Leadership Crisis for Boris Johnson

I've borrowed the phrase 'leadership crisis' from Mark Ames, who writes the admirable ibikelondon blog, but I feel that he's really hit the nail on the head. This really is a leadership crisis for Boris Johnson.

Six Londoners in two weeks have been killed while cycling (something Johnson, and the rest of TfL, constantly actively encourage Londoners to do through, among other things, a series of costly PR schemes). Boris Johnson could have tried to take something constructive out of the tragedy of these deaths. He could have reiterated how important actually delivering his 'Vision for Cycling' was (rather than just talking about future consultations), and how necessary it was to accelerate the road layout changes he wanted to achieve. He could have immediately installed temporary cycle lanes using bollards or cones of key routes in the capital. He could have imposed an immediate 20 MPH limit on all of London's most dangerous junctions. He could have highlighted the intransigence of certain local councils (Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea) in getting on board with his cycling vision and used the media attention around these deaths to force difficult councils to come to heel and embrace segregated routes and 20 MPH limits.

Richard Muzira, the sixth Londoner in two weeks to be killed while cycling. The road were he was killed has neither a cycle lane nor a 20 MPH limit. Did the Mayor suggest providing either of these to prevent future killings? No, he blamed the victim instead. Photo courtesy of Evening Standard.

Boris Johnson could have done any of these things. He chose to do none of them. Instead, he engaged in vile and despicable victim blaming. First he said publicly that cyclists need to obey the law and implied that the six recent killings were caused by law-breaking. One of them may have been. But what about the other five Londoners that were killed who were without a shadow of a doubt behaving completely lawfully? What is Boris Johnson doing for them? Absolutely nothing.

Moreover, Johnson then went on BBC London and described people that cycle with headphones in as a 'scourge', again implying that cycling with headphones in has something to do with the last six Londoners to be killed while cycling in the capital. It doesn't. Indeed, none of the almost 80 Londoners that have been killed while cycling since Boris Johnson came to power lost their lives due to headphone use. It's the equivalent of six Londoners being stabbed to death by gangs, and Boris Johnson telling people not to flash their cash in public, rather than doing anything to improve street safety and crack down on crime. Appalling.

One of key elements of 'Brand Boris' (to borrow another phrase, this time from Dave Hill) is his 'cycling' image. And this is important not just to Londoners, and Brits, who cycle. Many people who don't cycle like Boris Johnson partly because they feel he does 'stuff' for cycling, which seems like a good thing in general. However, over the past few weeks Johnson's credibility among all Londoners on cycle safety has been completely eroded by his utter refusal to act in a constructive manner, and his decision to victim-blame and stir up prejudice instead. 

The wider British public now see Johnson failing on one of his key policies: cycling.  This will undoubtedly have very negative implications for his future political career, and prevent voters from trusting him on any other issues he chooses to get behind. 

You can almost hear Londoners saying: 'if he betrayed the cyclists and did nothing to reduce how many of them were killed or maimed each year that he was in office, then he'll probably betray me'.

This blog has been very supportive of Johnson in the past, but his victim-blaming actions over the past few weeks have been despicable, vile, and offensive to the memories of those who have lost their lives while just trying to cycle from A to B. All Londoners are reacting negatively to this appalling hypocrisy by the Mayor, not just those that cycle.

-----

Also, if you want to make your voice heard in protest about TfL and the Mayor's non-reaction to the recent spate of killings, please try and come to the TfL Die-In, taking place Friday, 29 November 2013 17:00 until 18:30, outside TfL's headquarters on Blackfriars Road.

Tottenham Hale Consultation on 20 mph is fantastic and should be supported, but the plans need to be changed to include new segregated cycle lanes

This is just a quick post to urge any readers of this blog to respond to TfL's Tottenham Hale consultation, available here, before 18 October 2013 when it ends.

20 mph coming soon to Tottenham Hale, and the rest of Haringey?

The proposals for a 20 mph zone (which includes the main road, Broad Lane, rather than just being limited to side streets) is a massive step forward and should be supported. 20 mph limits will become far more adhered to once they are normalised as the right speed limit for dense, urban areas. However, this normalisation will only happen once 20 mph limits are standard all over London (and the UK), not just in Camden! That's why it's important that anyone that cycles in Britain supports the extension of 20 mph limits across all of our urban areas.

However, it's very disappointing that these designs do not include any plans to extend the crap cycle track on Broad Lane (you can see it on google maps here) and give it the priority over side roads which would turn it into an actual viable transport option. I'd would say it's very much worth pointing this out to TfL, as not providing a proper segregated cycle lane here goes directly against the Boris Johnson's Vision for Cycling in London.

--------------

Haringey Council are also consulting about whether to adopt a 'possible borough-wide 20 mph limit' on all the non-TfL controlled roads in the borough. The consultation is available here and ends on 31 October 2013. Please do respond if you get a chance. [I believe Broad Lane is being consulted on separately by TfL because it is TfL controlled so would not be subject to a Haringey Council borough-wide limit and would only go 20 mph if TfL let it happen.]

Open Response to Notting Hill Gate redevelopment consultation

Kensington and Chelsea are currently consulting on a redevelopment of Notting Hill Gate. The consultation itself is available here. 

I would urge everyone to respond to this consultation individually and let the council know this is the perfect opportunity to develop ground-breaking improvements in cycling and walking in the area.

My open response:

Notting Hill Gate is currently a major barrier for cycling in the borough, and London as a whole. The entire junction is horrible; an essentially 1970s design that encourages large volumes of traffic motor to move through the area at dangerously high speeds, leading to pedestrian and cycling fatalities and actively suppressed rates of walking and cycling. 

Visitors to the area can still see a white bike with flowers in memory of Eilidh Cairns who was tragically and wholly unnecessarily killed in Notting Hill Gate by a lorry driver in 2009. It is right that this 'ghost bike' remains near the spot where she was killed, both in memory to Eilidh and to remind the Council that something desperately needs to be done to prevent more wholly avoidable deaths occurring here.

Additionally, the entire area has illegal levels of air pollution and nitrogen dioxide levels that rival Beijing. In fact, a specific stretch of Notting Hill Gate is one of the most polluted streets in London.

The easiest way to solve both these problems is to radically redesign the entire area to provide safe, segregated cycle routes through Notting Hill including bus stop by-passes for cycling. When this has been done in New York it has led to an over 50% rise in local spending, as areas were transformed into 'people places', rather than motor traffic hell. Notting Hill Gate would also benefit from more, and easier pedestrian crossings (including zebra crossings), and a 20 mph limit.

The Westway is less than a mile north and provides a quick, direct route for motor traffic into Central London. There is no reason, therefore, why Notting Hill Gate should not be re-thought and re-designed as an area that prioritised cyclists and pedestrians (if only because these people don't use vehicles that emit illegal levels of air pollution which lowers everyone in the area's life expectancy.

One of the council's core aims is to encourage alternative transport to private car use, such as cycling and walking. The council would be ignoring and actively refuting its core aims if it did not, therefore, use this opportunity to transform Notting Hill Gate into somewhere where walking and cycling is actively encouraged, rather than discouraged, as it is by the current street layout.

Notting Hill Gate. Can you see anywhere safe to cycle through here? Can you see anywhere safe to cross the road as a pedestrian? This junction needs to be completely redesigned with wide segregated cycle lanes, bus stop by-passes for cycling, and more pedestrian crossings.

10,000 Londoners take to their bikes and bring Parliament Square to a stand-still but Boris Johnson *still* doesn't get the message.

Don't misunderstand me, I feel Boris Johnson has done a lot for London cycling, particularly in raising it's profile as a viable method of transport that anyone can, and should, use. However, his response to Nick Ferrari's questions during today's LBC Radio phone-in were deeply worrying. When asked about yesterday's London Cycling Campaign #Space4Cycling Protest Ride, the Mayor said that those Londoners taking part (all 10,000 of them) were unreasonably trying to get their own dedicated road space which simply wasn't feasible in London (where everyone knows that 95% of road space must at all costs be dedicated to motor traffic otherwise you're just being selfish).

These Londoners aren't happy sharing the road with HGVs. They want dedicated space for cycling. Boris Johnson needs to embrace this... because they're all going to vote...

The London mayor was talking absolute rubbish. It's completely legitimate not to want to share a 'general traffic lane' while defenceless on a bike with an HGV or a Chelsea Tractor going at 30MPH+. Moreover, there is plenty of space in London for the reallocation of road space, as Boris himself has previously admitted (think Euston Road, Cromwell Road, Park Lane, Vauxhall Bridge Road, etc).

Today on LBC Radio, Boris advocated 'share-the-road', 'mutual-respect', 'everyone-being-more-aware' crap instead, and suggested this was the real solution. Not dedicated space for segregated cycle lanes that didn't mix motor traffic with those on bikes. That would just be plain silly.

This public position from the Mayor of London is incredibly idiotic and demands another Protest Ride to actually bring the message home to him that Londoners are not happy sharing lanes with drivers that kill them every month (14 Londoners were killed while cycling in 2012), and seriously injure them almost twice day (657 Londoners were seriously injured while cycling from A to B in our Olympic year). Humans are not perfect. Therefore drivers are not perfect. Therefore it's idiotic to mix steel motor traffic with humans sitting on bicycles in 'general traffic lanes'. Over 100 MPs recognised this last night when they unanimously passed the recommendations of the Get Britain Cycling report (which includes segregation on main roads). Boris Johnson needs to recognise this.

By all accounts yesterday's #Space4Cycling Protest Ride was a huge success. The weather may have helped...

What is also interesting is that the Mayor's response to the Protest Ride differs completely from that of Andrew Gilligan, London's Cycling Commissioner. What Gilligan essentially said yesterday was that the Mayor's office are already pursuing a policy of segregation (i.e. with the Cycle Superhighway 2 extension in Stratford). The problem with this is that segregating one road in Stratford is not going to make it safe to cycle for the 8 million Londoners who don't live in Stratford. We need the Mayoralty to begin implementing immediate changes (i.e. 20MPH limits, point-closures to remove through-traffic, temporary cycle lanes using cones/bollards) all over London.

However, at least Gilligan is explicitly accepting that segregation and dedicated space for cycling is the way forward for London. His boss, Boris Johnson, isn't. He's still wittering on about 'share-the-road' twaddle, even after 10,000 Londoners in Parliament Square and over 100 MPs in the House of Commons unanimously called yesterday for full segregation of major roads in London, as well as all over the UK (for those interested there is a BBC recording of the entire 4 hour Great Britain Cycling Commons debate available from here).

I recommend another Protest Ride along the roads outside Boris Johnson's house to ram the message home.

Also, a massive well-done and thank you to everyone at the London Cycling Campaign for organising such a well-attended, successful, and trouble-free Protest Ride yesterday evening.

Please note: 10,000 is my personal estimate of the amount of riders who took part yesterday having watched the procession from the front to back.

Road Narrowing is engineering our roads to be even more dangerous than they already are for those on bicycles

This evening Mark Ames (of ibikelondon) tweeted:

"Got honked at by angry cabbie for taking lane on narrowed bit of Bethnal Grn Rd where cyclist was killed recently. HATE road narrowing!"

Martin Porter QC replied:

"@markbikeslondon Blame the cabbie first and foremost - road layout is intended to slow him down."

Now, I can't speak for my readers, but I have an extremely big problem with this attitude, especially when it comes from someone else who cycles. Effectively, 'blaming the cabbie' means that we are simultaneously accepting that cyclists should be used as human traffic calming devices, and that this is somehow okay.

It's not okay.

Cheapside, City of London (courtesy of Cyclists in the City). A dangerously close over-take is happening. Who's at fault? I would argue the road design itself, which is bringing the cyclist and van into active conflict. Plenty of room here for a segregated cycle lane...

It is not okay for local authorities to slow down taxi drivers (and all other forms of traffic) by narrowing roads to create danger zones where cyclists and motorised traffic are actively brought into each other's paths. When local authorities use narrow sections of road to slow traffic they are deliberately bringing cyclists and drivers in active conflict with each other.

To speak bluntly, it is completely infeasible to imagine that we could somehow persuade the majority of motorists to be happy with a cyclist pootling along at 10mph or less in the middle of the lane in front of them. To do so is to attempt to use said cyclist as a human traffic calmer. This is extremely dangerous and leads to cycling fatalities. It is inhumane.

If councils want to slow traffic down it is very simple, easy and effective to introduce a 20mph limit and segregated cycle lanes which lead to a reduced width traffic lanes. These rather excellent plans for Manchester provide a case in point:

Or we could turn to Tavistock Place in Camden, where the council chose to narrow the traffic lane widths while providing a separate segregated lane for cyclists which is (surprise, surprise) incredibly popular:

Happy pedestrians, happy cyclists, happy motorists. No pinch points, no idiocy from the local council. Tavistock Place, Camden 5/6/2013
Cyclists love segregation. Simple.
For a full history of how much wider this track could have been if it were not for (ignorant) local opposition to segregated cycle tracks, please see this highly informative post by Vole O'Speed.

What is remarkable about this stretch of segregated cycle tracks at Tavistock Place is that even though it is sub-standard and far too narrow, it is still extremely well used, conclusively demonstrating that even sub-standard segregation is better than mixing cyclists and motor traffic. This example from Holland shows the correct width (at least 2m) that councils should be aiming for:

I very much hope the East-West 'Crossrail for bikes' will be of this standard. Wide, easy and safe. Holland gets it right again. Image courtesy of AsEasyAsRidingABike.