Traffic Chaos Trafalger Square - Wednesday Mornings

Porgy

Esinem wrote:

I'll be back in a year or two to say "Told you so!"

that's very mature of you

notsoblue

I very very rarely leave my bike locked out on the street, and if I do its never for more than the length of time it takes to pop into a shop to buy something. Its just not safe, no matter how good your lock is, given enough time, a determined thief will get through it.

So to be honest, I'd welcome paid for secure bike parks in London like there are in most large towns in Holland. But I don't think theres any room for them here, and maintaining them would probably eat into the council's profit so much that it wouldn't be much of a money spinner.

Convenient though

tgotb

notsoblue wrote:

So to be honest, I'd welcome paid for secure bike parks in London

+1

I almost never leave my bike locked up on the street; if I have to go somewhere that doesn't have secure parking I take the Brompton. I can normally leave it in a cloakroom, and it's a good talking point/icebreaker with clients...

spen666

W1 wrote:

Esinem wrote:

Thanks for all the sarcasm! However, a simple explanation would have sufficed. Thank you for correcting me. This is one of the great things about interacting with other groups, it can correct misnomers. I was totally unaware that my VED, to use the correct but less common or undertood term, and fuel duty etc. did not go towards the roads and has not done so since the 30's. Frankly, I'm appalled. Where the hell does it go?

BTW, I don't believe that I have ever claimed any greater right to the road than any other vehicle taxed or otherwise. I believe that is merely the prejudices of some who are clearly 'motorist', not that many drivers aren't just as 'cyclist'. In case you are puzzled, I have coined this new usage of the words to equate with 'racist'

However, I have pointed out that some might perceive any road user who does not get ripped off to the same degree as themselves as freeloaders, irrespective of the true facts. This is the argument put forward by 4-wheelers who feel bikers should pay to park just like they do. Soon it will be directed at cyclists and you will be next. All I propose is unity against a soon-to-be common enemy when you become the next cash cows. You seem to be falling into a false sense of security that it won't happen to you. The councils must be rubbing their hands in glee when they see those who could be allies squabbling and sniping.

The problem with your argument is that (a) car drivers have no common body to protect their interests - cyclists do

Pardon??????????????????????????????

Some mistake surely

and (b) car drivers can be (fairly or unfairly) targetted on environmental grounds and made to pay more - cyclists are not in that position.

Couldn't be down to cyclists calling less damage than the cars?

In fact, as a "green" and austere form of transport, bikes will not face negative costs and regulations, as that would be political suicide in these current times. Finally (c) not that many people depend on cycling - so if the cost rises punitively, people will simply stop using them. That's not true for cars.

W1

spen666 wrote:

W1 wrote:

Esinem wrote:

Thanks for all the sarcasm! However, a simple explanation would have sufficed. Thank you for correcting me. This is one of the great things about interacting with other groups, it can correct misnomers. I was totally unaware that my VED, to use the correct but less common or undertood term, and fuel duty etc. did not go towards the roads and has not done so since the 30's. Frankly, I'm appalled. Where the hell does it go?

BTW, I don't believe that I have ever claimed any greater right to the road than any other vehicle taxed or otherwise. I believe that is merely the prejudices of some who are clearly 'motorist', not that many drivers aren't just as 'cyclist'. In case you are puzzled, I have coined this new usage of the words to equate with 'racist'

However, I have pointed out that some might perceive any road user who does not get ripped off to the same degree as themselves as freeloaders, irrespective of the true facts. This is the argument put forward by 4-wheelers who feel bikers should pay to park just like they do. Soon it will be directed at cyclists and you will be next. All I propose is unity against a soon-to-be common enemy when you become the next cash cows. You seem to be falling into a false sense of security that it won't happen to you. The councils must be rubbing their hands in glee when they see those who could be allies squabbling and sniping.

The problem with your argument is that (a) car drivers have no common body to protect their interests - cyclists do

Pardon??????????????????????????????

Some mistake surely

and (b) car drivers can be (fairly or unfairly) targetted on environmental grounds and made to pay more - cyclists are not in that position.

Couldn't be down to cyclists calling less damage than the cars?

In fact, as a "green" and austere form of transport, bikes will not face negative costs and regulations, as that would be political suicide in these current times. Finally (c) not that many people depend on cycling - so if the cost rises punitively, people will simply stop using them. That's not true for cars.

Who protects motorists then? Cycists have the CTC and LCC, motorists have who - the AA and RAC? Beyond useless. The closest thing motorists have to a common body is the Road Haulage Association and they only care about petrol prices for truckers.

edb999

Cor, theres a lot of heated replies on here - chill out guys and girls!
And to many generalizations.... what am I? a cyclist or a car driver..... maybe a biker? I happen to have a passion for all three! and i'm sure many of you drive/ride regularly as well.
If WCC just came out and admitted it was to raise revenue, i'm sure there would have been a lot of grumbling but no where near the kick back its had.
And i know for a fact that Westminster council keeps its council taxes artificially low and then rakes the deficit back on 'alternative incomes'. No doubt better to take a bit of stick from some road users who live out of bourgh than its voting, tax paying residents.

Porgy

this lot have been the self declared voice of the motorists since the 90s: http://www.abd.org.uk/

I've always been under the impression that they were an industry front group representing car manufacturers, road building firms, oil companies, etc.

When they first formed they had virtually no members for years while claiming to represent drivers. I think they have a few more members these days, but I'm still dubious about their legitimacy.

W1

Porgy wrote:

this lot have been the self declared voice of the motorists since the 90s: http://www.abd.org.uk/

I've always been under the impression that they were an industry front group representing car manufacturers, road building firms, oil companies, etc.

When they first formed they had virtually no members for years while claiming to represent drivers. I think they have a few more members these days, but I'm still dubious about their legitimacy.

What's your evidence for that accusation?

If they are a front group for the car industry, they aren't a very good one because I would bet 99% of the population haven't heard of them.

The AA and RAC should be representing the motorist, but as they are now big businesses they always appear rather toothless and pathetic to avoid actually making an impact.

spen666

Westminster Council 1 Bike Protestors 0

Bikers' bid to prevent £1 Westminster parking fee crashes in High Court
David Williams, Motoring Correspondent
16.07.10 Westminster council today won a landmark legal battle over charging motorcyclists to park in the street.

The High Court dismissed a parking campaigner's attempt to prevent officials levying a £1-a-day fee.

A judge rejected claims by Warren Djanogly, of No To Motorbike Parking Fees, that the authority introduced it simply to raise revenue. He also turned down claims the council did not conduct a full consultation before bringing in the charge, now operational across the borough.

The ruling may have wide-reaching implications, with other boroughs now also likely to consider charging motorcyclists to park.

Lord Justice Pitchford, sitting with Mr Justice Maddison, said the council had "perfectly legitimate objectives" in bringing in the fee to help regulate traffic. He added: "While there were traffic management and environmental arguments for and against treating motorcycles as a special case, it does not seem ... the council acted outside its powers by resolving that all road users should pay their fair share for on-street provision of spaces."

He said the charge was introduced "to improve on-street parking availability for motorcyclists in order to meet actual and anticipated increased demand. The existence of that need cannot be seriously challenged. The evidence was overwhelming."

The judge said the influx of motorcyclists into Westminster following the start of the congestion charge in 2003 demonstrated "the continuing need for measures of "restraint", which was the basis for the auth- ority's policy in the first place."

Westminster said it would seek to recover its legal costs of £50,000.

Over the past year the campaign group has held weekly demonstrations in Westminster, with "go-slow" rides in and around Trafalgar Square in the morning and evening rush hours to "paralyse" central London and turn the spotlight on their campaign. Motorcyclists have also taken their protests to the entrance of Westminster City Hall in Victoria.

Lee Rowley, Westminster's cabinet member for parking and transportation, said: "Our decision to charge motorcyclists £1 per day to park has been rigorously scrutinised, open to widespread public debate and has now been tested in the High Court.

"We have always maintained that with huge demand for on-street space here, charging motorcyclists a small sum to park was fair and I'm glad the judge has reiterated this.

"This is not about the council versus motorcyclists, who we see as an important part of central London's transport mix. We were one of the UK's first local authorities to permit motorcycles in bus lanes and we will always want to work with the motorcycling community."

Motorcyclists are charged to use any dedicated on-street bay. The council says it will hold the charge at £1 a day for three years. Riders can park free in its car parks.

Evening Standard

spen666

I note the deafening silence from the motoring lobby

gordon861

Yes we lost the court case, but the fight goes on.

The protests probably won't be limited to Wednesdays anymore, instead they are likely to be more random in location and timings.

A quote from another forum :

We lost this court case, it's not the end it just means that now the gloves are off. People that have been avoiding Trafalger Square on Wednesdays had better get used to being delayed on other days. We aren't going to stop, we will be turning up at any location in Westminster at any time we choose and cause even more chaos. After the case we closed Lambeth Bridge roundabout with about 10 bikes, no cars got onto it for about 5-10 mins, we can do this anywhere. On Wednesday we blockaded Westminsters Offices for an hour in the morning, we can turn up any day we like.

We are organised, we can avoid the traffic that we cause, we can stop any part of London we wish, we are here, we are not going away...

If you go to London, take sandwiches because you may be a little while, see you on the streets.

.
The fight goes on.

W1

gordon861 wrote:

Yes we lost the court case, but the fight goes on.

The protests probably won't be limited to Wednesdays anymore, instead they are likely to be more random in location and timings.

A quote from another forum :

We lost this court case, it's not the end it just means that now the gloves are off. People that have been avoiding Trafalger Square on Wednesdays had better get used to being delayed on other days. We aren't going to stop, we will be turning up at any location in Westminster at any time we choose and cause even more chaos. After the case we closed Lambeth Bridge roundabout with about 10 bikes, no cars got onto it for about 5-10 mins, we can do this anywhere. On Wednesday we blockaded Westminsters Offices for an hour in the morning, we can turn up any day we like.

We are organised, we can avoid the traffic that we cause, we can stop any part of London we wish, we are here, we are not going away...

If you go to London, take sandwiches because you may be a little while, see you on the streets.

.
The fight goes on.

Yes, that will garner you support among the people.

spen666

gordon861 wrote:

Yes we lost the court case, but the fight goes on.

The protests probably won't be limited to Wednesdays anymore, instead they are likely to be more random in location and timings.

A quote from another forum :

We lost this court case, it's not the end it just means that now the gloves are off. People that have been avoiding Trafalger Square on Wednesdays had better get used to being delayed on other days. We aren't going to stop, we will be turning up at any location in Westminster at any time we choose and cause even more chaos. After the case we closed Lambeth Bridge roundabout with about 10 bikes, no cars got onto it for about 5-10 mins, we can do this anywhere. On Wednesday we blockaded Westminsters Offices for an hour in the morning, we can turn up any day we like.

We are organised, we can avoid the traffic that we cause, we can stop any part of London we wish, we are here, we are not going away...

If you go to London, take sandwiches because you may be a little while, see you on the streets.

.
The fight goes on.

Sounds very much like bullying to me


This behaviour would not be allowed if it was an employment dispute as it is akin to secondary picketing

Aidy

gordon861 wrote:

Yes we lost the court case, but the fight goes on.

The protests probably won't be limited to Wednesdays anymore, instead they are likely to be more random in location and timings.

A quote from another forum :

We lost this court case, it's not the end it just means that now the gloves are off. People that have been avoiding Trafalger Square on Wednesdays had better get used to being delayed on other days. We aren't going to stop, we will be turning up at any location in Westminster at any time we choose and cause even more chaos. After the case we closed Lambeth Bridge roundabout with about 10 bikes, no cars got onto it for about 5-10 mins, we can do this anywhere. On Wednesday we blockaded Westminsters Offices for an hour in the morning, we can turn up any day we like.

We are organised, we can avoid the traffic that we cause, we can stop any part of London we wish, we are here, we are not going away...

If you go to London, take sandwiches because you may be a little while, see you on the streets.

.
The fight goes on.

This has much less in common with protesting, and much more in common with terrorism.

jbond

Aidy wrote:

This has much less in common with protesting, and much more in common with terrorism.

You've got to love hyperbole.

lost_in_thought

jbond wrote:

Aidy wrote:

This has much less in common with protesting, and much more in common with terrorism.

You've got to love hyperbole.

New here? Ride a motorbike?

@spen. Nice catch.

I suggest you give up with your silly protests. If the court won't support you then what next? The council won't give in, they've got a court decision behind them. It's over.

Aidy

lost_in_thought wrote:

@spen. Nice catch.

Interesting how they don't seem to have updated their website with this yet...

tgotb

spen666 wrote:

This behaviour would not be allowed if it was an employment dispute as it is akin to secondary picketing

It's not that dissimilar from what the tube drivers do (legally)...

Of course, the striking tube drivers are now something of a laughing stock amongst most Londoners; one of these days they'll strike over a genuine grievance, and no-one will notice because tube strikes have become part of the fabric of London life.

If the motorcyclists keep up their indiscriminate protests the same thing will happen, and they'll lose the ability to make any sort of impact next time they have something to protest about...

rjsterry

Just a thought: regardless of the rights and wrongs of WCC, and the subsequent protests, they do have an effect on cyclists despite 'letting us through'. The traffic backs up onto other roads and although cyclists can filter to an extent, nose-to-tail traffic often blocks roads even for us, and filtering past a lot of stationary angry motorists is fairly dangerous as you have a compromised view of the road ahead. I expect everyone on here has had to drop the anchors when a car or van suddenly appears from between two other vehicles waiting in a queue.

Aidy

If motorcycles are going to cause congestion like this, shouldn't they also be subject to the congestion charge?

tgotb

rjsterry wrote:

Just a thought: regardless of the rights and wrongs of WCC, and the subsequent protests, they do have an effect on cyclists despite 'letting us through'.

I've never understood (or believed, to be honest) the logic of "letting us through". Their stated aim is to cause disruption; it doesn't make sense to focus the disruption onto one innocent group of people (drivers, who are already "victims" of the same parking charges) whilst minimising the effect on another innocent group (cyclists).

TBH, I reckon the real reason people turn up to participate in this is that stopping the traffic gives them an ego trip. Same principle as spraying graffiti on the side of a train, or setting fire to a building and then watching the fire brigade arrive...

spen666

TGOTB wrote:

spen666 wrote:

This behaviour would not be allowed if it was an employment dispute as it is akin to secondary picketing

It's not that dissimilar from what the tube drivers do (legally).........

Wrong tube drivers:

a) Withdraw their labour ie an action related to their employer
- motorcyclists are blocking the streets - this is a positive action whereas the turbe drivers action is a negative ie not doing something

b) Tube drivers only ever picket the premmises of their employers - the bikers are blocking trafalgar square rather than WCC premises


so in short it is nothing like the actions of the tube drivers

rjsterry

spen666 wrote:

TGOTB wrote:

spen666 wrote:

This behaviour would not be allowed if it was an employment dispute as it is akin to secondary picketing

It's not that dissimilar from what the tube drivers do (legally).........

Wrong tube drivers:

a) Withdraw their labour ie an action related to their employer
- motorcyclists are blocking the streets - this is a positive action whereas the turbe drivers action is a negative ie not doing something

b) Tube drivers only ever picket the premmises of their employers - the bikers are blocking trafalgar square rather than WCC premises


so in short it is nothing like the actions of the tube drivers

They have been picketing WCC premises as well. That bit makes more sense at least. Picketing Traf. Sq. or even LBR as someone proudly announced, really is just counterproductive.

tgotb

spen666 wrote:

TGOTB wrote:

spen666 wrote:

This behaviour would not be allowed if it was an employment dispute as it is akin to secondary picketing

It's not that dissimilar from what the tube drivers do (legally).........

Wrong tube drivers:

a) Withdraw their labour ie an action related to their employer
- motorcyclists are blocking the streets - this is a positive action whereas the turbe drivers action is a negative ie not doing something

b) Tube drivers only ever picket the premmises of their employers - the bikers are blocking trafalgar square rather than WCC premises


so in short it is nothing like the actions of the tube drivers

The means (riding round and round Trafalgar Square vs withdrawal of labour) are different.

The end result (impeding travel for innocent commuters) is very much the same.

Both groups are doing whatever they can, within the law, to achieve the same goal of disrupting travel within London. If this was not their primary goal, they wouldn't choose to take action during peak travelling time.

spen666

TGOTB wrote:

spen666 wrote:

TGOTB wrote:

spen666 wrote:

This behaviour would not be allowed if it was an employment dispute as it is akin to secondary picketing

It's not that dissimilar from what the tube drivers do (legally).........

Wrong tube drivers:

a) Withdraw their labour ie an action related to their employer
- motorcyclists are blocking the streets - this is a positive action whereas the turbe drivers action is a negative ie not doing something

b) Tube drivers only ever picket the premmises of their employers - the bikers are blocking trafalgar square rather than WCC premises


so in short it is nothing like the actions of the tube drivers

The means (riding round and round Trafalgar Square vs withdrawal of labour) are different.

The end result (impeding travel for innocent commuters) is very much the same.

Both groups are doing whatever they can, within the law, to achieve the same goal of disrupting travel within London. If this was not their primary goal, they wouldn't choose to take action during peak travelling time.

I stand by what I said before that if this was in the course of an industrial dispute it would be illegal as secondary picketing.


The tube drivers are simply refraining from work - ie not doing anything

The bikers are deliberately driving their bikes slowly in Trafalgar Square - ie are doing something

It is not illegal to withdraw labour, it is illegal to picket a place other than your place of work

spen666

rjsterry wrote:

...

They have been picketing WCC premises as well. That bit makes more sense at least. Picketing Traf. Sq. or even LBR as someone proudly announced, really is just counterproductive.

LBR?????????????????

rjsterry

spen666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

...

They have been picketing WCC premises as well. That bit makes more sense at least. Picketing Traf. Sq. or even LBR as someone proudly announced, really is just counterproductive.

LBR?????????????????

Lambeth Bridge Roundabout

All part of the SCR-speak.

spen666

rjsterry wrote:

spen666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

...

They have been picketing WCC premises as well. That bit makes more sense at least. Picketing Traf. Sq. or even LBR as someone proudly announced, really is just counterproductive.

LBR?????????????????

Lambeth Bridge Roundabout

All part of the SCR-speak.

Thought you meant London Borough of Redbridge

jbond

lost_in_thought wrote:

jbond wrote:

Aidy wrote:

This has much less in common with protesting, and much more in common with terrorism.

You've got to love hyperbole.

New here? Ride a motorbike?

I was researching electric-assist bicycles, actually. While wandering around, fell over this thread. Although I admit, I do ride motorcycles, drive a car and occasionally use public transport, since you ask.

rjsterry

spen666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

spen666 wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

...

They have been picketing WCC premises as well. That bit makes more sense at least. Picketing Traf. Sq. or even LBR as someone proudly announced, really is just counterproductive.

LBR?????????????????

Lambeth Bridge Roundabout

All part of the SCR-speak.

Thought you meant London Borough of Redbridge

Now that would be impressive! To bring an entire borough to a standstill with a few motorbikes - albeit the wrong borough.