars with bikes for long journeys. But most people don’t make long journeys that often.
Let’s be careful though, this thread carries an increasing risk of becoming about WFH.
The country is not setup for bikes and most people will not risk their lives dodging arsehole drivers. Not a hope of us being like Europeans whist our politicians are shit.
Neither was the Netherlands in the 60s - it took a lot of bold reforms and infrastructure against the run of public opinion.
You’re right about our politicians being shite though.
Bikes are semi situational though. The Netherlands has the great advantage of being flat.
There is untapped potential still in the UK on this front, but in some places you’re just not going to persuade as many people that they want to cycle up a giant hill every time they come home from work or the shops.
I always wonder about things like that. It's not dissimilar to Jo Swinson's exuberant self-confidence before the election that saw her lose her own seat.
It’s real in the sense that it’s on the Reclaim twitter account, but a heavily enhanced photo. Looks nothing like the walking restraining order with bad hygiene that is Lozza.
The tabloid media are reflecting what people think and experience and so are the non tabloid media (Giles coren in the Times for instance). Last Christmas was a big eye opener; a lot of England diasporas out of London on a journey longer than a single charge, and found there was a 5 hour refuelling break in the middle of the journey. I witnessed this. It is not an experience anyone wants even once a year.
Just listening to JRM on R4 and it reminded me, thinking of his seat and the potential by election in Mid Beds, that hopefully Labour has learnt a lesson from these by elections re the swing to Lab & LDs.
If Labour fight Mid Beds hard the outcome is more likely to be a Tory hold. Just because you are in 2nd place does not make you the party with the best chance of winning if there is an anti Tory mood. Many Tories are more comfortable placing their protest vote with the LDs than Lab and the LDs are much, much, much better than Lab at by elections.
I don't believe that Lab can win seats like Mid Beds or JRMs seat. The LDs can, but not if Lab play a spoiler role.
Although more relevant to by elections it can impact seats in a GE and there is still a chance that Lab might need the LDs after the GE.
Mogg's seat was Labour between 1997 and 2010.
If Labour don't target it its effectively an admission they cannot win a majority.
It was a new seat in 2010 @another_richard. I don't know how it compares to the old seat(s), but realistically if there were a by election here who do you think the main challenger would be?
Mogg's NE Somerset is based on the old Wansdyke constituency.
It should be remembered that in 2017 Labour was 14k ahead of the LibDems in NE Somerset.
Do Labour think that Starmer is less popular than Corbyn (or Miliband or Brown) or that they're less ready for government ?
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
I have an e-cargo bike. I have had 4 small children in it - more than I've ever had in a car. Alternatively several people can ride their own bicycles! I know this is a very difficult solution to think of. I can fit a hell of a lot of shopping in it. For journeys up to 5 km it's easily quicker and more convenient than a car, also for most journeys up to 8km or more. Admittedly I live in a city (as do millions of others). For someone to think a bicycle is only for leisure is pretty bizarre.
As is believing that because more electric cars are coming in the future that means there are no environmental problems.
Same here. We live in a small rural town. Last year I bought an e-cargo bike. Since then I think I’ve driven the car three times in the whole year, and the bike pretty much every day on the school run (6 miles there and back on hilly Cotswold roads). The bike is cheaper, faster and all round more convenient. We almost certainly won’t replace the car when it dies.
The main thing holding cycling back in Britain is lack of proper infrastructure. It’s slowly being built in inner cities and is creeping out to the suburbs and occasional peri-urban/rural clusters. There was a really interesting (and largely unreported) development in south Oxfordshire this week where councillors turned down their own council’s fully funded £300m relief road plan, largely on the basis that building more roads just leads to more traffic. Given the demographic there is an opportunity to do something new and much less car centric there instead.
I have a bike and enjoy cycling. A 6 mile cycle to work is as good a way of getting there as any. When I only have one or two things to get at the shops, a bike is as easy as a car. I do not however enjoy cycle maintenance. It's bad enough having to maintain my own bike, but as the man of the house I am apparently responsible for the condition of everybody's bikes. I don't understand why bikes are so much less reliable than cars. You can drive a car for a year, or 10,000 miles, without even thinking of needing a service. Bikes need a service roughly every 500 miles. And I think in 30 years of driving, or about 300,000 miles, I have only ever had three or four punctures. I get at least two punctures a year on my bike. Granted it's a much easier job to fix a puncture on a bike than a car, but it's still a pain in the arse. We have five bikes in the shed, and at least three of them have flat tyres. Any journey out as a family is necessarily prefixed by a good hour or so's cycle maintenance. As I said, I like cycling, and use a bike quite well. But I can see why people don't.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Bicycles are also widely used for commuting. When I lived in Germany, I used to cycle 5 miles to work every day, unless the weather was particularly bad. As well as saving me money, this kept me fit and left more space on the roads for those who needed to use their cars.
I would commute by bicycle here in the UK, but it's simply too dangerous and unpleasant, so that's another car added to the rush-hour traffic.
The idea that bikes are inherently recreational rather than utility vehicles is quite silly. They ought to be a perfectly good way of making practical 2-10 mile journeys (like commutes). They can (like cars!) absolutely be recreational too.
I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting replacing cars with bikes for long journeys. But most people don’t make long journeys that often.
Let’s be careful though, this thread carries an increasing risk of becoming about WFH.
The country is not setup for bikes and most people will not risk their lives dodging arsehole drivers. Not a hope of us being like Europeans whist our politicians are shit.
Neither was the Netherlands in the 60s - it took a lot of bold reforms and infrastructure against the run of public opinion.
You’re right about our politicians being shite though.
Bikes are semi situational though. The Netherlands has the great advantage of being flat.
There is untapped potential still in the UK on this front, but in some places you’re just not going to persuade as many people that they want to cycle up a giant hill every time they come home from work or the shops.
I was astonished at just how flat the Netherlands was when I went there. I mean where I'm from, Coventry - people think of it as a flat city but there's definite ups and downs there. The Netherlands is just amazingly level.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Bicycles are also widely used for commuting. When I lived in Germany, I used to cycle 5 miles to work every day, unless the weather was particularly bad. As well as saving me money, this kept me fit and left more space on the roads for those who needed to use their cars.
I would commute by bicycle here in the UK, but it's simply too dangerous and unpleasant, so that's another car added to the rush-hour traffic.
The idea that bikes are inherently recreational rather than utility vehicles is quite silly. They ought to be a perfectly good way of making practical 2-10 mile journeys (like commutes). They can (like cars!) absolutely be recreational too.
I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting replacing cars with bikes for long journeys. But most people don’t make long journeys that often.
Let’s be careful though, this thread carries an increasing risk of becoming about WFH.
The country is not setup for bikes and most people will not risk their lives dodging arsehole drivers. Not a hope of us being like Europeans whist our politicians are shit.
Neither was the Netherlands in the 60s - it took a lot of bold reforms and infrastructure against the run of public opinion.
You’re right about our politicians being shite though.
Bikes are semi situational though. The Netherlands has the great advantage of being flat.
There is untapped potential still in the UK on this front, but in some places you’re just not going to persuade as many people that they want to cycle up a giant hill every time they come home from work or the shops.
Plenty of flat places in the UK that could do much better with bikes. Manchester, Liverpool, plenty of London, loads of towns. We are way behind notably non-flat countries such as Spain, France and Italy when it comes to bike usage.
What it shows is how Khan (and Burnham) have trapped themselves. Getting out of the Commons and getting some executive power seemed a no brainer when Labour were self destructing under that idiot Corbyn and it allowed them to avoid collateral damage but now, with Labour on the cusp of government, they look like forgotten men who will struggle to get back into front line politics, let alone the cabinet.
Khan is a canny operator. I doubt he cares too much. If you follow his twitter feed you will see his pronouncements are very much geared towards his base and his support. Any doubters or objectors are just dismissed. He is doing what he needs to in order to get re-elected and he will.
I agree he will be re-elected as Mayor but the path to a cabinet post is looking full of thorns.
I do wonder if the Conservatives will live to regret selecting a London Mayoral candidate when they did, from a weak field.
If nominations for the Conservative mayoral candidacy were opening now, I suspect they might actually have got more interest from more credible runners. It's clear they are on a good issue in outer London, but it feels likely that candidate quality will be an issue for them.
Do the London Conservatives have the equivalent of an Andy Street ?
In previous elections there's been suggestions they've wanted either Alan Sugar or Greg Dyke to be their candidate - both of whom were Labour supporters.
From the world of business, Michael Grade would've been a credible contender at one time, but he is now 80.
It's hard to say who may have emerged if there was a feeling that there was a good chance for the Tories to win the mayoralty in London. Heavyweights don't want to take the fall in a hopeless election, nor to agonise publicly over a bid.
But it would've at least been interesting if nominations had opened today, as there is more of a feeling than yesterday that, whilst not easy, it's not unwinnable with a strong candidate.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
Essentially, yes. I think that in a few years time we will se significant safety improvements on Welsh roads, and I think opponents are actually - behind the "my personal freedom to do XYZ" smoke-screen - worried that it will be shown to work. Just as LTNs have been working for well over half a century now.
Driving at more than 20mph (or usually less) in residential roads is purely a cultural expectation, and that can change.
One of the UK road safety outliers is the proportion of people killed on our roads who are pedestrians, and a
In London we are not looking at 20mph for "tight residential streets" but for nearly all roads, including main roads into the centre. If this is the right policy then lets discuss it as 20mph is the speed limit for all roads in cities, not that 20mph is the speed limit for tight residential streets, as we are already well past that point.
As I say, I'd go for everything at a properly enforced 20mph limit that is non-classified inside community boundaries.
The best numbers that I have for London are that there are 9200 miles of roads, and that TFL hjaveput 20mph limits on about 100 miles of the 360 miles of roads they control.
But we need to remember that Boroughs control the vast majority of roads, and I have no numbers for them - do you?
I live in the UK's most congested city, Edinburgh, yet we have the the best public transport system in Scotland and the city is about as walkable as they come. Cycling is getting there. A small, rich minority cause congestion for everyone else.
There are very few reasons for driving here or in central London. But very large chunks of the population don't have this opportunity to make the switch. Public transport and walking cycling provision in our regional cities is pathetic - compare Liverpool to any French city. That has to come first.
What Khan and others need to do is to offer this carrot, and fast. We could have fully funded HS2 if we hadn't frozen fuel duty over the last few years. We need to explain that building more roads induces more demand, rather than sating it.
Inducing more demand is a good thing.
That's how you get economic growth. Greater aggregate demand.
You're in danger of becoming the kinetic equivalent of the telephone sanitisers in Hitchhiker's Guide. It may add to the growth figures but wastes energy on doing nothing very useful much of the time.
I think he's trying to hit every economic fallacy in the textbook.
It's strange how many people consider driving good for economic activity. It's a cost, space and time sink. The only thing you can buy out of a car window is a McDonald's. An Edinburgh tram has 250 customers on it - that's equivalent to a a traffic jam nearly a mile long.
Perhaps my attitude to this comes from actually growing up in the countryside. It was amazing moving to a city and finding that thousands of people could spend their time having fun and spending money rather than driving for hours to get to the cinema in Inverness.
Oh great, now we are onto use trams as a solution.
There are a grand total of zero trams in my town, nor any demand for them. So which invisible tram should I magic up with my pixie dust?
Yes cities can be different. But most of the country IS NOT IN A CITY.
A large majority of people (80%) DO LIVE IN CITIES
AND THEY SHOULD ALL HAVE A TRAM
The problem you have is that even in cities that do have a tram system the coverage is often poor. So in Nottingham when the system was introduced a decade ago they charged all the local firms £250 a year per parking space to pay for it.
Boots with 3000 spaces that would have been liable pointed out that the trams didn't run close to their factory and that many of their employees worked shift patterns that weren't served by the trams. They asked for discussions over the levy which would cost them £750,000 a year.
The council said no so Boots - whose factory straddled the city/county boundary - moved their car park from one end of the site to the other, moving it out of the city and avoiding the levy entirely
You can blame the Treasury for this kind of insanity.
We need a halfway house where local authorities can issue bonds in order to fund this kind of development, but (partially due to past LA stupidity) the Treasury is dead against relinquishing any control over the financial purse strings, which leaves LAs in the invidious position of having to somehow tax the local business population to pay for improvements.
(One might reasonably ask what is happening to the rest of the money being paid by local businesses to local government, but the vast majority of that is earmarked by central government mandates already. LAs have very little room for maneovre.)
Weirdly, it seems to have been perfectly possible for LAs to borrow vast sums to build shopping centres, but impossible for them to borrow to build railway or tram system. The ways of the Treasury are mysterious, opaque & seem designed to prevent any real development in this country.
I’m struggling to see how Sunak has concluded the next election isn’t a done deal based on these results.
Yes they held Uxbridge by 495 votes - but the swing against them was also massive and they overturned the biggest majority they ever have in Selby, a seat which indicates they can win in the seats they need to.
As far as I can see, all this confirms is that Labour won’t win a super majority but instead quite possibly a large majority.
Sunak sounds like Corbyn after Labour won in Peterborough, not looking at how the votes changed and how narrowly they held it.
The Tories are in big trouble.
Yep. Uxbridge is a cameo. It's the Selby result that has GE energy. Think of it as a booming tannoy announcement as we sit here in a pre-election year waiting for the real thing to come.
"Attention platform UK, your Labour majority government is approaching and will be here shortly. Mind the gap. Mind the gap."
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
I have an e-cargo bike. I have had 4 small children in it - more than I've ever had in a car. Alternatively several people can ride their own bicycles! I know this is a very difficult solution to think of. I can fit a hell of a lot of shopping in it. For journeys up to 5 km it's easily quicker and more convenient than a car, also for most journeys up to 8km or more. Admittedly I live in a city (as do millions of others). For someone to think a bicycle is only for leisure is pretty bizarre.
As is believing that because more electric cars are coming in the future that means there are no environmental problems.
Same here. We live in a small rural town. Last year I bought an e-cargo bike. Since then I think I’ve driven the car three times in the whole year, and the bike pretty much every day on the school run (6 miles there and back on hilly Cotswold roads). The bike is cheaper, faster and all round more convenient. We almost certainly won’t replace the car when it dies.
The main thing holding cycling back in Britain is lack of proper infrastructure. It’s slowly being built in inner cities and is creeping out to the suburbs and occasional peri-urban/rural clusters. There was a really interesting (and largely unreported) development in south Oxfordshire this week where councillors turned down their own council’s fully funded £300m relief road plan, largely on the basis that building more roads just leads to more traffic. Given the demographic there is an opportunity to do something new and much less car centric there instead.
I have a bike and enjoy cycling. A 6 mile cycle to work is as good a way of getting there as any. When I only have one or two things to get at the shops, a bike is as easy as a car. I do not however enjoy cycle maintenance. It's bad enough having to maintain my own bike, but as the man of the house I am apparently responsible for the condition of everybody's bikes. I don't understand why bikes are so much less reliable than cars. You can drive a car for a year, or 10,000 miles, without even thinking of needing a service. Bikes need a service roughly every 500 miles. And I think in 30 years of driving, or about 300,000 miles, I have only ever had three or four punctures. I get at least two punctures a year on my bike. Granted it's a much easier job to fix a puncture on a bike than a car, but it's still a pain in the arse. We have five bikes in the shed, and at least three of them have flat tyres. Any journey out as a family is necessarily prefixed by a good hour or so's cycle maintenance. As I said, I like cycling, and use a bike quite well. But I can see why people don't.
Bike maintenance emporia are available you know. They will take your money & your bicycles & return a lovely fettled bicycle in return.
Good morning, one and all. Interesting set up by election results, and of course congratulations.to HYUFC for calling Uxbridge correctly. However, there’s another feature that nobody appears to have commented upon. The LibDem vote in Selby and Uxbridge collapsed as did the Labour vote in the west country. Are we actually seeing tactical voting?
I can't say I'm surprised that the government should perform worse than its poll rating, in a by-election. Governments usually do.
Absolutely, especially against the Lib Dems who remain masters of by election campaigns.
I think Rishi will think, it could have been worse. Murmurings about replacing him, never loud, will die away. But the Tories are still on track for a heavy defeat. I am currently estimating them losing 100-120 seats, not a wipe out by any means but a loss of power that may well get worse in the election after that. The pendulum has turned.
CON 240 seats or so at the next GE is entirely plausible and in line with my own expectations. So not a wipeout.
So LAB to get the overall majority or maybe fall just short, Keir will be PM in any case as LAB will do a deal with LDs, their 20-25 seats will be enough to provide a stable government through confidence and supply.
Overall a very bad night for the Conservatives, but it could have been worse. My take from this and the local elections, is that there is a certain kind of seat, suburban, or semi-urban, well-off but not liberal, where the Conservative vote is pretty sticky. Places like Uxbridge, Broxbourne, Old Bexley, Dartford, Harlow, Basildon, the seats in Dudley. The difference in by-elections and local elections in the mid 90's is that you could not point to anywhere that the Conservatives were bucking the trend.
Fair point, but how many seats like that are there? More than the Liberals had when they retreated to their celtic redoubts, but nowhere near enough to win.
Nowhere near enough to win. And, there are places where the Conservatives are doing worse than in the mid 90's, like Westminster, Wandsworth, and Surrey.
But given the choice, between the mid 90's situation, and the current situation, the Conservatives would take the latter. There's a certain kind of voter that switched from the Conservatives to Labour, because they liked Blair, switched back in 2010, and has decided to stick with the Conservatives.
As others may have said, a footnote is the feeble showing of Reform/Reclaim when it comes to a crunch. L/LD mutual discipline held up well, but as expected Green voters ignored the progressive alliance stuff (their Uxbridge votes were enough to give the antiULEZ candidate victory, in fact) - in Somerton they were over 10%.
Yes. This is a factor in thinking that NOM is value at the moment. There is no good reason to think the (residual) Tory vote will split to the right as much as polling indicates, or as much as the centre progressive vote will be split.
The possible change in this would be the entry of N Farage into the scene big time. But do I get a sense his day has passed? (And that L Fox, who at one time appeared as a celeb articulating reasonable right populism but now sounds like someone needing care in the community will not be a major successor).
BTW is Matt Goodwin, the L Fox of academia, at risk of going the same way?
I live in the UK's most congested city, Edinburgh, yet we have the the best public transport system in Scotland and the city is about as walkable as they come. Cycling is getting there. A small, rich minority cause congestion for everyone else.
There are very few reasons for driving here or in central London. But very large chunks of the population don't have this opportunity to make the switch. Public transport and walking cycling provision in our regional cities is pathetic - compare Liverpool to any French city. That has to come first.
What Khan and others need to do is to offer this carrot, and fast. We could have fully funded HS2 if we hadn't frozen fuel duty over the last few years. We need to explain that building more roads induces more demand, rather than sating it.
Inducing more demand is a good thing.
That's how you get economic growth. Greater aggregate demand.
You're in danger of becoming the kinetic equivalent of the telephone sanitisers in Hitchhiker's Guide. It may add to the growth figures but wastes energy on doing nothing very useful much of the time.
I think he's trying to hit every economic fallacy in the textbook.
It's strange how many people consider driving good for economic activity. It's a cost, space and time sink. The only thing you can buy out of a car window is a McDonald's. An Edinburgh tram has 250 customers on it - that's equivalent to a a traffic jam nearly a mile long.
Perhaps my attitude to this comes from actually growing up in the countryside. It was amazing moving to a city and finding that thousands of people could spend their time having fun and spending money rather than driving for hours to get to the cinema in Inverness.
Oh great, now we are onto use trams as a solution.
There are a grand total of zero trams in my town, nor any demand for them. So which invisible tram should I magic up with my pixie dust?
Yes cities can be different. But most of the country IS NOT IN A CITY.
Bart, have you read The Power Broker by Robert Caro? In addition to being an interesting story about the perils of autocratic power it's also an interesting study of car dependency in a big city. From your perspective, it's very anti-car but it does an excellent job of explaining a lot of the issues around transport planning in big cities.
European cities, to my mind, do this excellently. I lived in a German city of 250,000 and they had five tramlines that could get you most places within 2 changes. Contrast that with a place like Leeds and it seems positively barbarous.
Rural areas, like the Highlands, will always be more car dependent than urban areas and I don't think we should be punitive (especially without Eabhal's carrot) but induced demand can work both ways if public transport (of which I think the tram is certainly up there) is cheap, reliable and frequent.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
I have an e-cargo bike. I have had 4 small children in it - more than I've ever had in a car. Alternatively several people can ride their own bicycles! I know this is a very difficult solution to think of. I can fit a hell of a lot of shopping in it. For journeys up to 5 km it's easily quicker and more convenient than a car, also for most journeys up to 8km or more. Admittedly I live in a city (as do millions of others). For someone to think a bicycle is only for leisure is pretty bizarre.
As is believing that because more electric cars are coming in the future that means there are no environmental problems.
Same here. We live in a small rural town. Last year I bought an e-cargo bike. Since then I think I’ve driven the car three times in the whole year, and the bike pretty much every day on the school run (6 miles there and back on hilly Cotswold roads). The bike is cheaper, faster and all round more convenient. We almost certainly won’t replace the car when it dies.
The main thing holding cycling back in Britain is lack of proper infrastructure. It’s slowly being built in inner cities and is creeping out to the suburbs and occasional peri-urban/rural clusters. There was a really interesting (and largely unreported) development in south Oxfordshire this week where councillors turned down their own council’s fully funded £300m relief road plan, largely on the basis that building more roads just leads to more traffic. Given the demographic there is an opportunity to do something new and much less car centric there instead.
I have a bike and enjoy cycling. A 6 mile cycle to work is as good a way of getting there as any. When I only have one or two things to get at the shops, a bike is as easy as a car. I do not however enjoy cycle maintenance. It's bad enough having to maintain my own bike, but as the man of the house I am apparently responsible for the condition of everybody's bikes. I don't understand why bikes are so much less reliable than cars. You can drive a car for a year, or 10,000 miles, without even thinking of needing a service. Bikes need a service roughly every 500 miles. And I think in 30 years of driving, or about 300,000 miles, I have only ever had three or four punctures. I get at least two punctures a year on my bike. Granted it's a much easier job to fix a puncture on a bike than a car, but it's still a pain in the arse. We have five bikes in the shed, and at least three of them have flat tyres. Any journey out as a family is necessarily prefixed by a good hour or so's cycle maintenance. As I said, I like cycling, and use a bike quite well. But I can see why people don't.
Schwalbe marathon plus tyres are pretty much puncture-proof - I've had them on a few bikes and never managed to get a pucnture through one. Slight hit on rolling resistance compared to a specialist tyre, but not much. I switched to them on my road bike for commute after a number of punctures and saw no reduction in speed (replacing the Specialized ones that came with the bike which were, in all fairness, probably nothing special).
Not super cheap and a bit of a bugger to fit them, but at least you only have to do it once!
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
I have an e-cargo bike. I have had 4 small children in it - more than I've ever had in a car. Alternatively several people can ride their own bicycles! I know this is a very difficult solution to think of. I can fit a hell of a lot of shopping in it. For journeys up to 5 km it's easily quicker and more convenient than a car, also for most journeys up to 8km or more. Admittedly I live in a city (as do millions of others). For someone to think a bicycle is only for leisure is pretty bizarre.
As is believing that because more electric cars are coming in the future that means there are no environmental problems.
Same here. We live in a small rural town. Last year I bought an e-cargo bike. Since then I think I’ve driven the car three times in the whole year, and the bike pretty much every day on the school run (6 miles there and back on hilly Cotswold roads). The bike is cheaper, faster and all round more convenient. We almost certainly won’t replace the car when it dies.
The main thing holding cycling back in Britain is lack of proper infrastructure. It’s slowly being built in inner cities and is creeping out to the suburbs and occasional peri-urban/rural clusters. There was a really interesting (and largely unreported) development in south Oxfordshire this week where councillors turned down their own council’s fully funded £300m relief road plan, largely on the basis that building more roads just leads to more traffic. Given the demographic there is an opportunity to do something new and much less car centric there instead.
I have a bike and enjoy cycling. A 6 mile cycle to work is as good a way of getting there as any. When I only have one or two things to get at the shops, a bike is as easy as a car. I do not however enjoy cycle maintenance. It's bad enough having to maintain my own bike, but as the man of the house I am apparently responsible for the condition of everybody's bikes. I don't understand why bikes are so much less reliable than cars. You can drive a car for a year, or 10,000 miles, without even thinking of needing a service. Bikes need a service roughly every 500 miles. And I think in 30 years of driving, or about 300,000 miles, I have only ever had three or four punctures. I get at least two punctures a year on my bike. Granted it's a much easier job to fix a puncture on a bike than a car, but it's still a pain in the arse. We have five bikes in the shed, and at least three of them have flat tyres. Any journey out as a family is necessarily prefixed by a good hour or so's cycle maintenance. As I said, I like cycling, and use a bike quite well. But I can see why people don't.
Your car tyres are made of thicker rubber and have much more tread on them.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Bicycles are also widely used for commuting. When I lived in Germany, I used to cycle 5 miles to work every day, unless the weather was particularly bad. As well as saving me money, this kept me fit and left more space on the roads for those who needed to use their cars.
I would commute by bicycle here in the UK, but it's simply too dangerous and unpleasant, so that's another car added to the rush-hour traffic.
The idea that bikes are inherently recreational rather than utility vehicles is quite silly. They ought to be a perfectly good way of making practical 2-10 mile journeys (like commutes). They can (like cars!) absolutely be recreational too.
I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting replacing cars with bikes for long journeys. But most people don’t make long journeys that often.
Let’s be careful though, this thread carries an increasing risk of becoming about WFH.
The country is not setup for bikes and most people will not risk their lives dodging arsehole drivers. Not a hope of us being like Europeans whist our politicians are shit.
Neither was the Netherlands in the 60s - it took a lot of bold reforms and infrastructure against the run of public opinion.
You’re right about our politicians being shite though.
Bikes are semi situational though. The Netherlands has the great advantage of being flat.
There is untapped potential still in the UK on this front, but in some places you’re just not going to persuade as many people that they want to cycle up a giant hill every time they come home from work or the shops.
Plenty of flat places in the UK that could do much better with bikes. Manchester, Liverpool, plenty of London, loads of towns. We are way behind notably non-flat countries such as Spain, France and Italy when it comes to bike usage.
There aren't many cities in the country where the terrain is hilly enough to be a real barrier. Sheffield, Bristol, Plymouth - I don't think any others. Nottingham and Leeds undulate a bit but not enough to deter cycling. Personally I'd rather have a bit of up and down on my route - for me, my nearest hill of any sort at all is the Warburton Toll Bridge over the Manchester Ship Canal, which is 7 miles away.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Bicycles are also widely used for commuting. When I lived in Germany, I used to cycle 5 miles to work every day, unless the weather was particularly bad. As well as saving me money, this kept me fit and left more space on the roads for those who needed to use their cars.
I would commute by bicycle here in the UK, but it's simply too dangerous and unpleasant, so that's another car added to the rush-hour traffic.
The idea that bikes are inherently recreational rather than utility vehicles is quite silly. They ought to be a perfectly good way of making practical 2-10 mile journeys (like commutes). They can (like cars!) absolutely be recreational too.
I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting replacing cars with bikes for long journeys. But most people don’t make long journeys that often.
Let’s be careful though, this thread carries an increasing risk of becoming about WFH.
The country is not setup for bikes and most people will not risk their lives dodging arsehole drivers. Not a hope of us being like Europeans whist our politicians are shit.
Neither was the Netherlands in the 60s - it took a lot of bold reforms and infrastructure against the run of public opinion.
You’re right about our politicians being shite though.
Bikes are semi situational though. The Netherlands has the great advantage of being flat.
There is untapped potential still in the UK on this front, but in some places you’re just not going to persuade as many people that they want to cycle up a giant hill every time they come home from work or the shops.
I was astonished at just how flat the Netherlands was when I went there. I mean where I'm from, Coventry - people think of it as a flat city but there's definite ups and downs there. The Netherlands is just amazingly level.
Interesting though (and I'm not disagreeing btw!) that the premier bike race in the Netherlands (Amstel Gold, one of the Classic one dayers) is actually pretty hilly; it's categorised as an 'Ardennes Classic' even though it is obviously not in the Ardennes. Limburg, the region it's held in, is quite un-Dutch in its lumpiness.
I live in the UK's most congested city, Edinburgh, yet we have the the best public transport system in Scotland and the city is about as walkable as they come. Cycling is getting there. A small, rich minority cause congestion for everyone else.
There are very few reasons for driving here or in central London. But very large chunks of the population don't have this opportunity to make the switch. Public transport and walking cycling provision in our regional cities is pathetic - compare Liverpool to any French city. That has to come first.
What Khan and others need to do is to offer this carrot, and fast. We could have fully funded HS2 if we hadn't frozen fuel duty over the last few years. We need to explain that building more roads induces more demand, rather than sating it.
Inducing more demand is a good thing.
That's how you get economic growth. Greater aggregate demand.
You're in danger of becoming the kinetic equivalent of the telephone sanitisers in Hitchhiker's Guide. It may add to the growth figures but wastes energy on doing nothing very useful much of the time.
I think he's trying to hit every economic fallacy in the textbook.
It's strange how many people consider driving good for economic activity. It's a cost, space and time sink. The only thing you can buy out of a car window is a McDonald's. An Edinburgh tram has 250 customers on it - that's equivalent to a a traffic jam nearly a mile long.
Perhaps my attitude to this comes from actually growing up in the countryside. It was amazing moving to a city and finding that thousands of people could spend their time having fun and spending money rather than driving for hours to get to the cinema in Inverness.
"Libertarians are like house cats: absolutely convinced of their fierce independence while utterly dependent on a system they don't appreciate or understand."
Our resident pirate’s celebration of the car fits this definition perfectly. Cars are utterly dependent on a system of societal support that everyone pays for, whether they are car users or not. Depending on the car for personal travel is a society-level choice, not an absolute.
The issue, politically, is that at the individual level, for many, it isn’t a choice. Given the pressure on housing supply in this country people have to live where the housing is: what other choice do they have? Barty is absolutely correct that this means that for a many, many (probably a bare majority?) of people in this country that means depending on the car for personal transport for their daily needs - work, pleasure, shopping etc etc. To not have access to a car is to be impoverished & reliant on the whims of others.
It matters not one jot that they would be happier & healthier if they used public transport & the bicycle. They can’t - the entire system that allows them to exist in society requires this portion of the population to have a car. There is no functional bus service & no cycling infrastructure that doesn’t put them directly in the way of 44 ton artics on narrow rural A roads.
Squaring this circle is a challenge & Uxbridge demonstrates how easy it is for a politician to use people’s dependence on the car as a political tool: Expect more of this culture war politics I guess?
It matters not one jot that they would be happier & healthier if they used public transport & the bicycle.
That reads as if you know what's good for them better than they know themselves ?
And do you not realise that this feeds into the suspicion that people are anti-car not for any reasons about pollution but because they are against the concept of individuals having cars under any circumstances.
Good morning, one and all. Interesting set up by election results, and of course congratulations.to HYUFC for calling Uxbridge correctly. However, there’s another feature that nobody appears to have commented upon. The LibDem vote in Selby and Uxbridge collapsed as did the Labour vote in the west country. Are we actually seeing tactical voting?
Yes.. and I think we did in previous high-profile by-elections too (eg North Shropshire where Lab was safely second but realised LDs were best-placed to hoover up disaffected Tories).
But that's easier in a by-election where (a) there's a smaller and more active turnout, (b) waaaay less national noise meaning the message can get out and (c) a willingness to dick around because the future govt isn't at stake. It's ambitious to think the same effect can be mobilised in a GE.
To the same degree certainly. I think it'd be reasonable to suggest it means Selby and Somerton are likely to be regained by the Tories, but similar seats around 10k or so are very much in play.
Given that Somerton and Frome had a history of voting LD more often than that, and the successor seat of Glastonbury and Somerton is likewise inclined, I doubt whether it will revert to the Conservatives. Shropshire North will be a much tougher prospect, for the same reason in reverse.
Labour also has a a decent chance of holding the new Selby seat, as the successor seat is slightly more favourable to them than the old Selby and Ainsty seat.
IMO North Shropshire depends on whether the Tories lift themselves sufficiently for their core vote to come out in force at the GE. Helen Morgan's been active on some local issues which Owen Paterson ignored while he was busy punting his commercial interests, and I suspect a lot of the non-aligned who come into contact with that could be persuaded to give her another go.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
I have an e-cargo bike. I have had 4 small children in it - more than I've ever had in a car. Alternatively several people can ride their own bicycles! I know this is a very difficult solution to think of. I can fit a hell of a lot of shopping in it. For journeys up to 5 km it's easily quicker and more convenient than a car, also for most journeys up to 8km or more. Admittedly I live in a city (as do millions of others). For someone to think a bicycle is only for leisure is pretty bizarre.
As is believing that because more electric cars are coming in the future that means there are no environmental problems.
Same here. We live in a small rural town. Last year I bought an e-cargo bike. Since then I think I’ve driven the car three times in the whole year, and the bike pretty much every day on the school run (6 miles there and back on hilly Cotswold roads). The bike is cheaper, faster and all round more convenient. We almost certainly won’t replace the car when it dies.
The main thing holding cycling back in Britain is lack of proper infrastructure. It’s slowly being built in inner cities and is creeping out to the suburbs and occasional peri-urban/rural clusters. There was a really interesting (and largely unreported) development in south Oxfordshire this week where councillors turned down their own council’s fully funded £300m relief road plan, largely on the basis that building more roads just leads to more traffic. Given the demographic there is an opportunity to do something new and much less car centric there instead.
I have a bike and enjoy cycling. A 6 mile cycle to work is as good a way of getting there as any. When I only have one or two things to get at the shops, a bike is as easy as a car. I do not however enjoy cycle maintenance. It's bad enough having to maintain my own bike, but as the man of the house I am apparently responsible for the condition of everybody's bikes. I don't understand why bikes are so much less reliable than cars. You can drive a car for a year, or 10,000 miles, without even thinking of needing a service. Bikes need a service roughly every 500 miles. And I think in 30 years of driving, or about 300,000 miles, I have only ever had three or four punctures. I get at least two punctures a year on my bike. Granted it's a much easier job to fix a puncture on a bike than a car, but it's still a pain in the arse. We have five bikes in the shed, and at least three of them have flat tyres. Any journey out as a family is necessarily prefixed by a good hour or so's cycle maintenance. As I said, I like cycling, and use a bike quite well. But I can see why people don't.
Bike maintenance emporia are available you know. They will take your money & your bicycles & return a lovely fettled bicycle in return.
Well yes, but from what I can see they tend to be bloody expensive!
To be fair, there is a place in Sale which will maintain your bike for almost free and also teach you to do it. Solutions are available: mainly just be a man and learn some skills. My comment was more the point that I can see why people don't do it.
What it shows is how Khan (and Burnham) have trapped themselves. Getting out of the Commons and getting some executive power seemed a no brainer when Labour were self destructing under that idiot Corbyn and it allowed them to avoid collateral damage but now, with Labour on the cusp of government, they look like forgotten men who will struggle to get back into front line politics, let alone the cabinet.
Khan is a canny operator. I doubt he cares too much. If you follow his twitter feed you will see his pronouncements are very much geared towards his base and his support. Any doubters or objectors are just dismissed. He is doing what he needs to in order to get re-elected and he will.
I agree he will be re-elected as Mayor but the path to a cabinet post is looking full of thorns.
I do wonder if the Conservatives will live to regret selecting a London Mayoral candidate when they did, from a weak field.
If nominations for the Conservative mayoral candidacy were opening now, I suspect they might actually have got more interest from more credible runners. It's clear they are on a good issue in outer London, but it feels likely that candidate quality will be an issue for them.
Do the London Conservatives have the equivalent of an Andy Street ?
In previous elections there's been suggestions they've wanted either Alan Sugar or Greg Dyke to be their candidate - both of whom were Labour supporters.
From the world of business, Michael Grade would've been a credible contender at one time, but he is now 80.
It's hard to say who may have emerged if there was a feeling that there was a good chance for the Tories to win the mayoralty in London. Heavyweights don't want to take the fall in a hopeless election, nor to agonise publicly over a bid.
But it would've at least been interesting if nominations had opened today, as there is more of a feeling than yesterday that, whilst not easy, it's not unwinnable with a strong candidate.
It would be easier to find a high profile candidate if the Tories had any idea what their distinguishing principles and core competencies were. Does anyone know?
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
I have an e-cargo bike. I have had 4 small children in it - more than I've ever had in a car. Alternatively several people can ride their own bicycles! I know this is a very difficult solution to think of. I can fit a hell of a lot of shopping in it. For journeys up to 5 km it's easily quicker and more convenient than a car, also for most journeys up to 8km or more. Admittedly I live in a city (as do millions of others). For someone to think a bicycle is only for leisure is pretty bizarre.
As is believing that because more electric cars are coming in the future that means there are no environmental problems.
Same here. We live in a small rural town. Last year I bought an e-cargo bike. Since then I think I’ve driven the car three times in the whole year, and the bike pretty much every day on the school run (6 miles there and back on hilly Cotswold roads). The bike is cheaper, faster and all round more convenient. We almost certainly won’t replace the car when it dies.
The main thing holding cycling back in Britain is lack of proper infrastructure. It’s slowly being built in inner cities and is creeping out to the suburbs and occasional peri-urban/rural clusters. There was a really interesting (and largely unreported) development in south Oxfordshire this week where councillors turned down their own council’s fully funded £300m relief road plan, largely on the basis that building more roads just leads to more traffic. Given the demographic there is an opportunity to do something new and much less car centric there instead.
There’s a bunch of people trying to get an actual new train line built out from Oxford to Brize via Eynsham & Witney.
It makes total sense - the land is there, the demand is there (the A40 is a permanent car park of slow moving commuter traffic), the new Park&Ride is being built at Eynsham so a station there is perfect, the MoD likes the idea of being able to ship all their stuff into Brize on the train.
In the current planning environment I don’t think it will ever happen though. Rail expenditure, especially in the south, just seems to be politically undoable.
(Total cost is £1billion according to the feasibility study. Which compares pretty well with the £300million that relatively short length of road was going to cost. Roads are extremely expensive.)
Just listening to JRM on R4 and it reminded me, thinking of his seat and the potential by election in Mid Beds, that hopefully Labour has learnt a lesson from these by elections re the swing to Lab & LDs.
If Labour fight Mid Beds hard the outcome is more likely to be a Tory hold. Just because you are in 2nd place does not make you the party with the best chance of winning if there is an anti Tory mood. Many Tories are more comfortable placing their protest vote with the LDs than Lab and the LDs are much, much, much better than Lab at by elections.
I don't believe that Lab can win seats like Mid Beds or JRMs seat. The LDs can, but not if Lab play a spoiler role.
Although more relevant to by elections it can impact seats in a GE and there is still a chance that Lab might need the LDs after the GE.
I refer the hon member to North Shropshire.. where second-placed Lab voters obligingly lent their votes to be rid of Paterson.
Exactly. Worryingly Lab seem to be getting too excited by places like Mid Bed and wanting to get stuck in. To do so would be very silly and counter productive.
I'd argue that the Selby result, showing huge strength outside the metropolis. shows the mid-Beds poll was credible. Somerton was obvious LibDem territory, but mid-Beds is less so.
Oh absolutely. LDs could quite reasonably hold Somerton in a GE. If they won Mid Beds in a by election I think a GE hold would be very tough indeed. They are very different I agree. I also don't doubt that poll was credible. As you know I have some ancient experience in your area and a private poll done just before 1997 put Lab in 2nd place in SW Surrey. When it came to the GE the LDs missed it by just under 1000 votes. The point is when the Tories are in the doldrums and Lab running high then any poll in the Blue Wall will have Labour doing well and ahead of the LDs (as we have seen in Blue Wall polling). When it comes to the crunch and with targeting many of these seats are seats that Labour can't win but the LDs can. There are some examples of the reverse effect in towns where LDs are the main challengers and Lab take the seat from 3rd.
The simple point is Mid Beds is a Tory seat at any time you like to pick. Only a freak result changes that. I would argue the LDs can pull off that freak result and Lab can't simply because:
a) Tories are more likely to lend there vote to the LDs than Lab in a seat like this b) LDs are much better at by elections than Lab.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Bicycles are also widely used for commuting. When I lived in Germany, I used to cycle 5 miles to work every day, unless the weather was particularly bad. As well as saving me money, this kept me fit and left more space on the roads for those who needed to use their cars.
I would commute by bicycle here in the UK, but it's simply too dangerous and unpleasant, so that's another car added to the rush-hour traffic.
The idea that bikes are inherently recreational rather than utility vehicles is quite silly. They ought to be a perfectly good way of making practical 2-10 mile journeys (like commutes). They can (like cars!) absolutely be recreational too.
I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting replacing cars with bikes for long journeys. But most people don’t make long journeys that often.
Let’s be careful though, this thread carries an increasing risk of becoming about WFH.
The country is not setup for bikes and most people will not risk their lives dodging arsehole drivers. Not a hope of us being like Europeans whist our politicians are shit.
Neither was the Netherlands in the 60s - it took a lot of bold reforms and infrastructure against the run of public opinion.
You’re right about our politicians being shite though.
Bikes are semi situational though. The Netherlands has the great advantage of being flat.
There is untapped potential still in the UK on this front, but in some places you’re just not going to persuade as many people that they want to cycle up a giant hill every time they come home from work or the shops.
Plenty of flat places in the UK that could do much better with bikes. Manchester, Liverpool, plenty of London, loads of towns. We are way behind notably non-flat countries such as Spain, France and Italy when it comes to bike usage.
There aren't many cities in the country where the terrain is hilly enough to be a real barrier. Sheffield, Bristol, Plymouth - I don't think any others. Nottingham and Leeds undulate a bit but not enough to deter cycling. Personally I'd rather have a bit of up and down on my route - for me, my nearest hill of any sort at all is the Warburton Toll Bridge over the Manchester Ship Canal, which is 7 miles away.
The biggest lump I encounter is the bridge over the M60 by Sharston tip - though if I fancy pretending to be Tom Boonen I've got a lovely tiny steep cobbled hill by work in Jutland Street.
On cycling - and our long debate some time ago about the woman jailed for causing the death of a cyclist who was on a maybe/maybe not shared use cycle way.
Changed my commute recently, due to some roadworks and discovered that the pavement next to an icky bit of road (tight, queued up in rush hour - so either slow on a bike or risky/under-overtaking with not much space) has a shared bike/pedstrian sign and it's definitely wide enough. Great. Except it only has one sign and no obvious end or start point. I headed up it and then joined road when the path became thinner (and more used by pedestrians) but there was no indication that the status had changed. Been along it a few times and there's no demarcation at all of where the cycle use starts and ends, just one sign in the middle of a stretch.
I come off it where I think it should not be a cycle path as too tight, but have seen others head merrily on, which may well lead to conflict at some point. If walking down from the other direction, I'd be surprised and annoyed to see a bike coming towards me on the thin bits - thin enough that someone is going to have to stop and move to the side..
How many Labour supporters on here have said something to the effect of "nobody in London cares about the ULEZ" over the last few weeks? Quite a lot. Mind you a fair number of people saying such things don't live in London, so what the hell would they know about it?
Now even the Labour leadership is blaming the ULEZ for failing to take Uxbridge.
ULEZ and similar schemes strike me as a fundamentally good idea, badly implemented. The people who reap the benefit and can most easily adapt think it's great. Of course your EV driving Londoner likes it. Less traffic? On top of no road tax, free parking, and have you seen the crazy projections your Tesla's headlights can cast? The EV revolution is fantastic for the well heeled. They are loving it!
Some of the poorest Londoners who need a car, because even in TfL land public transport can be patchy, especially around the edges of the city, are now facing paying a lot more to drive, or buying a new car. Even with a scrappage scheme that might be hard to pay for, and even if there was no cost it is still a hassle.
The people who are really stuffed are the poor occasional drivers who drive into London once or twice a week in an old car, and are now going to have to make some tough choices.
Further down the road there are going to be even bigger problems. Will EV cars as second-hand, or third, be viable? Will the price floor be low enough? Will the old batteries be fit enough to use?
I suspect a lot of poor people are going to end up priced out of private transport. This ought to prompt a massive investment in public transport, but I don't think it will.
I would love to be able to cycle again but in my state of health, it’s not going to be possible! Incidentally, our local bus operator has announced that it’s dropping the service to the local hospital and replacing it with one to Stansted Airport. Can’t see that that’s a benefit! To me and mine anyway.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
I have an e-cargo bike. I have had 4 small children in it - more than I've ever had in a car. Alternatively several people can ride their own bicycles! I know this is a very difficult solution to think of. I can fit a hell of a lot of shopping in it. For journeys up to 5 km it's easily quicker and more convenient than a car, also for most journeys up to 8km or more. Admittedly I live in a city (as do millions of others). For someone to think a bicycle is only for leisure is pretty bizarre.
As is believing that because more electric cars are coming in the future that means there are no environmental problems.
Same here. We live in a small rural town. Last year I bought an e-cargo bike. Since then I think I’ve driven the car three times in the whole year, and the bike pretty much every day on the school run (6 miles there and back on hilly Cotswold roads). The bike is cheaper, faster and all round more convenient. We almost certainly won’t replace the car when it dies.
The main thing holding cycling back in Britain is lack of proper infrastructure. It’s slowly being built in inner cities and is creeping out to the suburbs and occasional peri-urban/rural clusters. There was a really interesting (and largely unreported) development in south Oxfordshire this week where councillors turned down their own council’s fully funded £300m relief road plan, largely on the basis that building more roads just leads to more traffic. Given the demographic there is an opportunity to do something new and much less car centric there instead.
I have a bike and enjoy cycling. A 6 mile cycle to work is as good a way of getting there as any. When I only have one or two things to get at the shops, a bike is as easy as a car. I do not however enjoy cycle maintenance. It's bad enough having to maintain my own bike, but as the man of the house I am apparently responsible for the condition of everybody's bikes. I don't understand why bikes are so much less reliable than cars. You can drive a car for a year, or 10,000 miles, without even thinking of needing a service. Bikes need a service roughly every 500 miles. And I think in 30 years of driving, or about 300,000 miles, I have only ever had three or four punctures. I get at least two punctures a year on my bike. Granted it's a much easier job to fix a puncture on a bike than a car, but it's still a pain in the arse. We have five bikes in the shed, and at least three of them have flat tyres. Any journey out as a family is necessarily prefixed by a good hour or so's cycle maintenance. As I said, I like cycling, and use a bike quite well. But I can see why people don't.
Bike maintenance emporia are available you know. They will take your money & your bicycles & return a lovely fettled bicycle in return.
Well yes, but from what I can see they tend to be bloody expensive!
To be fair, there is a place in Sale which will maintain your bike for almost free and also teach you to do it. Solutions are available: mainly just be a man and learn some skills. My comment was more the point that I can see why people don't do it.
Sure, but anything that requires time is expensive. Either you pay in your own time or you pay someone else for their time. Somehow we happily accept that the car costs huge sums to keep running, but balk at paying £100 to keep a bike running!
A well fettled bicycle is a thing of joy & worth paying for if you don’t have the time to do it yourself imo.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Bicycles are also widely used for commuting. When I lived in Germany, I used to cycle 5 miles to work every day, unless the weather was particularly bad. As well as saving me money, this kept me fit and left more space on the roads for those who needed to use their cars.
I would commute by bicycle here in the UK, but it's simply too dangerous and unpleasant, so that's another car added to the rush-hour traffic.
The idea that bikes are inherently recreational rather than utility vehicles is quite silly. They ought to be a perfectly good way of making practical 2-10 mile journeys (like commutes). They can (like cars!) absolutely be recreational too.
I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting replacing cars with bikes for long journeys. But most people don’t make long journeys that often.
Let’s be careful though, this thread carries an increasing risk of becoming about WFH.
The country is not setup for bikes and most people will not risk their lives dodging arsehole drivers. Not a hope of us being like Europeans whist our politicians are shit.
Neither was the Netherlands in the 60s - it took a lot of bold reforms and infrastructure against the run of public opinion.
You’re right about our politicians being shite though.
Bikes are semi situational though. The Netherlands has the great advantage of being flat.
There is untapped potential still in the UK on this front, but in some places you’re just not going to persuade as many people that they want to cycle up a giant hill every time they come home from work or the shops.
Plenty of flat places in the UK that could do much better with bikes. Manchester, Liverpool, plenty of London, loads of towns. We are way behind notably non-flat countries such as Spain, France and Italy when it comes to bike usage.
There aren't many cities in the country where the terrain is hilly enough to be a real barrier. Sheffield, Bristol, Plymouth - I don't think any others. Nottingham and Leeds undulate a bit but not enough to deter cycling. Personally I'd rather have a bit of up and down on my route - for me, my nearest hill of any sort at all is the Warburton Toll Bridge over the Manchester Ship Canal, which is 7 miles away.
The biggest lump I encounter is the bridge over the M60 by Sharston tip - though if I fancy pretending to be Tom Boonen I've got a lovely tiny steep cobbled hill by work in Jutland Street.
Bradford, especially to the west, is quite hilly.
Yes, I should have included Bradford.
I know exactly the two hills you mean! You barely notice the bridge by Sharston tip in the car: on a bike it's Les Alpes d'Gatley. And cycling down Jutland Street would be insane!
As others may have said, a footnote is the feeble showing of Reform/Reclaim when it comes to a crunch. L/LD mutual discipline held up well, but as expected Green voters ignored the progressive alliance stuff (their Uxbridge votes were enough to give the antiULEZ candidate victory, in fact) - in Somerton they were over 10%.
2.3% for Reclaim, 3.7% for Reform UK in Selby, 3.4% for Reform UK in Somerton. Reform UK aren't going to win any seats, but over 3% isn't nothing. Those who like to add the Reform polling to the Conservatives' should take note that, even in a situation with a strong squeeze on small parties, the Reform vote holds up somewhat.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
I have an e-cargo bike. I have had 4 small children in it - more than I've ever had in a car. Alternatively several people can ride their own bicycles! I know this is a very difficult solution to think of. I can fit a hell of a lot of shopping in it. For journeys up to 5 km it's easily quicker and more convenient than a car, also for most journeys up to 8km or more. Admittedly I live in a city (as do millions of others). For someone to think a bicycle is only for leisure is pretty bizarre.
As is believing that because more electric cars are coming in the future that means there are no environmental problems.
Same here. We live in a small rural town. Last year I bought an e-cargo bike. Since then I think I’ve driven the car three times in the whole year, and the bike pretty much every day on the school run (6 miles there and back on hilly Cotswold roads). The bike is cheaper, faster and all round more convenient. We almost certainly won’t replace the car when it dies.
The main thing holding cycling back in Britain is lack of proper infrastructure. It’s slowly being built in inner cities and is creeping out to the suburbs and occasional peri-urban/rural clusters. There was a really interesting (and largely unreported) development in south Oxfordshire this week where councillors turned down their own council’s fully funded £300m relief road plan, largely on the basis that building more roads just leads to more traffic. Given the demographic there is an opportunity to do something new and much less car centric there instead.
I have a bike and enjoy cycling. A 6 mile cycle to work is as good a way of getting there as any. When I only have one or two things to get at the shops, a bike is as easy as a car. I do not however enjoy cycle maintenance. It's bad enough having to maintain my own bike, but as the man of the house I am apparently responsible for the condition of everybody's bikes. I don't understand why bikes are so much less reliable than cars. You can drive a car for a year, or 10,000 miles, without even thinking of needing a service. Bikes need a service roughly every 500 miles. And I think in 30 years of driving, or about 300,000 miles, I have only ever had three or four punctures. I get at least two punctures a year on my bike. Granted it's a much easier job to fix a puncture on a bike than a car, but it's still a pain in the arse. We have five bikes in the shed, and at least three of them have flat tyres. Any journey out as a family is necessarily prefixed by a good hour or so's cycle maintenance. As I said, I like cycling, and use a bike quite well. But I can see why people don't.
Your car tyres are made of thicker rubber and have much more tread on them.
Indeed, worth investing in cycle tyres that are hard to puncture - whatever you spend on a bicycle it's still a fraction of the cost of running a car. I'm lucky we have several cycle repair shops within 400 metres, it can be annoying if you have to transport a bicycle far to get it fixed. But I know people who rely on their bicycles who pay for annual breakdown/recovery services for their bicycles. You just have to have the mindset of comparing it with the costs of running a car, rather than seeing it as an expensive toy!
As others may have said, a footnote is the feeble showing of Reform/Reclaim when it comes to a crunch. L/LD mutual discipline held up well, but as expected Green voters ignored the progressive alliance stuff (their Uxbridge votes were enough to give the antiULEZ candidate victory, in fact) - in Somerton they were over 10%.
Yes. This is a factor in thinking that NOM is value at the moment. There is no good reason to think the (residual) Tory vote will split to the right as much as polling indicates, or as much as the centre progressive vote will be split.
The possible change in this would be the entry of N Farage into the scene big time. But do I get a sense his day has passed? (And that L Fox, who at one time appeared as a celeb articulating reasonable right populism but now sounds like someone needing care in the community will not be a major successor).
BTW is Matt Goodwin, the L Fox of academia, at risk of going the same way?
People get used to the high of online fandom and attention, and escalate. Even starting out as potentially interesting they become parodies.
Owen Jones @OwenJones84 · 5m My main takeaway from the by elections is that Labour remain on course to form the next government, which we already knew; they’re not going to address the terrible social crises defining our country, but it will be preferable to fight them than the Tories.
I do not however enjoy cycle maintenance. It's bad enough having to maintain my own bike, but as the man of the house I am apparently responsible for the condition of everybody's bikes. I don't understand why bikes are so much less reliable than cars. You can drive a car for a year, or 10,000 miles, without even thinking of needing a service. Bikes need a service roughly every 500 miles. And I think in 30 years of driving, or about 300,000 miles, I have only ever had three or four punctures. I get at least two punctures a year on my bike. Granted it's a much easier job to fix a puncture on a bike than a car, but it's still a pain in the arse. We have five bikes in the shed, and at least three of them have flat tyres. Any journey out as a family is necessarily prefixed by a good hour or so's cycle maintenance.
Punctures are a function of tyres. If you are continually troubled by them then fit nothing but Schwalbe Marathon Plus. They ride like shit but you won't get any punctures.
I ride 10,000+ km/year and my maintenance regime is new chain every 4,000km, new brake pads every 2,000km. You can divide all those numbers by 2-3 for wet weather riding. Tyres are usually 4,000-7,000km depending on brand. Never rotate bike tyres.
Generally, shit bikes need a lot more maintenance due to lack of precision and poor materials in component manufacture.
Just listening to JRM on R4 and it reminded me, thinking of his seat and the potential by election in Mid Beds, that hopefully Labour has learnt a lesson from these by elections re the swing to Lab & LDs.
If Labour fight Mid Beds hard the outcome is more likely to be a Tory hold. Just because you are in 2nd place does not make you the party with the best chance of winning if there is an anti Tory mood. Many Tories are more comfortable placing their protest vote with the LDs than Lab and the LDs are much, much, much better than Lab at by elections.
I don't believe that Lab can win seats like Mid Beds or JRMs seat. The LDs can, but not if Lab play a spoiler role.
Although more relevant to by elections it can impact seats in a GE and there is still a chance that Lab might need the LDs after the GE.
I refer the hon member to North Shropshire.. where second-placed Lab voters obligingly lent their votes to be rid of Paterson.
Exactly. Worryingly Lab seem to be getting too excited by places like Mid Bed and wanting to get stuck in. To do so would be very silly and counter productive.
I'd argue that the Selby result, showing huge strength outside the metropolis. shows the mid-Beds poll was credible. Somerton was obvious LibDem territory, but mid-Beds is less so.
Maybe, but you also declared in the past they'd have no chance due to being third despite similar seats showing that is not definitive, as the quoted examples indicate.
I live in the UK's most congested city, Edinburgh, yet we have the the best public transport system in Scotland and the city is about as walkable as they come. Cycling is getting there. A small, rich minority cause congestion for everyone else.
There are very few reasons for driving here or in central London. But very large chunks of the population don't have this opportunity to make the switch. Public transport and walking cycling provision in our regional cities is pathetic - compare Liverpool to any French city. That has to come first.
What Khan and others need to do is to offer this carrot, and fast. We could have fully funded HS2 if we hadn't frozen fuel duty over the last few years. We need to explain that building more roads induces more demand, rather than sating it.
Inducing more demand is a good thing.
That's how you get economic growth. Greater aggregate demand.
You're in danger of becoming the kinetic equivalent of the telephone sanitisers in Hitchhiker's Guide. It may add to the growth figures but wastes energy on doing nothing very useful much of the time.
I think he's trying to hit every economic fallacy in the textbook.
It's strange how many people consider driving good for economic activity. It's a cost, space and time sink. The only thing you can buy out of a car window is a McDonald's. An Edinburgh tram has 250 customers on it - that's equivalent to a a traffic jam nearly a mile long.
Perhaps my attitude to this comes from actually growing up in the countryside. It was amazing moving to a city and finding that thousands of people could spend their time having fun and spending money rather than driving for hours to get to the cinema in Inverness.
"Libertarians are like house cats: absolutely convinced of their fierce independence while utterly dependent on a system they don't appreciate or understand."
Our resident pirate’s celebration of the car fits this definition perfectly. Cars are utterly dependent on a system of societal support that everyone pays for, whether they are car users or not. Depending on the car for personal travel is a society-level choice, not an absolute.
The issue, politically, is that at the individual level, for many, it isn’t a choice. Given the pressure on housing supply in this country people have to live where the housing is: what other choice do they have? Barty is absolutely correct that this means that for a many, many (probably a bare majority?) of people in this country that means depending on the car for personal transport for their daily needs - work, pleasure, shopping etc etc. To not have access to a car is to be impoverished & reliant on the whims of others.
It matters not one jot that they would be happier & healthier if they used public transport & the bicycle. They can’t - the entire system that allows them to exist in society requires this portion of the population to have a car. There is no functional bus service & no cycling infrastructure that doesn’t put them directly in the way of 44 ton artics on narrow rural A roads.
Squaring this circle is a challenge & Uxbridge demonstrates how easy it is for a politician to use people’s dependence on the car as a political tool: Expect more of this culture war politics I guess?
Yes, expect more. More or less every bit of politics in a democracy is about the gap or gulf between what is good for me and what is good for nation/society/world.
A significant cultural change has occurred, reflected in things like political party membership, whereby social complexification and discohesion has discouraged communal/national rather than individual concerns.
Education is a nice example. Rawlsianism suggests comprehensive education for 100% of people is best overall. The moment there are individual alternatives, the model ceases to work. Social good and individual good are at odds.
That Tories will want to weaponise that Uxbridge result. The problem is, the Tories are committed to banning new ICEs from 2030 (I know that’s to do with climate rather than air quality, but it’s the same effect). I wonder if they might now ditch that and dare Labour to keep that pledge.
It's not an ICE ban as PHEVs will still be available until 2035. There probably won't be any pure ICE offerings from any major OEMs anyway by then so it's irrelevant what this scumbag government does or doesn't do on the issue.
Here in Spain I've hired my usual Fiat Panda. Except this is a new one with the mild hybrid system. Which is *interesting*. Previous 1.2 4-pot replaced by 1.0 3-pot turbo with a bigger battery and now 6 gears.
What that means is that instead of a drivetrain which would run forever, we have a ludicrous thing with a power band absurdly narrow. And a nagging indicator for when you should change gear. Which isn't when it says. And the mild hybrid? As well as cutting the engine at traffic lights, it also advises you to coast in neutral - again with the engine off.
Frankly they have ruined a thoroughly good car. I am an advocate for proper hybrids and EVs, but this is my first "mild" hybrid and its bloody awful.
It's a Fiat fucking Panda. It got you were you needed to be with less emissions than the pure ICE variant so mission accomplished. All this moaning about 'power band' is bollocks. You weren't hot lapping Aragon in it.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
This is the BS.
Driving anywhere, except a tiny minority of the country in inner cities, is pleasant and convenient. Not horrendous.
Driving is the most freeing, the most liberating, the most self-controlled means of transportation people have in the modern, developed world.
Relying upon others, on 'public transportation' is a farce and a pathetic joke outside of a tiny number of metropolises, and it always will be.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with private transportation. Either environmentally, once we switch to clean technologies, or progressively, or for a matter of convenience.
Personally, I find driving a car is shit everywhere. A bicycle is way more enjoyable.
Nothing wrong environmentally if we pretend hard enough.
I know you like to be the king of wishful thinking, but isn't this a bit much eve for you?
A bicycle is enjoyable for having fun. It is a social activity.
When it comes to moving a serious distance, or moving multiple people a distance, or moving a heavy or bulky quantity of goods - nothing comes close to a private vehicle.
And no pretence necessary. Electric cars are the future, not replacing an eighty mile journey to see relatives with riding a bicycle down the M6.
Driving a bicycle can be very practical for a very large number of journeys. Not every journey, but I'm not a dogmatist who would propose one mode of transport is suitable for every journey.
Here in West Cork I'm finding driving is a lot easier than I ever found it anywhere in Britain. Where the population density is low a car comes into its own. But we visited Bath recently, using public transport when we were there this time - on a previous visit we'd driven, and in any sort of reasonably-sized urban area, using a car becomes nightmarish, and there are much better options.
My recommendation to you is to drive to the West of Ireland for a holiday. Experience the freedom of driving on roads where the worst traffic you have to worry about is an occasional tractor, or herd of cows. Then take yourself off for a holiday somewhere with good cycling infrastructure - some European city - and enjoy the freedom of being able to explore a city by bicycle, without having to battle the hassle of urban driving.
I think it would give you a broader perspective. You have a very narrow focus on car driving, and cannot imagine anything different.
When we were in Valencia, my son commented on the number of middle-aged women riding bicycles in normal clothes, obviously simply using a bike to get from A to B. Having grown up in the UK, it was something of a novelty to him that bikes could actually be used as practical transport by a wide range of people and not just for recreation by sporty types.
I remember chatting with a Danish colleague who had just bought an e-bike. I said “but isn’t that a cheat, surely the point of riding the bike to work is to get more exercise?” And he looked at me confused and said “the point of a bike is to get from a to b, isn’t it?”
for me, as I cycle to work when I can, it is both, It does not have to be one or the other.
I have an e-cargo bike. I have had 4 small children in it - more than I've ever had in a car. Alternatively several people can ride their own bicycles! I know this is a very difficult solution to think of. I can fit a hell of a lot of shopping in it. For journeys up to 5 km it's easily quicker and more convenient than a car, also for most journeys up to 8km or more. Admittedly I live in a city (as do millions of others). For someone to think a bicycle is only for leisure is pretty bizarre.
As is believing that because more electric cars are coming in the future that means there are no environmental problems.
Same here. We live in a small rural town. Last year I bought an e-cargo bike. Since then I think I’ve driven the car three times in the whole year, and the bike pretty much every day on the school run (6 miles there and back on hilly Cotswold roads). The bike is cheaper, faster and all round more convenient. We almost certainly won’t replace the car when it dies.
The main thing holding cycling back in Britain is lack of proper infrastructure. It’s slowly being built in inner cities and is creeping out to the suburbs and occasional peri-urban/rural clusters. There was a really interesting (and largely unreported) development in south Oxfordshire this week where councillors turned down their own council’s fully funded £300m relief road plan, largely on the basis that building more roads just leads to more traffic. Given the demographic there is an opportunity to do something new and much less car centric there instead.
I have a bike and enjoy cycling. A 6 mile cycle to work is as good a way of getting there as any. When I only have one or two things to get at the shops, a bike is as easy as a car. I do not however enjoy cycle maintenance. It's bad enough having to maintain my own bike, but as the man of the house I am apparently responsible for the condition of everybody's bikes. I don't understand why bikes are so much less reliable than cars. You can drive a car for a year, or 10,000 miles, without even thinking of needing a service. Bikes need a service roughly every 500 miles. And I think in 30 years of driving, or about 300,000 miles, I have only ever had three or four punctures. I get at least two punctures a year on my bike. Granted it's a much easier job to fix a puncture on a bike than a car, but it's still a pain in the arse. We have five bikes in the shed, and at least three of them have flat tyres. Any journey out as a family is necessarily prefixed by a good hour or so's cycle maintenance. As I said, I like cycling, and use a bike quite well. But I can see why people don't.
Schwalbe marathon plus tyres are pretty much puncture-proof - I've had them on a few bikes and never managed to get a pucnture through one. Slight hit on rolling resistance compared to a specialist tyre, but not much. I switched to them on my road bike for commute after a number of punctures and saw no reduction in speed (replacing the Specialized ones that came with the bike which were, in all fairness, probably nothing special).
Not super cheap and a bit of a bugger to fit them, but at least you only have to do it once!
I'm also a member of the Marathon Plus cult! I have had punctures, but they've either been internal (from the spoke poking through) or the sort of gash that, if it was on a person, would see you to A&E.
Labour should not backtrack on its environmental policies because of the result in Uxbridge, for two main reasons, in order of priority:
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed. 2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
On cycling - and our long debate some time ago about the woman jailed for causing the death of a cyclist who was on a maybe/maybe not shared use cycle way.
Changed my commute recently, due to some roadworks and discovered that the pavement next to an icky bit of road (tight, queued up in rush hour - so either slow on a bike or risky/under-overtaking with not much space) has a shared bike/pedstrian sign and it's definitely wide enough. Great. Except it only has one sign and no obvious end or start point. I headed up it and then joined road when the path became thinner (and more used by pedestrians) but there was no indication that the status had changed. Been along it a few times and there's no demarcation at all of where the cycle use starts and ends, just one sign in the middle of a stretch.
I come off it where I think it should not be a cycle path as too tight, but have seen others head merrily on, which may well lead to conflict at some point. If walking down from the other direction, I'd be surprised and annoyed to see a bike coming towards me on the thin bits - thin enough that someone is going to have to stop and move to the side..
A word in the ear of the relevant councillor might get some results - they should pass the query on to the traffic officers in the LA.
Congratulations to @HYUFD who said the conservatives would hold Uxbridge
Also a lot of humble pie is needed by all those who dismissed ULEZ as an issue
In the wider context the war against the car is not labour's friend
I'm still not convinced by ULEZ as an issue in London - in a few outer seats, maybe, and imo not in the mayoral election.
However it remains that around 90% of vehicles are *already* compliant, so the number of voters actually affected will be very small. Not sure how it will play electorally - we'll see. I don't see it saving Tory bacon - the outraged gammon vote in Outer London is not imo dominant enough.
Perhaps it's more interesting in the other cities which are introducing Low Emission Zones across the country. Those places where there has not been investment in public transport are perhaps exposed, though there's not a clear correlation.
This is a 2021 graphic, so it may have changed a little.
I think it is the first evidence that the war on cars may not play into labour's hands
It certainly played a part in Uxbridge and already we see calls to move the 2030 deadline for all new cars to be EV and here in Wales we have Drakeford cancelling all new road building, including the 3rd Menai crossing notwithstanding Holyhead is to become a free port, and the ideological change of all 30mph zones in Wales to 20mph by default
It will be interesting how this plays out over the next 15 months
Remember what happens when labour ignore WVM
An urban speed limit of 20 mph in Wales is a lot like ULEZ expansion. It isn't the principle that is wrong, it is the speed and lack of thought in which it is being implemented.
Transport policy is a disaster nationally. There are too many cars, not enough infrastructure (including alternative transport). Driving anywhere is horrendous, particularly in cities. Now that the current Government in Westminster have learned anti - green, anti- safety issues win votes, it is a situation that will undoubtedly get worse.
Essentially, yes. I think that in a few years time we will se significant safety improvements on Welsh roads, and I think opponents are actually - behind the "my personal freedom to do XYZ" smoke-screen - worried that it will be shown to work. Just as LTNs have been working for well over half a century now.
Driving at more than 20mph (or usually less) in residential roads is purely a cultural expectation, and that can change.
One of the UK road safety outliers is the proportion of people killed on our roads who are pedestrians, and a
In London we are not looking at 20mph for "tight residential streets" but for nearly all roads, including main roads into the centre. If this is the right policy then lets discuss it as 20mph is the speed limit for all roads in cities, not that 20mph is the speed limit for tight residential streets, as we are already well past that point.
As I say, I'd go for everything at a properly enforced 20mph limit that is non-classified inside community boundaries.
The best numbers that I have for London are that there are 9200 miles of roads, and that TFL hjaveput 20mph limits on about 100 miles of the 360 miles of roads they control.
But we need to remember that Boroughs control the vast majority of roads, and I have no numbers for them - do you?
It is about 50-50 across Greater London at the moment, but most of inner London, roughly zones 1 and 2, is close to 100% 20mph already. Outer London varies considerably with the most Brexity areas sub 10% through to others above 80%.
Comments
https://twitter.com/MarcDavenant/status/1682289037401288704
The Tories are con artists, Labour failed to mention this loudly.
Glasgow council are having to spend a fortune as most of their vehicles don't comply with the rules they introduced and all their trucks that take cars away are same and so they have to hire outside companies. You could not make up how useless and incompetent these people are.
Likewise Trump has some fanatical female supporters.
Farage doesn't.
But Nigel would be the only one who would pay for a round of drinks in a pub.
TBF the Edinburgh and hinterland buses are much better, on the whole, than almost anywhere else, being cooncil buses, and the trams are finally beginning to be useful, though the delays were shameful - we should have had the Granton and Gilmerton lines long ago, and be planning for some of the outer towns too.
Now it has a new name, some people are pretending that it is a new idea.
It's one simple idea - filtering to prevent through traffic, which is a core feature of pretty much every new housing development since 1965.
The first filtered traffic scheme I can recall was in Nottingham in the mid 1970s that I walked past on my way home from junior school. It is still there, and is excellent.
Opponents of ULEZs are denying the ratrun-free benefits of new developments, to those who live in pre-war housing.
Comparing the size of urban areas is fraught with difficulties.
But LA is clearly much bigger than Venice however you measure it. And Venice is clearly a special case.
What is politically unacceptable is saying that “those people who are poor and screwed over by this policy - well, the aim of the policy is good. So on consideration, and after some thought FUCK YOU, FUCKERS”.
Something to understand as well. Those with cars in The fatal flaw in decriminalisation is that they real problems of drugs relate to supply. Not giving someone a minor criminal record for having a splif is a fail - but the real harm to society is the huge amounts of easy money fed into the criminal system.
Hell, I would legalise supply *first*.
In some respects a better night for anti-Tories than the clean sweep we expected.
- cost
- exercise
Before purchase, I tried the route on my wife's hybrid and decided it was very doable, being largely flat. I knew the cycle would take a bit more time* compared to driving and wanted that to be compensated for with exercise so I could - and I have - cut down on time spent on other exercise in the week.
I'd switch though if either my commute got longer** or I started to struggle with the cycle as I get older.
*the five miles closest to work and 3 miles closest to home are actually faster on a bike. Some years ago I lived within 5 miles of the office in a different direction and that was faster by bike than by car, too. currently it's the 8 mile stretch in the middle where the cars can average ~50mph and I can do probably an everage of 18-19 that makes the car quicker.
**my 15 mile each way cycle is about the limit I'd want to do on a conventional bike, I think. Last year due to a closure on my route I had a substantal detour that took it up to 18 miles and that was a bit too much, both in time and energy on a conventional bike - I stuck with it, but only because I knew it was a short term thing. 15 miles I can do in under an hour door to door, with traffic and stopping included. The 18 miles on a different route was closer to 1:15
The main thing holding cycling back in Britain is lack of proper infrastructure. It’s slowly being built in inner cities and is creeping out to the suburbs and occasional peri-urban/rural clusters. There was a really interesting (and largely unreported) development in south Oxfordshire this week where councillors turned down their own council’s fully funded £300m relief road plan, largely on the basis that building more roads just leads to more traffic. Given the demographic there is an opportunity to do something new and much less car centric there instead.
Plus in this country (for example) we have many millions of people who *can't* get a driving license due to eg age or medical conditions. An example is epilepsy. They (which may eventually include me depending on diabetic complications of eyesight) need safe and practical forms of travel.
Given that in this country we have invested almost nothing in non-car mobility except for a spurt in the 1930s, one in the 1970s, and another one in the last decade or so, we have a long way to go to catch up.
The infrastructure is cheap. Rishi's bribe to motorists of cutting 5p off fuel taxes for one year cost £2.4bn, which is more than the total spent on mobility infrastructure in London over 20 years.
Yet all we hear from the moto-lobby is an unending whinging noise.
The pic looks like something from SS-GB.
Boots with 3000 spaces that would have been liable pointed out that the trams didn't run close to their factory and that many of their employees worked shift patterns that weren't served by the trams. They asked for discussions over the levy which would cost them £750,000 a year.
The council said no so Boots - whose factory straddled the city/county boundary - moved their car park from one end of the site to the other, moving it out of the city and avoiding the levy entirely
I always wonder about things like that. It's not dissimilar to Jo Swinson's exuberant self-confidence before the election that saw her lose her own seat.
I think it quite probable that they will get their way. Which means, since the Germany dominates economic matters in the EU, that the EU would probably follow suit.
So the next government might have the situation of pressure from the EU to harmonise on a later end of ICE date.
Labour also has a a decent chance of holding the new Selby seat, as the successor seat is slightly more favourable to them than the old Selby and Ainsty seat.
And congrats on your 1% in S&A
I did think about Swytch but their consumer reviews are awful.
I have been thinking of an electric bike. When I first started cycling in it was about 25 minutes when it was about 20 in a car. Now it is nearer 30 minutes.
Labours biggest weakness is a lack of understanding of, and even concern for, the lives and economics of those who are just above the welfare level. These should be natural Labour supporters but the party has been out of touch with them for decades so many have ended up Tories.
The way ULEZ and other traffic changes have been pushed through is another example of this, yet again the same group of just managing get the least support, are most impacted, and then told they are being pampered.......
Our resident pirate’s celebration of the car fits this definition perfectly. Cars are utterly dependent on a system of societal support that everyone pays for, whether they are car users or not. Depending on the car for personal travel is a society-level choice, not an absolute.
The issue, politically, is that at the individual level, for many, it isn’t a choice. Given the pressure on housing supply in this country people have to live where the housing is: what other choice do they have? Barty is absolutely correct that this means that for a many, many (probably a bare majority?) of people in this country that means depending on the car for personal transport for their daily needs - work, pleasure, shopping etc etc. To not have access to a car is to be impoverished & reliant on the whims of others.
It matters not one jot that they would be happier & healthier if they used public transport & the bicycle. They can’t - the entire system that allows them to exist in society requires this portion of the population to have a car. There is no functional bus service & no cycling infrastructure that doesn’t put them directly in the way of 44 ton artics on narrow rural A roads.
Squaring this circle is a challenge & Uxbridge demonstrates how easy it is for a politician to use people’s dependence on the car as a political tool: Expect more of this culture war politics I guess?
What is politically unacceptable is saying that “those people who are poor and screwed over by this policy - well, the aim of the policy is good. So on consideration, and after some thought FUCK YOU, FUCKERS”.
Something to understand as well. Those with cars in Yes, they were.
The new policy is to use the road space to create segregated, barrier protected cycle lanes.
This puts buses in the main traffic flow. It used to be that you would see the buses cruising past traffic jams. In a number of areas, that is no longer the case
In the poorer areas of London buses are the main public transport - house prices/desirability are essentially a function of access to the Tube and local school quality. So this is policy that has hit a section of the poor.
There is untapped potential still in the UK on this front, but in some places you’re just not going to persuade as many people that they want to cycle up a giant hill every time they come home from work or the shops.
It should be remembered that in 2017 Labour was 14k ahead of the LibDems in NE Somerset.
Do Labour think that Starmer is less popular than Corbyn (or Miliband or Brown) or that they're less ready for government ?
If not why would Labour give up now ?
I do not however enjoy cycle maintenance. It's bad enough having to maintain my own bike, but as the man of the house I am apparently responsible for the condition of everybody's bikes. I don't understand why bikes are so much less reliable than cars. You can drive a car for a year, or 10,000 miles, without even thinking of needing a service. Bikes need a service roughly every 500 miles. And I think in 30 years of driving, or about 300,000 miles, I have only ever had three or four punctures. I get at least two punctures a year on my bike. Granted it's a much easier job to fix a puncture on a bike than a car, but it's still a pain in the arse.
We have five bikes in the shed, and at least three of them have flat tyres. Any journey out as a family is necessarily prefixed by a good hour or so's cycle maintenance.
As I said, I like cycling, and use a bike quite well. But I can see why people don't.
It's hard to say who may have emerged if there was a feeling that there was a good chance for the Tories to win the mayoralty in London. Heavyweights don't want to take the fall in a hopeless election, nor to agonise publicly over a bid.
But it would've at least been interesting if nominations had opened today, as there is more of a feeling than yesterday that, whilst not easy, it's not unwinnable with a strong candidate.
The best numbers that I have for London are that there are 9200 miles of roads, and that TFL hjaveput 20mph limits on about 100 miles of the 360 miles of roads they control.
But we need to remember that Boroughs control the vast majority of roads, and I have no numbers for them - do you?
We need a halfway house where local authorities can issue bonds in order to fund this kind of development, but (partially due to past LA stupidity) the Treasury is dead against relinquishing any control over the financial purse strings, which leaves LAs in the invidious position of having to somehow tax the local business population to pay for improvements.
(One might reasonably ask what is happening to the rest of the money being paid by local businesses to local government, but the vast majority of that is earmarked by central government mandates already. LAs have very little room for maneovre.)
Weirdly, it seems to have been perfectly possible for LAs to borrow vast sums to build shopping centres, but impossible for them to borrow to build railway or tram system. The ways of the Treasury are mysterious, opaque & seem designed to prevent any real development in this country.
12s on BF.
"Attention platform UK, your Labour majority government is approaching and will be here shortly. Mind the gap. Mind the gap."
But given the choice, between the mid 90's situation, and the current situation, the Conservatives would take the latter. There's a certain kind of voter that switched from the Conservatives to Labour, because they liked Blair, switched back in 2010, and has decided to stick with the Conservatives.
The possible change in this would be the entry of N Farage into the scene big time. But do I get a sense his day has passed? (And that L Fox, who at one time appeared as a celeb articulating reasonable right populism but now sounds like someone needing care in the community will not be a major successor).
BTW is Matt Goodwin, the L Fox of academia, at risk of going the same way?
European cities, to my mind, do this excellently. I lived in a German city of 250,000 and they had five tramlines that could get you most places within 2 changes. Contrast that with a place like Leeds and it seems positively barbarous.
Rural areas, like the Highlands, will always be more car dependent than urban areas and I don't think we should be punitive (especially without Eabhal's carrot) but induced demand can work both ways if public transport (of which I think the tram is certainly up there) is cheap, reliable and frequent.
Not super cheap and a bit of a bugger to fit them, but at least you only have to do it once!
That reads as if you know what's good for them better than they know themselves ?
And do you not realise that this feeds into the suspicion that people are anti-car not for any reasons about pollution but because they are against the concept of individuals having cars under any circumstances.
To be fair, there is a place in Sale which will maintain your bike for almost free and also teach you to do it. Solutions are available: mainly just be a man and learn some skills. My comment was more the point that I can see why people don't do it.
It makes total sense - the land is there, the demand is there (the A40 is a permanent car park of slow moving commuter traffic), the new Park&Ride is being built at Eynsham so a station there is perfect, the MoD likes the idea of being able to ship all their stuff into Brize on the train.
In the current planning environment I don’t think it will ever happen though. Rail expenditure, especially in the south, just seems to be politically undoable.
(Total cost is £1billion according to the feasibility study. Which compares pretty well with the £300million that relatively short length of road was going to cost. Roads are extremely expensive.)
The simple point is Mid Beds is a Tory seat at any time you like to pick. Only a freak result changes that. I would argue the LDs can pull off that freak result and Lab can't simply because:
a) Tories are more likely to lend there vote to the LDs than Lab in a seat like this
b) LDs are much better at by elections than Lab.
Bradford, especially to the west, is quite hilly.
Changed my commute recently, due to some roadworks and discovered that the pavement next to an icky bit of road (tight, queued up in rush hour - so either slow on a bike or risky/under-overtaking with not much space) has a shared bike/pedstrian sign and it's definitely wide enough. Great. Except it only has one sign and no obvious end or start point. I headed up it and then joined road when the path became thinner (and more used by pedestrians) but there was no indication that the status had changed. Been along it a few times and there's no demarcation at all of where the cycle use starts and ends, just one sign in the middle of a stretch.
I come off it where I think it should not be a cycle path as too tight, but have seen others head merrily on, which may well lead to conflict at some point. If walking down from the other direction, I'd be surprised and annoyed to see a bike coming towards me on the thin bits - thin enough that someone is going to have to stop and move to the side..
Now even the Labour leadership is blaming the ULEZ for failing to take Uxbridge.
ULEZ and similar schemes strike me as a fundamentally good idea, badly implemented. The people who reap the benefit and can most easily adapt think it's great. Of course your EV driving Londoner likes it. Less traffic? On top of no road tax, free parking, and have you seen the crazy projections your Tesla's headlights can cast? The EV revolution is fantastic for the well heeled. They are loving it!
Some of the poorest Londoners who need a car, because even in TfL land public transport can be patchy, especially around the edges of the city, are now facing paying a lot more to drive, or buying a new car. Even with a scrappage scheme that might be hard to pay for, and even if there was no cost it is still a hassle.
The people who are really stuffed are the poor occasional drivers who drive into London once or twice a week in an old car, and are now going to have to make some tough choices.
Further down the road there are going to be even bigger problems. Will EV cars as second-hand, or third, be viable? Will the price floor be low enough? Will the old batteries be fit enough to use?
I suspect a lot of poor people are going to end up priced out of private transport. This ought to prompt a massive investment in public transport, but I don't think it will.
Incidentally, our local bus operator has announced that it’s dropping the service to the local hospital and replacing it with one to Stansted Airport. Can’t see that that’s a benefit! To me and mine anyway.
A well fettled bicycle is a thing of joy & worth paying for if you don’t have the time to do it yourself imo.
I know exactly the two hills you mean! You barely notice the bridge by Sharston tip in the car: on a bike it's Les Alpes d'Gatley. And cycling down Jutland Street would be insane!
But I know people who rely on their bicycles who pay for annual breakdown/recovery services for their bicycles. You just have to have the mindset of comparing it with the costs of running a car, rather than seeing it as an expensive toy!
@OwenJones84
·
5m
My main takeaway from the by elections is that Labour remain on course to form the next government, which we already knew; they’re not going to address the terrible social crises defining our country, but it will be preferable to fight them than the Tories.
https://twitter.com/OwenJones84
I ride 10,000+ km/year and my maintenance regime is new chain every 4,000km, new brake pads every 2,000km. You can divide all those numbers by 2-3 for wet weather riding. Tyres are usually 4,000-7,000km depending on brand. Never rotate bike tyres.
Generally, shit bikes need a lot more maintenance due to lack of precision and poor materials in component manufacture.
Edit: or have I got muddled?
A significant cultural change has occurred, reflected in things like political party membership, whereby social complexification and discohesion has discouraged communal/national rather than individual concerns.
Education is a nice example. Rawlsianism suggests comprehensive education for 100% of people is best overall. The moment there are individual alternatives, the model ceases to work. Social good and individual good are at odds.
1. Measures to reduce air pollution in cities and, more generally, to tackle climate change are urgently needed.
2. Any backtracking would lead to a significant increase in the Green vote at the next GE, potentially losing Labour quite a few seats.
That's not to say that the implementation of schemes like ULEZ shouldn't be improved. But they shouldn't be abandoned.
https://www.healthystreetsscorecard.london/results/results_input_indicators/#Results20mph