Despite all the OTT stuff and lots of smears / lies doing the rounds on social media, it appears that people behind this ferry company, you know have done rather a lot of sea transportation lark in the past.
Mitigation policies are details that can be left up to the government.
Frankly the preferably option is that Parliament should stop fucking around and make up the decision to accept the deal or leave without a deal and stop looking for a way out. When they voted for Article 50 they created this situation.
The point is, there will be a deal. There has to be if only for the bare essentials. Hence all those points which need to be included in the deal will have to be included in a document of sorts and then, following discussions, again, if only on the EU's own no deal measures, that document will be used to form some kind of, er, deal.
So either way we will have a deal.
Now, people might not like the new deal but then when what they say they prefer (no deal) is actually impossible, they will have to lump it.
You're just being pedantic.
"The Withdrawal Agreement" is a comprehensive agreement on how we leave the EU.
A deal on, for example, a 9 month extension to civil aviation licenses is not "A Withdrawal Agreement"
What people will have voted for is no transition period, no ongoing payments (about 2/3 of the £39bn I believe), no guarantee on citizens rights, etc.
Is the third option one that has been agreed with the EU? And if so on what terms? The ones we are in with at the moment (e.g. with rebate, non-Euro etc), or those from Cameron's negotiation, or something else?
Putting an option on a ballot paper that no-one knows what it means (and can therefore mean anything to everyone), and might not even be agreeable, is the sort of madness that got us into this mess in the first place.
We don't need consent from the EU to revoke Article 50, provided we haven't actually left - that was the ECJ ruling.
But aren't there restrictions after that?
No, the ECJ ruling removed the advocate general's text about "abuse". The right to invoke and revoke A50 in accordance with normal constitutional procedures is completely unabridged.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
You inconsiderate victim blaming driving facist. it’s the drivers like you, the street furniture, the signs, it’s everybody but the cyclist with no helmet in dark clothes fault.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Despite all the OTT stuff and lots of smears / lies doing the rounds on social media, it appears that people behind this ferry company, you know have done rather a lot of sea transportation lark in the past.
[snip] The big challenge, it was put to me by someone who knows, was to allow the no dealers the opportunity to change their minds in an "honourable" way so that they don't lose face. I'm not sure that this has happened but I expect the narrative to build whereby such an excuse can be found.
It's a very sensible approach, but it's going to be darned hard to find a plausible justification for an honourable U-turn.
Why would the no-dealers want to U-turn now when they think they're on the cusp of victory?
Well, some of them are genuine no-deal enthusiasts, for who the only argument that might work would be 'sign up else Brexit is off', but most of the Tory MPs who have dissed the deal are more likely to be less extreme sorts who simply hadn't understood quite how big the disaster of no deal would be, and who were caught up in the mob attack on the deal.
However you look at it, though, the numbers are daunting.
Referendum would solve it. I don't see any other way of settling the issue, outside of a general election - and the outcome of that would be even less certain.
Which would be fine if the eeijits who lost first time didn't want to use a referendum to overturn the previous decision.
A deal vs no deal referendum would be entirely legitimate. But the Commons will never approve it.
No it wouldn't. What exactly would be on the ballot paper for "no deal"? No deals whatsoever for anything? No agreements, temporary or otherwise, allowed to be negotiated or concluded? No acceptance of the EU's no deal measures?
It is a nonsensical instruction to a government that would be impossible to carry out.
The wording would be easy. If and when Parliament voted down the WA, and if it then voted through the legislation for a second referendum, the question on the ballot would read:
"Do you wish to remain in the European Union?" Yes/No.
Despite all the OTT stuff and lots of smears / lies doing the rounds on social media, it appears that people behind this ferry company, you know have done rather a lot of sea transportation lark in the past.
Despite all the OTT stuff and lots of smears / lies doing the rounds on social media, it appears that people behind this ferry company, you know have done rather a lot of sea transportation lark in the past.
Mitigation policies are details that can be left up to the government.
Frankly the preferably option is that Parliament should stop fucking around and make up the decision to accept the deal or leave without a deal and stop looking for a way out. When they voted for Article 50 they created this situation.
The point is, there will be a deal. There has to be if only for the bare essentials. Hence all those points which need to be included in the deal will have to be included in a document of sorts and then, following discussions, again, if only on the EU's own no deal measures, that document will be used to form some kind of, er, deal.
So either way we will have a deal.
Now, people might not like the new deal but then when what they say they prefer (no deal) is actually impossible, they will have to lump it.
You're just being pedantic.
"The Withdrawal Agreement" is a comprehensive agreement on how we leave the EU.
A deal on, for example, a 9 month extension to civil aviation licenses is not "A Withdrawal Agreement"
What people will have voted for is no transition period, no ongoing payments (about 2/3 of the £39bn I believe), no guarantee on citizens rights, etc.
I don't believe you are in a position to say for sure what people "will have voted for".
We will need some kind of a deal and it is positively Plato's Republic-esque that it should be thought that something so simple as determining what arrangements we will have with the EU post March will be straightforward. You would have to create society from scratch.
Don't forget the WA leaves everything as is via the transition period.
If you have no deal you have to replicate each of those arrangements. Or else you have the WA.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Usual mode of travel to work (Great Britain, 2016):
Car/van 67% Walking 10% Rail 10% Bus 8% Other 5%
Trains are often bloody awful, but their failings are the subject of a disproportionate amount of attention. The reason for this is, of course, that rail commuting is also disproportionately concentrated in London and the South East (i.e. the part of the country on which most care and attention is lavished,) disproportionately undertaken by the well-to-do (i.e. the people who have the loudest voices and are taken the most seriously,) and the rail network swallows an enormous amount of public subsidy. It also helps that the poor performance of the railways is easy to monitor (through plentiful and readily available statistics,) and large numbers of pissed-off commuters can easily be located and interviewed at any major railway station (you simply take your microphone and camera crew to Kings Cross on a particularly miserable Monday evening, et voila! Instant news filler.)
By contrast, the roads are full of potholes and bus services have been continually cut for many years, but gripes about those problems rarely make it past the sixth item on the local news, just after the winner of the under-16s national karate championships and the woman given a six-month suspended prison sentence for neglecting some kittens.
Remember, this will be messy whatever happens next. We can’t stop that, what we’re looking for is the least bad option and that means getting as many people on board.
The deal has the support of very few and carries a calculated risk. It can only be forced through Parliament. It seeks to limit economic harm by taking in a democratic deficit. No deal with consent or remain with consent is better than something being forced through.
Oh, a pref system. Ok, well if you have 3 options, I guess you would have to.
But no, sorry, to me it's nuts.
How is No Deal going to be defined and how can the public form a view on what the consequences will be?
If No Deal wins how can parliament implement what most of them think is catastrophic?
Will an article 50 extension be granted for anything but Deal v Remain? (Doubt it.)
And if so, does it not look a slam dunk (i.e. rigged) for Remain?
Or what if the result is very close for Remain? Best of three?
How will the public understand the Deal when many MPs don't seem to?
Just a sample of questions arising.
2nd Ref might happen, not ruling it out, but gosh it would be a monumental piece of failure and cowardice from our elected politicians.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
There is plenty wrong with the antics of some car and lorry drivers but very often cyclists are their own worst enemies.
Doubly stupid as actually I don't wear a helmet in case of traffic collision but in case I fall off and bang my head. If I'm hit by a 30 tonne lorry I realise a helmet is not going to be important either way. If I get blown over and land on a kerb, it suddenly becomes very relevant.
As for the comments about reflective clothing, they're beyond ridiculous. By that argument motorists with good night vision shouldn't need to use lights at night and when they get hit, it's the other person's fault.
The whole cyclists-wearing-a-helmet-causes-drivers-to-behave-differently is absolutely ridiculous.
A colleague of others crashed his bike on the way into work when the front forks split (yes, really) and threw him under a stationary car. A good friend of mine broke his collarbone when he tried to jump his racing bike onto a pavement to avoid traffic. Both were glad they were wearing their helmets, and no other vehicle caused the accidents.
Cycling UK can just fuck off. Any public funding they get should be removed until they grow up and do what is best for the majority of cyclists, pedestrians and car users, not just the pepparami-in-lycra cycling fundamentalists.
Leave the EU with this deal Leave the EU without this deal Remain in the EU
These are the three things that could happen, we’re going to have to pick one. So let the people choose.
Ok.
Leave with the deal 20% Leave without the deal 35% Remain in the EU 45%
The people have spoken.
What have they said?
A two part question - either: No Deal yes/no ? If no, then May's Deal or Remain ?
or... May's Deal yes/no If no, then No Deal or Remain ?
Both options offer all sides a chance of their preferred result - but prioritise the leave side of the debate, which respects the outcome of the first referendum.
Is the third option one that has been agreed with the EU? And if so on what terms? The ones we are in with at the moment (e.g. with rebate, non-Euro etc), or those from Cameron's negotiation, or something else?
Putting an option on a ballot paper that no-one knows what it means (and can therefore mean anything to everyone), and might not even be agreeable, is the sort of madness that got us into this mess in the first place.
We don't need consent from the EU to revoke Article 50, provided we haven't actually left - that was the ECJ ruling.
But aren't there restrictions after that?
No, the ECJ ruling removed the advocate general's text about "abuse". The right to invoke and revoke A50 in accordance with normal constitutional procedures is completely unabridged.
I thought the ECJ still had right to determine whether or not a revocation was valid?
Mitigation policies are details that can be left up to the government.
Frankly the preferably option is that Parliament should stop fucking around and make up the decision to accept the deal or leave without a deal and stop looking for a way out. When they voted for Article 50 they created this situation.
The point is, there will be a deal. There has to be if only for the bare essentials. Hence all those points which need to be included in the deal will have to be included in a document of sorts and then, following discussions, again, if only on the EU's own no deal measures, that document will be used to form some kind of, er, deal.
So either way we will have a deal.
Now, people might not like the new deal but then when what they say they prefer (no deal) is actually impossible, they will have to lump it.
You're just being pedantic.
"The Withdrawal Agreement" is a comprehensive agreement on how we leave the EU.
A deal on, for example, a 9 month extension to civil aviation licenses is not "A Withdrawal Agreement"
What people will have voted for is no transition period, no ongoing payments (about 2/3 of the £39bn I believe), no guarantee on citizens rights, etc.
I don't believe you are in a position to say for sure what people "will have voted for".
We will need some kind of a deal and it is positively Plato's Republic-esque that it should be thought that something so simple as determining what arrangements we will have with the EU post March will be straightforward. You would have to create society from scratch.
Don't forget the WA leaves everything as is via the transition period.
If you have no deal you have to replicate each of those arrangements. Or else you have the WA.
You asked me for proposed wording. I provided it:
(1) Leave the EU having signed the WA. (2) Leave the EU without having signed the WA.
I think I'd be exactly in a position to say what people have voted for...
You certainly have to replicate some of those arrangements - not necessarily all of them.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
That's the drivers fault for not being able to anticipate an idiot in their blind spot.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
On the plus side this practise does reduce the number of cyclists on the road.
Usual mode of travel to work (Great Britain, 2016):
Car/van 67% Walking 10% Rail 10% Bus 8% Other 5%
Trains are often bloody awful, but their failings are the subject of a disproportionate amount of attention.
Trains are also stupidly expensive compared to say Austria or Holland. For instance I have to go by car from Darlington to Northampton next week as by car I get £180 in mileage expenses but the train takes 4 hours and costs £249 for a standard return...
In Austria it was €100 to go from Vienna to Klagenfurt and that's an identical distance...
Now I do prefer to travel by train but sometimes the prices are beyond insane - Darlington to London on a Monday morning is £306 return now...
Mitigation policies are details that can be left up to the government.
Frankly the preferably option is that Parliament should stop fucking around and make up the decision to accept the deal or leave without a deal and stop looking for a way out. When they voted for Article 50 they created this situation.
The point is, there will be a deal. There has to be if only for the bare essentials. Hence all those points which need to be included in the deal will have to be included in a document of sorts and then, following discussions, again, if only on the EU's own no deal measures, that document will be used to form some kind of, er, deal.
So either way we will have a deal.
Now, people might not like the new deal but then when what they say they prefer (no deal) is actually impossible, they will have to lump it.
You're just being pedantic.
"The Withdrawal Agreement" is a comprehensive agreement on how we leave the EU.
A deal on, for example, a 9 month extension to civil aviation licenses is not "A Withdrawal Agreement"
What people will have voted for is no transition period, no ongoing payments (about 2/3 of the £39bn I believe), no guarantee on citizens rights, etc.
I don't believe you are in a position to say for sure what people "will have voted for".
We will need some kind of a deal and it is positively Plato's Republic-esque that it should be thought that something so simple as determining what arrangements we will have with the EU post March will be straightforward. You would have to create society from scratch.
Don't forget the WA leaves everything as is via the transition period.
If you have no deal you have to replicate each of those arrangements. Or else you have the WA.
You asked me for proposed wording. I provided it:
(1) Leave the EU having signed the WA. (2) Leave the EU without having signed the WA.
I think I'd be exactly in a position to say what people have voted for...
You certainly have to replicate some of those arrangements - not necessarily all of them.
In the event of 2) there would be a WA II. There would have to be and your "you certainly have to replicate some of those arrangements" is testament to that fact.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
The solution is perhaps that all bikes, in major cities, must register and carry a reg number on their back wheel mudguard. Modern camera tech at traffic lights should be able to tag them?
Despite all the OTT stuff and lots of smears / lies doing the rounds on social media, it appears that people behind this ferry company, you know have done rather a lot of sea transportation lark in the past.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
There is plenty wrong with the antics of some car and lorry drivers but very often cyclists are their own worst enemies.
My favourite was from years ago - whilst walking on a pavement, I got nearly knocked over by a cyclist coming around a blind bend, where there are a couple of trees on the pavement. He had a mobile phone to his ear and a child in a child seat on the back of his bike as he steered blindly into the middle gap.
He should have his child and phone taken off him. Although I think he'd probably miss his phone more. And the child - if it has survived - must be a teenager.
I've seen plenty of good car drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. I have also soon (fewer) bad drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Groups like Cycling UK ought to concentrate a little more on condemning bad cycling than automatically blaming car drivers and pedestrians.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
On the plus side this practise does reduce the number of cyclists on the road.
Well, the stupid ones, perhaps.
If I'm honest I would have said the best use of the time of these intellectually challenged lazy virtue signallers Cycling UK would be spent in getting it made illegal for cyclists to wear earphones while cycling. Blasting along in their own little world, with nothing to stop them hitting pedestrians, cars, pavements, potholes...
Usual mode of travel to work (Great Britain, 2016):
Car/van 67% Walking 10% Rail 10% Bus 8% Other 5%
Trains are often bloody awful, but their failings are the subject of a disproportionate amount of attention.
Trains are also stupidly expensive compared to say Austria or Holland. For instance I have to go by car from Darlington to Northampton next week as by car I get £180 in mileage expenses but the train takes 4 hours and costs £249 for a standard return...
In Austria it was €100 to go from Vienna to Klagenfurt and that's an identical distance...
Now I do prefer to travel by train but sometimes the prices are beyond insane - Darlington to London on a Monday morning is £306 return now...
Usual mode of travel to work (Great Britain, 2016):
Car/van 67% Walking 10% Rail 10% Bus 8% Other 5%
Trains are often bloody awful, but their failings are the subject of a disproportionate amount of attention.
Trains are also stupidly expensive compared to say Austria or Holland. For instance I have to go by car from Darlington to Northampton next week as by car I get £180 in mileage expenses but the train takes 4 hours and costs £249 for a standard return...
In Austria it was €100 to go from Vienna to Klagenfurt and that's an identical distance...
Now I do prefer to travel by train but sometimes the prices are beyond insane - Darlington to London on a Monday morning is £306 return now...
That's rush hour pricing for you!
I can fly from Newcastle to London City airport for half the amount - which is what makes it so blooming stupid
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
The solution is perhaps that all bikes, in major cities, must register and carry a reg number on their back wheel mudguard. Modern camera tech at traffic lights should be able to tag them?
If we can't even catch those moped criminals,* I can't see that this would help.
*or at least, can't do so without Diane Abbott going off on one, er, that is, a rant.
I've never really experienced too many issues with cyclists as a motorist. Perhaps it's because I give them i) As much room as I would a car whilst overtaking ii) Think they have a right to use the road too.
The 'two abreast' peloton is perfectly correct (Three makes a line too wide; and single file creates the line too long).
Although my bike currently needs some repair perhaps it's because I've been out on some 50 mile rides with a local club that I can understand it all as a driver ?
Same with horse riders. Once you've ridden a horse on the road you have a far better concept of what they're trying to achieve and how to drive round them.
Sure, everyone can behave like idiots - but you're of far more danger in a 2 ton piece of metal than on a bike or nag. Note this experience is mainly out rural, city cycling (and driving) is a somewhat different beast.
Edit: Although I've driven far far far more than I've cycled, dickhead motorist experiences ('did that BMW pass within 11.7 millimetres of my bike') ? outnumber the piss poor cyclist experiences by far.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
There is plenty wrong with the antics of some car and lorry drivers but very often cyclists are their own worst enemies.
My favourite was from years ago - whilst walking on a pavement, I got nearly knocked over by a cyclist coming around a blind bend, where there are a couple of trees on the pavement. He had a mobile phone to his ear and a child in a child seat on the back of his bike as he steered blindly into the middle gap.
He should have his child and phone taken off him. Although I think he'd probably miss his phone more. And the child - if it has survived - must be a teenager.
I've seen plenty of good car drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. I have also soon (fewer) bad drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Groups like Cycling UK ought to concentrate a little more on condemning bad cycling than automatically blaming car drivers and pedestrians.
The ones who are the best round here are the Arriva bus drivers. Always patient, always polite, always considerate. And always give a friendly wave back when you wave to thank them.
I'm following brexit somewhat at arm's length, but was surprised to hear on the World Service and NPR this morning that the UK gov is preparing a 'massive' advertising campaign to get the nation ready for a no-deal brexit, including such items as making sure your passport has at least 6 months left on it.
Is 'no deal' really getting that much closer? It was always portrayed as the nuclear option and to be avoided like the plague (as CAMRA used to say about Watneys Red Barrel).
Usual mode of travel to work (Great Britain, 2016):
Car/van 67% Walking 10% Rail 10% Bus 8% Other 5%
Trains are often bloody awful, but their failings are the subject of a disproportionate amount of attention.
Trains are also stupidly expensive compared to say Austria or Holland. For instance I have to go by car from Darlington to Northampton next week as by car I get £180 in mileage expenses but the train takes 4 hours and costs £249 for a standard return...
In Austria it was €100 to go from Vienna to Klagenfurt and that's an identical distance...
Now I do prefer to travel by train but sometimes the prices are beyond insane - Darlington to London on a Monday morning is £306 return now...
Don't forget the add on cost of taxis at either end for a train journey.
If I'm honest I would have said the best use of the time of these intellectually challenged lazy virtue signallers Cycling UK would be spent in getting it made illegal for cyclists to wear earphones while cycling. Blasting along in their own little world, with nothing to stop them hitting pedestrians, cars, pavements, potholes...
We can't even seem to stop idiots literally watching TV shows whilst driving*. So I don't see much chance of us stopping cyclists listening to music.
* I'd personally favour crushing their cars on say a second offence.
Usual mode of travel to work (Great Britain, 2016):
Car/van 67% Walking 10% Rail 10% Bus 8% Other 5%
Trains are often bloody awful, but their failings are the subject of a disproportionate amount of attention.
Trains are also stupidly expensive compared to say Austria or Holland. For instance I have to go by car from Darlington to Northampton next week as by car I get £180 in mileage expenses but the train takes 4 hours and costs £249 for a standard return...
In Austria it was €100 to go from Vienna to Klagenfurt and that's an identical distance...
Now I do prefer to travel by train but sometimes the prices are beyond insane - Darlington to London on a Monday morning is £306 return now...
That's rush hour pricing for you!
I can fly from Newcastle to London City airport for half the amount - which is what makes it so blooming stupid
Sounds a lot less convenient though, when you account for check in and security.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
There is plenty wrong with the antics of some car and lorry drivers but very often cyclists are their own worst enemies.
My favourite was from years ago - whilst walking on a pavement, I got nearly knocked over by a cyclist coming around a blind bend, where there are a couple of trees on the pavement. He had a mobile phone to his ear and a child in a child seat on the back of his bike as he steered blindly into the middle gap.
He should have his child and phone taken off him. Although I think he'd probably miss his phone more. And the child - if it has survived - must be a teenager.
I've seen plenty of good car drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. I have also soon (fewer) bad drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Groups like Cycling UK ought to concentrate a little more on condemning bad cycling than automatically blaming car drivers and pedestrians.
The ones who are the best round here are the Arriva bus drivers. Always patient, always polite, always considerate. And always give a friendly wave back when you wave to thank them.
In my experience, most bus drivers behave well towards other road users.
As an aside, I'd say that about 80% of Audi drivers are arseholes.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
There is plenty wrong with the antics of some car and lorry drivers but very often cyclists are their own worst enemies.
My favourite was from years ago - whilst walking on a pavement, I got nearly knocked over by a cyclist coming around a blind bend, where there are a couple of trees on the pavement. He had a mobile phone to his ear and a child in a child seat on the back of his bike as he steered blindly into the middle gap.
He should have his child and phone taken off him. Although I think he'd probably miss his phone more. And the child - if it has survived - must be a teenager.
I've seen plenty of good car drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. I have also soon (fewer) bad drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Groups like Cycling UK ought to concentrate a little more on condemning bad cycling than automatically blaming car drivers and pedestrians.
The ones who are the best round here are the Arriva bus drivers. Always patient, always polite, always considerate. And always give a friendly wave back when you wave to thank them.
In my experience, most bus drivers behave well towards other road users.
As an aside, I'd say that about 80% of Audi drivers are arseholes.
It used to be received wisdom that BMW drivers were all wankers. Has Audi now inherited this mantle?
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
There is plenty wrong with the antics of some car and lorry drivers but very often cyclists are their own worst enemies.
My favourite was from years ago - whilst walking on a pavement, I got nearly knocked over by a cyclist coming around a blind bend, where there are a couple of trees on the pavement. He had a mobile phone to his ear and a child in a child seat on the back of his bike as he steered blindly into the middle gap.
He should have his child and phone taken off him. Although I think he'd probably miss his phone more. And the child - if it has survived - must be a teenager.
I've seen plenty of good car drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. I have also soon (fewer) bad drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Groups like Cycling UK ought to concentrate a little more on condemning bad cycling than automatically blaming car drivers and pedestrians.
The ones who are the best round here are the Arriva bus drivers. Always patient, always polite, always considerate. And always give a friendly wave back when you wave to thank them.
In my experience, most bus drivers behave well towards other road users.
As an aside, I'd say that about 80% of Audi drivers are arseholes.
To be fair to most other Audi drivers, I significantly skew the figures.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
There is plenty wrong with the antics of some car and lorry drivers but very often cyclists are their own worst enemies.
My favourite was from years ago - whilst walking on a pavement, I got nearly knocked over by a cyclist coming around a blind bend, where there are a couple of trees on the pavement. He had a mobile phone to his ear and a child in a child seat on the back of his bike as he steered blindly into the middle gap.
He should have his child and phone taken off him. Although I think he'd probably miss his phone more. And the child - if it has survived - must be a teenager.
I've seen plenty of good car drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. I have also soon (fewer) bad drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Groups like Cycling UK ought to concentrate a little more on condemning bad cycling than automatically blaming car drivers and pedestrians.
The ones who are the best round here are the Arriva bus drivers. Always patient, always polite, always considerate. And always give a friendly wave back when you wave to thank them.
In my experience, most bus drivers behave well towards other road users.
As an aside, I'd say that about 80% of Audi drivers are arseholes.
Well behaved - except of course towards passengers, to whom they can be right gits in my experience (although they're not of course responsible for the ludicrous unfare structure).
That second one is an astonishing figure. It implies you've had a good experience with 20% of Audi drivers...
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
There is plenty wrong with the antics of some car and lorry drivers but very often cyclists are their own worst enemies.
My favourite was from years ago - whilst walking on a pavement, I got nearly knocked over by a cyclist coming around a blind bend, where there are a couple of trees on the pavement. He had a mobile phone to his ear and a child in a child seat on the back of his bike as he steered blindly into the middle gap.
He should have his child and phone taken off him. Although I think he'd probably miss his phone more. And the child - if it has survived - must be a teenager.
I've seen plenty of good car drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. I have also soon (fewer) bad drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Groups like Cycling UK ought to concentrate a little more on condemning bad cycling than automatically blaming car drivers and pedestrians.
The ones who are the best round here are the Arriva bus drivers. Always patient, always polite, always considerate. And always give a friendly wave back when you wave to thank them.
In my experience, most bus drivers behave well towards other road users.
As an aside, I'd say that about 80% of Audi drivers are arseholes.
Is 'no deal' really getting that much closer? It was always portrayed as the nuclear option and to be avoided like the plague (as CAMRA used to say about Watneys Red Barrel).
Well, we're less than 3 months away, and the deal needs to pass parliament. Maybe 265ish Tory MPs will vote for, at most 5 Labour MPs, the rest of parliament is committed to voting for no deal.
Is 'no deal' really getting that much closer? It was always portrayed as the nuclear option and to be avoided like the plague (as CAMRA used to say about Watneys Red Barrel).
Well, we're less than 3 months away, and the deal needs to pass parliament. Maybe 265ish Tory MPs will vote for, at most 5 Labour MPs, the rest of parliament is committed to voting for no deal.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
There is plenty wrong with the antics of some car and lorry drivers but very often cyclists are their own worst enemies.
My favourite was from years ago - whilst walking on a pavement, I got nearly knocked over by a cyclist coming around a blind bend, where there are a couple of trees on the pavement. He had a mobile phone to his ear and a child in a child seat on the back of his bike as he steered blindly into the middle gap.
He should have his child and phone taken off him. Although I think he'd probably miss his phone more. And the child - if it has survived - must be a teenager.
I've seen plenty of good car drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. I have also soon (fewer) bad drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Groups like Cycling UK ought to concentrate a little more on condemning bad cycling than automatically blaming car drivers and pedestrians.
The ones who are the best round here are the Arriva bus drivers. Always patient, always polite, always considerate. And always give a friendly wave back when you wave to thank them.
In my experience, most bus drivers behave well towards other road users.
As an aside, I'd say that about 80% of Audi drivers are arseholes.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
There is plenty wrong with the antics of some car and lorry drivers but very often cyclists are their own worst enemies.
My favourite was from years ago - whilst walking on a pavement, I got nearly knocked over by a cyclist coming around a blind bend, where there are a couple of trees on the pavement. He had a mobile phone to his ear and a child in a child seat on the back of his bike as he steered blindly into the middle gap.
He should have his child and phone taken off him. Although I think he'd probably miss his phone more. And the child - if it has survived - must be a teenager.
I've seen plenty of good car drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. I have also soon (fewer) bad drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Groups like Cycling UK ought to concentrate a little more on condemning bad cycling than automatically blaming car drivers and pedestrians.
The ones who are the best round here are the Arriva bus drivers. Always patient, always polite, always considerate. And always give a friendly wave back when you wave to thank them.
In my experience, most bus drivers behave well towards other road users.
As an aside, I'd say that about 80% of Audi drivers are arseholes.
I must be in the 20% then as I waft past in mine
Evening Malcolm, or should I say, 'Owdee?
Evening ydoethur PS LOL, you looking for your coat
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
There is plenty wrong with the antics of some car and lorry drivers but very often cyclists are their own worst enemies.
My favourite was from years ago - whilst walking on a pavement, I got nearly knocked over by a cyclist coming around a blind bend, where there are a couple of trees on the pavement. He had a mobile phone to his ear and a child in a child seat on the back of his bike as he steered blindly into the middle gap.
He should have his child and phone taken off him. Although I think he'd probably miss his phone more. And the child - if it has survived - must be a teenager.
I've seen plenty of good car drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. I have also soon (fewer) bad drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Groups like Cycling UK ought to concentrate a little more on condemning bad cycling than automatically blaming car drivers and pedestrians.
The ones who are the best round here are the Arriva bus drivers. Always patient, always polite, always considerate. And always give a friendly wave back when you wave to thank them.
In my experience, most bus drivers behave well towards other road users.
As an aside, I'd say that about 80% of Audi drivers are arseholes.
Many years ago I had an Audi. Nice car. However one day someone swerved into the side of me and drove off. I've no idea who he thought I was or what I was supposed to have done. Long before the days of dash cams, of course, so nothing could be done.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
When you consider how bad standards of driving, cycling, walking etc are on our roads, it's amazing more people aren't killed in accidents. We must have some of the most unsafe roads in Europe, on paper.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
I've never really experienced too many issues with cyclists as a motorist. Perhaps it's because I give them i) As much room as I would a car whilst overtaking ii) Think they have a right to use the road too.
The 'two abreast' peloton is perfectly correct (Three makes a line too wide; and single file creates the line too long).
Although my bike currently needs some repair perhaps it's because I've been out on some 50 mile rides with a local club that I can understand it all as a driver ?
Same with horse riders. Once you've ridden a horse on the road you have a far better concept of what they're trying to achieve and how to drive round them.
Sure, everyone can behave like idiots - but you're of far more danger in a 2 ton piece of metal than on a bike or nag. Note this experience is mainly out rural, city cycling (and driving) is a somewhat different beast.
Edit: Although I've driven far far far more than I've cycled, dickhead motorist experiences ('did that BMW pass within 11.7 millimetres of my bike') ? outnumber the piss poor cyclist experiences by far.
Totally agree with that. But I live in Cambridge, so piss-poor cyclists are sadly very common, as are the cycling-rights brigade.
My dad says that all drivers should get to drive a lorry as part of their training, pre-test, so they get an idea of the issues involved in driving one, and especially the visibility.
(I'd also add I've been a piss-poor pedestrian, cyclist and driver at times; I bet most of us have been if we've used a particular mode of transport. The important thing is to recognise it and try not to do he same thing again.)
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
When you consider how bad standards of driving, cycling, walking etc are on our roads, it's amazing more people aren't killed in accidents. We must have some of the most unsafe roads in Europe, on paper.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
Not so much in God's country unless you go to Glasgow/Edinburgh.
I've never really experienced too many issues with cyclists as a motorist. Perhaps it's because I give them i) As much room as I would a car whilst overtaking ii) Think they have a right to use the road too.
The 'two abreast' peloton is perfectly correct (Three makes a line too wide; and single file creates the line too long).
Although my bike currently needs some repair perhaps it's because I've been out on some 50 mile rides with a local club that I can understand it all as a driver ?
Same with horse riders. Once you've ridden a horse on the road you have a far better concept of what they're trying to achieve and how to drive round them.
Sure, everyone can behave like idiots - but you're of far more danger in a 2 ton piece of metal than on a bike or nag. Note this experience is mainly out rural, city cycling (and driving) is a somewhat different beast.
Edit: Although I've driven far far far more than I've cycled, dickhead motorist experiences ('did that BMW pass within 11.7 millimetres of my bike') ? outnumber the piss poor cyclist experiences by far.
Totally agree with that. But I live in Cambridge, so piss-poor cyclists are sadly very common, as are the cycling-rights brigade.
My dad says that all drivers should get to drive a lorry as part of their training, pre-test, so they get an idea of the issues involved in driving one, and especially the visibility.
(I'd also add I've been a piss-poor pedestrian, cyclist and driver at times; I bet most of us have been if we've used a particular mode of transport. The important thing is to recognise it and try not to do he same thing again.)
What do you call a motorist who has never broken the speed limit?
The one group of road users that I sometimes wonder if they are actively out to kill themselves are motorcyclists. My friend has bought one and has confirmed
1. It's even more fun than I thought it would be 2. The temptation to be an absolute dickhead is constant and overwhelming
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
When you consider how bad standards of driving, cycling, walking etc are on our roads, it's amazing more people aren't killed in accidents. We must have some of the most unsafe roads in Europe, on paper.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
Not so much in God's country unless you go to Glasgow/Edinburgh.
Well, if you go from Wales to Edinburgh I imagine you see some truly shocking driving en route.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
When you consider how bad standards of driving, cycling, walking etc are on our roads, it's amazing more people aren't killed in accidents. We must have some of the most unsafe roads in Europe, on paper.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
It is amazing. On the road, you somehow acquire a sixth sense about when some other driver is going to behave like an idiot, and take evasive action accordingly.
Many of the worst drivers are on motorways, but fortunately, one's line of vision is so good that one can avoid them. Urban areas are very congested, so collisions there are most unlikely to be fatal.
Rural roads are by far the most dangerous, as you can pick up speed, and suddenly. someone shoots out of a side road, or a deer leaps into your path.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
When you consider how bad standards of driving, cycling, walking etc are on our roads, it's amazing more people aren't killed in accidents. We must have some of the most unsafe roads in Europe, on paper.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
It is amazing. On the road, you somehow acquire a sixth sense about when some other driver is going to behave like an idiot, and take evasive action accordingly.
Many of the worst drivers are on motorways, but fortunately, one's line of vision is so good that one can avoid them. Urban areas are very congested, so collisions there are most unlikely to be fatal.
Rural roads are by far the most dangerous, as you can pick up speed, and suddenly. someone shoots out of a side road, or a deer leaps into your path.
"It is amazing. On the road, you somehow acquire a sixth sense about when some other driver is going to behave like an idiot, and take evasive action accordingly."
Incidentally, this is one of the reasons why I think autonomous cars are going to find it very difficult to reach a suitable level of performance - at least if ordinary cars are on the roads with them.
I've never really experienced too many issues with cyclists as a motorist. Perhaps it's because I give them i) As much room as I would a car whilst overtaking ii) Think they have a right to use the road too.
The 'two abreast' peloton is perfectly correct (Three makes a line too wide; and single file creates the line too long).
Although my bike currently needs some repair perhaps it's because I've been out on some 50 mile rides with a local club that I can understand it all as a driver ?
Same with horse riders. Once you've ridden a horse on the road you have a far better concept of what they're trying to achieve and how to drive round them.
Sure, everyone can behave like idiots - but you're of far more danger in a 2 ton piece of metal than on a bike or nag. Note this experience is mainly out rural, city cycling (and driving) is a somewhat different beast.
Edit: Although I've driven far far far more than I've cycled, dickhead motorist experiences ('did that BMW pass within 11.7 millimetres of my bike') ? outnumber the piss poor cyclist experiences by far.
Totally agree with that. But I live in Cambridge, so piss-poor cyclists are sadly very common, as are the cycling-rights brigade.
My dad says that all drivers should get to drive a lorry as part of their training, pre-test, so they get an idea of the issues involved in driving one, and especially the visibility.
(I'd also add I've been a piss-poor pedestrian, cyclist and driver at times; I bet most of us have been if we've used a particular mode of transport. The important thing is to recognise it and try not to do he same thing again.)
What do you call a motorist who has never broken the speed limit?
A liar.
The speed limit and safe driving are two almost completely seperate things though. 110 on a clear motorway on a clear sunday in June at 1 PM is safer than sticking to the speed limit on a foggy night heading out of Macclesfield on the cat and fiddle in winter.
The YouGov figures for the Tory membership look about right to be. I'm in the 24% who are on record as backing the deal but it's a very reluctant backing.
My only observation is that the more it looks like we are moving to no deal the more likely a deal will eventually get through.
Combination of concessions from EU, Labour MPs peeling off as they realise No Deal is odds on to actually happen and some Tory tribal loyalty (still some residue left) kicking in at the last moment.
Our Irish friends are looking increasingly pale about the gills as they stare down the barrel. Leo not looking too confident now.
The only thing May's Shit Deal has going for it is this: it's better than not Brexiting at all.
I think it has two things going for it: (1) Leavers think it's better than not leaving at all, (2) Remainers think it's better than leaving with no deal at all.
I'm following brexit somewhat at arm's length, but was surprised to hear on the World Service and NPR this morning that the UK gov is preparing a 'massive' advertising campaign to get the nation ready for a no-deal brexit, including such items as making sure your passport has at least 6 months left on it.
Is 'no deal' really getting that much closer? It was always portrayed as the nuclear option and to be avoided like the plague (as CAMRA used to say about Watneys Red Barrel).
Given the vehemence and number in the HoC against The Deal, and No Deal being the default option if it doesn't happen, it's certainly moving closer. I'd agree a significant chunk of people (including MPs) feel as you suggest, but there seems little leadership/co-ordination/will among them to actively stop it.
The one group of road users that I sometimes wonder if they are actively out to kill themselves are motorcyclists. My friend has bought one and has confirmed
1. It's even more fun than I thought it would be 2. The temptation to be an absolute dickhead is constant and overwhelming
I have three. It all depends what you use them for, would I commute on a motorbike, no chance if using A roads, inner city roads. Nice sunny day light traffic on country roads, find that long stretch of old Roman Road and have some fun. In inner cities/towns I would use a moped or scooter if I had to, smaller and more easily manoeuvred.
I've never really experienced too many issues with cyclists as a motorist. Perhaps it's because I give them i) As much room as I would a car whilst overtaking ii) Think they have a right to use the road too.
The 'two abreast' peloton is perfectly correct (Three makes a line too wide; and single file creates the line too long).
Although my bike currently needs some repair perhaps it's because I've been out on some 50 mile rides with a local club that I can understand it all as a driver ?
Same with horse riders. Once you've ridden a horse on the road you have a far better concept of what they're trying to achieve and how to drive round them.
Sure, everyone can behave like idiots - but you're of far more danger in a 2 ton piece of metal than on a bike or nag. Note this experience is mainly out rural, city cycling (and driving) is a somewhat different beast.
Edit: Although I've driven far far far more than I've cycled, dickhead motorist experiences ('did that BMW pass within 11.7 millimetres of my bike') ? outnumber the piss poor cyclist experiences by far.
Totally agree with that. But I live in Cambridge, so piss-poor cyclists are sadly very common, as are the cycling-rights brigade.
My dad says that all drivers should get to drive a lorry as part of their training, pre-test, so they get an idea of the issues involved in driving one, and especially the visibility.
(I'd also add I've been a piss-poor pedestrian, cyclist and driver at times; I bet most of us have been if we've used a particular mode of transport. The important thing is to recognise it and try not to do he same thing again.)
What do you call a motorist who has never broken the speed limit?
A liar.
The speed limit and safe driving are two almost completely seperate things though. 110 on a clear motorway on a clear sunday in June at 1 PM is safer than sticking to the speed limit on a foggy night heading out of Macclesfield on the cat and fiddle in winter.
My personal favourite is a friend of mine who was booked for doing 38 outside a primary school in Wales.
The magistrate, when he contested the ticket, rather pompously lectured him on the importance of speed limits for keeping children safe.
His reply was, 'I had no idea your Worship was such a sadist you force your children to attend school at 2am in Sundays, but maybe if they are of your own intellectual level they need extra help.'
He was fined for contempt as well, but he says it was more than worth it.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
When you consider how bad standards of driving, cycling, walking etc are on our roads, it's amazing more people aren't killed in accidents. We must have some of the most unsafe roads in Europe, on paper.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
It is amazing. On the road, you somehow acquire a sixth sense about when some other driver is going to behave like an idiot, and take evasive action accordingly.
Many of the worst drivers are on motorways, but fortunately, one's line of vision is so good that one can avoid them. Urban areas are very congested, so collisions there are most unlikely to be fatal.
Rural roads are by far the most dangerous, as you can pick up speed, and suddenly. someone shoots out of a side road, or a deer leaps into your path.
Following on, I was warned at Wood Green Animal Shelters that if you run over a deer, you must never pick it up and put in the car. They are remarkably resilient, and will frequently wake up in the car and go berserk.
It's good to see that there are some fixed points and the lodestar of pb is that transport discussions trump everything else. Even Brexit, it seems.
Is there much more to say on Brexit though ? The same arguments are just repeated ad nauseam. When parliament resumes I'm sure everyone will be keen to give their two pennies worth on the Gov't/parliament course of action - we'll have new information on which to pontificate The various betting options for 'what happens next' wrt Brexit are very murky indeed and I have no idea where the value is !
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
When you consider how bad standards of driving, cycling, walking etc are on our roads, it's amazing more people aren't killed in accidents. We must have some of the most unsafe roads in Europe, on paper.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
I will say one thing - the standards in France were notably haphazard.
However, one statistic jumps out. In the years I was in Paris, when there were almost weekly stories about cyclist deaths in London, it actually had roughly the same number of accidents as in London. However, the death rate was much, much lower.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
When you consider how bad standards of driving, cycling, walking etc are on our roads, it's amazing more people aren't killed in accidents. We must have some of the most unsafe roads in Europe, on paper.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
I will say one thing - the standards in France were notably haphazard.
However, one statistic jumps out. In the years I was in Paris, when there were almost weekly stories about cyclist deaths in London, it actually had roughly the same number of accidents as in London. However, the death rate was much, much lower.
Following on, I was warned at Wood Green Animal Shelters that if you run over a deer, you must never pick it up and put in the car. They are remarkably resilient, and will frequently wake up in the car and go berserk.
I just had an idea for a gritty reboot of Bambi.
'Falling down' but with a CGI fawn. Jason Statham as the voice of Bambi.
I've never really experienced too many issues with cyclists as a motorist. Perhaps it's because I give them i) As much room as I would a car whilst overtaking ii) Think they have a right to use the road too.
The 'two abreast' peloton is perfectly correct (Three makes a line too wide; and single file creates the line too long).
Although my bike currently needs some repair perhaps it's because I've been out on some 50 mile rides with a local club that I can understand it all as a driver ?
Same with horse riders. Once you've ridden a horse on the road you have a far better concept of what they're trying to achieve and how to drive round them.
Sure, everyone can behave like idiots - but you're of far more danger in a 2 ton piece of metal than on a bike or nag. Note this experience is mainly out rural, city cycling (and driving) is a somewhat different beast.
Edit: Although I've driven far far far more than I've cycled, dickhead motorist experiences ('did that BMW pass within 11.7 millimetres of my bike') ? outnumber the piss poor cyclist experiences by far.
Totally agree with that. But I live in Cambridge, so piss-poor cyclists are sadly very common, as are the cycling-rights brigade.
My dad says that all drivers should get to drive a lorry as part of their training, pre-test, so they get an idea of the issues involved in driving one, and especially the visibility.
(I'd also add I've been a piss-poor pedestrian, cyclist and driver at times; I bet most of us have been if we've used a particular mode of transport. The important thing is to recognise it and try not to do he same thing again.)
What do you call a motorist who has never broken the speed limit?
A liar.
The speed limit and safe driving are two almost completely seperate things though. 110 on a clear motorway on a clear sunday in June at 1 PM is safer than sticking to the speed limit on a foggy night heading out of Macclesfield on the cat and fiddle in winter.
My personal favourite is a friend of mine who was booked for doing 38 outside a primary school in Wales.
The magistrate, when he contested the ticket, rather pompously lectured him on the importance of speed limits for keeping children safe.
His reply was, 'I had no idea your Worship was such a sadist you force your children to attend school at 2am in Sundays, but maybe if they are of your own intellectual level they need extra help.'
He was fined for contempt as well, but he says it was more than worth it.
The 'victim surcharge' is horribly misnamed too as you get clobbered with it when there are no victims.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
When you consider how bad standards of driving, cycling, walking etc are on our roads, it's amazing more people aren't killed in accidents. We must have some of the most unsafe roads in Europe, on paper.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
I will say one thing - the standards in France were notably haphazard.
However, one statistic jumps out. In the years I was in Paris, when there were almost weekly stories about cyclist deaths in London, it actually had roughly the same number of accidents as in London. However, the death rate was much, much lower.
Following on, I was warned at Wood Green Animal Shelters that if you run over a deer, you must never pick it up and put in the car. They are remarkably resilient, and will frequently wake up in the car and go berserk.
I just had an idea for a gritty reboot of Bambi.
"Revenge of Bambi", as Bambi rips apart a whole family in their estate car.
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
When you consider how bad standards of driving, cycling, walking etc are on our roads, it's amazing more people aren't killed in accidents. We must have some of the most unsafe roads in Europe, on paper.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
I will say one thing - the standards in France were notably haphazard.
However, one statistic jumps out. In the years I was in Paris, when there were almost weekly stories about cyclist deaths in London, it actually had roughly the same number of accidents as in London. However, the death rate was much, much lower.
Everyone is driving banged up old Peugeots in France. My own made a beeline to remain the country whilst there last year. They aren't that fast.
I will say one thing - the standards in France were notably haphazard.
Double the number of road deaths/capita compared to us.
The US has 4x though.
Rowan Atkinson (long time ago) did a sketch on 'Road Deaths in Europe', going through the rising tolls of different countries.....concluding with "And I say to you, tragic though this is - IT's NOT ENOUGH!" Extolling the audience to remember that when on the Continent they were British and should jolly well drive on the British side of the road....
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
I can only recall ever having knowingly gone through a red light once. It was a hot pursuit.
10th March, 1996. I was following a flock of Waxwings, within which flock was a very rare Cedar Waxwing.
Eventually caught up with outside the Pork Farms pork pie factory.... Tick!
I was driving through Westminster yesterday at dusk and it was very dangerous - the number of cyclists with dark clothing and no desire to stick to the rules (red lights, pedestrians, etc).
When you combine that with traffic and risk-taking pedestrians on their phones it's very difficult and dangerous driving. Of course I'm going to try not to hit anyone, but a bit of a contribution on their side would be appreciated!
I am a regular cyclist in London and I loathe those who go through red lights, ride like idiots, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Considerably worse than that is the idiot motorists who overtake a cyclist and then turn left immediately in front of them.
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
When you consider how bad standards of driving, cycling, walking etc are on our roads, it's amazing more people aren't killed in accidents. We must have some of the most unsafe roads in Europe, on paper.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
I will say one thing - the standards in France were notably haphazard.
However, one statistic jumps out. In the years I was in Paris, when there were almost weekly stories about cyclist deaths in London, it actually had roughly the same number of accidents as in London. However, the death rate was much, much lower.
Everyone is driving banged up old Peugeots in France. My own made a beeline to remain the country whilst there last year. They aren't that fast.
I was thinking a lack of bigger, industrial vehicles in the centre, but yeah, we'll go with the 'joke' answer.
It has been interesting reading the comments from all sides this morning regarding the No Dealers. ... Whilst I don't necessarily believe the doomsday scenarios about Brexit, I do think a negotiated settlement is far better but I do fear that the Remainers and Dealers are currently in denial about the unruffled fanaticism of the No Dealers.
I suspect that tin-eared Tess will take us over the edge. I am resigned to No-Deal Brexit happening.
I am not resigned to it. I am bloody furious about it.
If ever we needed the fabled men in grey suits to tell her to stop being so bloody stupid, it's now.
I reckon this just makes Iowa more important. Whoever wins there gets several days of good media just as Californian postal voters get their ballots.
Iowa will be a good test of ground ops - I reckon Beto could do well there and I see Warren performing well in New Hampshire because it borders on to Massachusetts
Don't forget that Warren polls just 11% in her native New Hampshire for the democratic nomination
Following on, I was warned at Wood Green Animal Shelters that if you run over a deer, you must never pick it up and put in the car. They are remarkably resilient, and will frequently wake up in the car and go berserk.
I just had an idea for a gritty reboot of Bambi.
'Falling down' but with a CGI fawn. Jason Statham as the voice of Bambi.
It has been interesting reading the comments from all sides this morning regarding the No Dealers. ... Whilst I don't necessarily believe the doomsday scenarios about Brexit, I do think a negotiated settlement is far better but I do fear that the Remainers and Dealers are currently in denial about the unruffled fanaticism of the No Dealers.
I suspect that tin-eared Tess will take us over the edge. I am resigned to No-Deal Brexit happening.
I am not resigned to it. I am bloody furious about it.
If ever we needed the fabled men in grey suits to tell her to stop being so bloody stupid, it's now.
What are they supposed to tell her. She has a negotiated settlement ready to go.
I reckon this just makes Iowa more important. Whoever wins there gets several days of good media just as Californian postal voters get their ballots.
Iowa will be a good test of ground ops - I reckon Beto could do well there and I see Warren performing well in New Hampshire because it borders on to Massachusetts
Don't forget that Warren polls just 11% in her native New Hampshire for the democratic nomination
I hadn’t realised she was 1/1024th New Hampshirite.
I reckon this just makes Iowa more important. Whoever wins there gets several days of good media just as Californian postal voters get their ballots.
Iowa will be a good test of ground ops - I reckon Beto could do well there and I see Warren performing well in New Hampshire because it borders on to Massachusetts
Don't forget that Warren polls just 11% in her native New Hampshire for the democratic nomination
The DNA test was her Chappaquidick.It will come up every debate and be a punch line
I reckon this just makes Iowa more important. Whoever wins there gets several days of good media just as Californian postal voters get their ballots.
Iowa will be a good test of ground ops - I reckon Beto could do well there and I see Warren performing well in New Hampshire because it borders on to Massachusetts
Don't forget that Warren polls just 11% in her native New Hampshire for the democratic nomination
I hadn’t realised she was 1/1024th New Hampshirite.
Comments
"The Withdrawal Agreement" is a comprehensive agreement on how we leave the EU.
A deal on, for example, a 9 month extension to civil aviation licenses is not "A Withdrawal Agreement"
What people will have voted for is no transition period, no ongoing payments (about 2/3 of the £39bn I believe), no guarantee on citizens rights, etc.
If I am at a red light, I can guarantee that 95% of every cyclist that comes to it will go straight through it.
(hint: Mercator was not a ferry company)
Dredging already started, experienced hands on board, money secured, ferry chartered. All without a penny of government money being spent.
This all seems rather a long way from the media coverage.
We will need some kind of a deal and it is positively Plato's Republic-esque that it should be thought that something so simple as determining what arrangements we will have with the EU post March will be straightforward. You would have to create society from scratch.
Don't forget the WA leaves everything as is via the transition period.
If you have no deal you have to replicate each of those arrangements. Or else you have the WA.
Even worse is when cars and lorries are signalling to turn left but cyclists overtake them on the inside.
Car/van 67%
Walking 10%
Rail 10%
Bus 8%
Other 5%
Trains are often bloody awful, but their failings are the subject of a disproportionate amount of attention. The reason for this is, of course, that rail commuting is also disproportionately concentrated in London and the South East (i.e. the part of the country on which most care and attention is lavished,) disproportionately undertaken by the well-to-do (i.e. the people who have the loudest voices and are taken the most seriously,) and the rail network swallows an enormous amount of public subsidy. It also helps that the poor performance of the railways is easy to monitor (through plentiful and readily available statistics,) and large numbers of pissed-off commuters can easily be located and interviewed at any major railway station (you simply take your microphone and camera crew to Kings Cross on a particularly miserable Monday evening, et voila! Instant news filler.)
By contrast, the roads are full of potholes and bus services have been continually cut for many years, but gripes about those problems rarely make it past the sixth item on the local news, just after the winner of the under-16s national karate championships and the woman given a six-month suspended prison sentence for neglecting some kittens.
But no, sorry, to me it's nuts.
How is No Deal going to be defined and how can the public form a view on what the consequences will be?
If No Deal wins how can parliament implement what most of them think is catastrophic?
Will an article 50 extension be granted for anything but Deal v Remain? (Doubt it.)
And if so, does it not look a slam dunk (i.e. rigged) for Remain?
Or what if the result is very close for Remain? Best of three?
How will the public understand the Deal when many MPs don't seem to?
Just a sample of questions arising.
2nd Ref might happen, not ruling it out, but gosh it would be a monumental piece of failure and cowardice from our elected politicians.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBFFrsvgu1Y
A colleague of others crashed his bike on the way into work when the front forks split (yes, really) and threw him under a stationary car. A good friend of mine broke his collarbone when he tried to jump his racing bike onto a pavement to avoid traffic. Both were glad they were wearing their helmets, and no other vehicle caused the accidents.
Cycling UK can just fuck off. Any public funding they get should be removed until they grow up and do what is best for the majority of cyclists, pedestrians and car users, not just the pepparami-in-lycra cycling fundamentalists.
No Deal yes/no ?
If no, then May's Deal or Remain ?
or...
May's Deal yes/no
If no, then No Deal or Remain ?
Both options offer all sides a chance of their preferred result - but prioritise the leave side of the debate, which respects the outcome of the first referendum.
(1) Leave the EU having signed the WA.
(2) Leave the EU without having signed the WA.
I think I'd be exactly in a position to say what people have voted for...
You certainly have to replicate some of those arrangements - not necessarily all of them.
In Austria it was €100 to go from Vienna to Klagenfurt and that's an identical distance...
Now I do prefer to travel by train but sometimes the prices are beyond insane - Darlington to London on a Monday morning is £306 return now...
He should have his child and phone taken off him. Although I think he'd probably miss his phone more. And the child - if it has survived - must be a teenager.
I've seen plenty of good car drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. I have also soon (fewer) bad drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. Groups like Cycling UK ought to concentrate a little more on condemning bad cycling than automatically blaming car drivers and pedestrians.
If I'm honest I would have said the best use of the time of
these intellectually challenged lazy virtue signallersCycling UK would be spent in getting it made illegal for cyclists to wear earphones while cycling. Blasting along in their own little world, with nothing to stop them hitting pedestrians, cars, pavements, potholes...*or at least, can't do so without Diane Abbott going off on one, er, that is, a rant.
i) As much room as I would a car whilst overtaking
ii) Think they have a right to use the road too.
The 'two abreast' peloton is perfectly correct (Three makes a line too wide; and single file creates the line too long).
Although my bike currently needs some repair perhaps it's because I've been out on some 50 mile rides with a local club that I can understand it all as a driver ?
Same with horse riders. Once you've ridden a horse on the road you have a far better concept of what they're trying to achieve and how to drive round them.
Sure, everyone can behave like idiots - but you're of far more danger in a 2 ton piece of metal than on a bike or nag. Note this experience is mainly out rural, city cycling (and driving) is a somewhat different beast.
Edit: Although I've driven far far far more than I've cycled, dickhead motorist experiences ('did that BMW pass within 11.7 millimetres of my bike') ? outnumber the piss poor cyclist experiences by far.
Is 'no deal' really getting that much closer? It was always portrayed as the nuclear option and to be avoided like the plague (as CAMRA used to say about Watneys Red Barrel).
* I'd personally favour crushing their cars on say a second offence.
As an aside, I'd say that about 80% of Audi drivers are arseholes.
(It would be 90% otherwise.....
That second one is an astonishing figure. It implies you've had a good experience with 20% of Audi drivers...
Or those who think that "Give way to oncoming traffic" doesn't apply when it is a cyclist oncoming.
And of course motorists never go through lights that have turned red.
PS LOL, you looking for your coat
Sold the car not long afterwards.
Maybe it's because they're so congested average speeds are quite low?
My dad says that all drivers should get to drive a lorry as part of their training, pre-test, so they get an idea of the issues involved in driving one, and especially the visibility.
(I'd also add I've been a piss-poor pedestrian, cyclist and driver at times; I bet most of us have been if we've used a particular mode of transport. The important thing is to recognise it and try not to do he same thing again.)
That said, it was so oily it wasn't exactly flourescent any more. I think I might treat myself to a new one.
A liar.
1. It's even more fun than I thought it would be
2. The temptation to be an absolute dickhead is constant and overwhelming
[Only small stakes, so I'd effectively written it off].
Many of the worst drivers are on motorways, but fortunately, one's line of vision is so good that one can avoid them. Urban areas are very congested, so collisions there are most unlikely to be fatal.
Rural roads are by far the most dangerous, as you can pick up speed, and suddenly. someone shoots out of a side road, or a deer leaps into your path.
Incidentally, this is one of the reasons why I think autonomous cars are going to find it very difficult to reach a suitable level of performance - at least if ordinary cars are on the roads with them.
(1) Leavers think it's better than not leaving at all,
(2) Remainers think it's better than leaving with no deal at all.
Caesar was so rubbish at transport* he got himself stuck in Alexandria for months.
*To be realistic, for a moment, logistics was actually one of Caesar's key strengths and most impressive aspects.
In inner cities/towns I would use a moped or scooter if I had to, smaller and more easily manoeuvred.
The magistrate, when he contested the ticket, rather pompously lectured him on the importance of speed limits for keeping children safe.
His reply was, 'I had no idea your Worship was such a sadist you force your children to attend school at 2am in Sundays, but maybe if they are of your own intellectual level they need extra help.'
He was fined for contempt as well, but he says it was more than worth it.
I was hoping to pull some hot chicks in the riots, but there weren't any, they were all Corbynistas and mostly male.
The various betting options for 'what happens next' wrt Brexit are very murky indeed and I have no idea where the value is !
However, one statistic jumps out. In the years I was in Paris, when there were almost weekly stories about cyclist deaths in London, it actually had roughly the same number of accidents as in London. However, the death rate was much, much lower.
'Falling down' but with a CGI fawn. Jason Statham as the voice of Bambi.
The US has 4x though.
https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1081206316985663489
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate
10th March, 1996. I was following a flock of Waxwings, within which flock was a very rare Cedar Waxwing.
Eventually caught up with outside the Pork Farms pork pie factory.... Tick!
1981 25.9
1988 34.1
1995 20.8
2002 19.9
2007 31.2
2012 28.6
Macron is somewhere in the middle, and the scores are more a function of how many candidates/viable candidates are out there.
LESSON: don't compare apples and pears.
If ever we needed the fabled men in grey suits to tell her to stop being so bloody stupid, it's now.