Forum home Commuter cycling forum Commuting chat

Welcome your new Transport Secretary, Philip Hammond

prj45prj45 Posts: 2,208
edited September 2010 in Commuting chat
Complete c**k knocker by the sound of it.

(quotes from the printed version of the Evening Standard)
I've never actually cycled in London. I'd have to take a deep breath. I think you need to know what you're doing to cycle in London

Ah, nice and encouraging.
Cyclists need to be more aware of the risks around them. It frightens me to death when I see them pull out around other cyclists, completely unaware that there is a car behind. Maybe they need wing mirrors.

Maybe you need to give them more space and/or slow down?
We have to make it [cycling] less risky. The more separation your can create between cyclists and motorists the better.

You mean get cyclists out of your way?

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/ ... -issues.do

The Standard also states that the "war on the motorist" is over. What war?
«13

Posts

  • Paul EPaul E Posts: 2,052
    I thought to have wing mirrors you needed wings!!!
    bartman100 wrote:
    The OP is a troll = moron
    The OP actually believes this = moron
  • prj45prj45 Posts: 2,208
    Ah, MayorOfLondon has just tweeted Just had a good meeting with the new Transport Secretary and Phil Hammond's agreed to come cycling with me

    From what I hear though Boris is quite a risk taker so I reckon Mr Hammond's prejudices might be enforced!

    Boris-Johnson-cycling-in--002.jpg
  • wgwarburtonwgwarburton Posts: 1,863
    prj45 wrote:
    Ah, MayorOfLondon has just tweeted Just had a good meeting with the new Transport Secretary and Phil Hammond's agreed to come cycling with me

    From what I hear though Boris is quite a risk taker so I reckon Mr Hammond's prejudices might be enforced!

    Boris-Johnson-cycling-in--002.jpg

    You know that Boris is riding legally, here, don't you? He's also covering/applying a brake and by the look of the bike & his hair/jacket riding quite slowly...

    I can't see any sign of any vehicles about.... What exactly illustrates that he's "quite a risk taker"?

    Cheers,
    W.
  • Eau RougeEau Rouge Posts: 1,118
    I can't see any sign of any vehicles about.... What exactly illustrates that he's "quite a risk taker"?

    Cheers,
    W.

    He's not wearing Lycra, and hasn't got drop handlebars. He's running the very real risk of losing his scalp to half the commuters on his route. Very risky altogether.
  • Stevo_666Stevo_666 Posts: 44,607
    prj45 wrote:
    The Standard also states that the "war on the motorist" is over. What war?
    Excessive taxes on motoring, proliferation of speed cameras etc. Do you own a car? If so, you would know what they meant.
    Whippet
    Bruiser
    Panzer
    Commuter

    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • greg66_tri_v2.0greg66_tri_v2.0 Posts: 7,172
    prj45 wrote:
    Cyclists need to be more aware of the risks around them. It frightens me to death when I see them pull out around other cyclists, completely unaware that there is a car behind. Maybe they need wing mirrors.

    Maybe you need to give them more space and/or slow down?

    Hmm. I can see both sides of this one.

    If I pull out to go round another cyclist, it knobs me off bigtime to hear some motorist giving me a blast on the horn. Esp as I'm usually round the other cyclist in an instant, come up on their 4 o'clock rather than their 6 and pull out sharply, and generally don't hold up a car for more than a second.

    However.

    Were I in a car, overtaking a line of slower moving cars, and one of the cars in that line decided to pull his own overtaking move right in front of me, I'd be royally fcuked off, and consider him to be the fcukwit who had failed to follow the mirror-signal-manouevre mantra.

    So it's not so clear cut as all that, I think.
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • tailwindhometailwindhome Posts: 16,065
    All 3 comments made by Mr Hammond are essentially correct

    Edit

    No I wish to withdraw that and instead....

    Neither of the 3 comments made by Mr Hammond seem entirely unreasonable
    Believe that a farther shore
    Is reachable from here.
    Believe in miracles
    And cures and healing wells
  • Eau RougeEau Rouge Posts: 1,118
    All 3 comments made by Mr Hammond are essentially correct

    Probably, the last one mentions "separation" which can often mean segregation.
    I feel he's maybe missed the fact that the problem isn't that the cyclists are there, it's that cars, buses and lorries are fundamentally dangerous. If that is the case he could well head down the path of putting the onus, maybe even legally, on cyclists to ensure they aren't hit by errant motorists. That's not a path I want the DfT to head down. They would be better off looking at ways to make drivers less dangerous for everyone, not just cyclists but pedestrians and other drivers too.
    It could be argued cars are used far too casually by far too many people.
  • mousetoomousetoo Posts: 53
    I think we, as posters on this site, and probably mostly half-way decent cyclists with it, should remember that the many of the cyclists in London do act unpredictably and dangerously on the roads. When I'm in my car the actions of some cyclists takes my breath away. I don't thin Hammond's comments are that outrageous in that context
  • Chewy CheeksChewy Cheeks Posts: 234
    Phillip is our local MP.

    During the last two years or so Wimbledon
    has had its roads being dug up to improve
    the infrastructure - fair enough.

    But having the same piece of road dug up 2 to 3 times in this
    time period is wasteful, in terms of costs and time.
    It has also caused his constituents to have a massive
    pain in the censored .

    Hmmmm Transport you say - Him and boris will make
    a right pigs breakfast of it - I reckon.
    No Babbit No, Look what Birdy doing
  • Citizen SmithCitizen Smith Posts: 336
    Eau Rouge wrote:
    He's not wearing Lycra, and hasn't got drop handlebars. He's running the very real risk of losing his scalp to half the commuters on his route. Very risky altogether.

    SCR rules FAIL. Yes, likely to passed by lots of folk but due to his setup and getup: a high FCN; few people could claim a technical scalp.

    Although, arguably passing Bojo would be a superb scalp.
    "Come at the king, you best not miss." - Omar, The Wire

    FCN 4: Willier Izoard XP
    FCN 7: GT Legato 4.0

    *GAME* competitor
  • Agent57Agent57 Posts: 2,300
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    prj45 wrote:
    The Standard also states that the "war on the motorist" is over. What war?
    Excessive taxes on motoring, proliferation of speed cameras etc. Do you own a car? If so, you would know what they meant.

    I own a car, and I don't know what form the "war on the motorist" takes. Can't say I've felt embattled. Maybe the excessive taxes are London-centric (if you mean the congestion charge, for example). Fuel duty is high, admittedly, but has been for decades.

    As for speed cameras, I think they're a good thing. But I don't speed in my car anyway, so they really don't affect me. :D
    MTB commuter / 531c commuter / CR1 Team 2009 / RockHopper Pro Disc / 10 mile PB: 25:52 (Jun 2014)
  • Soul BoySoul Boy Posts: 359
    Read this yesterday evening. The comment about seperation worries me the most. This is from someone who has never cycled in London. Hopefully he'll seek out views of those who do.

    Comment about being more aware of risks, fair enough, I see some riding that makes me wince, but theres f-all chance of me fitting mirrors. Nature has kindly provided me with a neck which allows me to look behind, and that'll do for me.
  • rjsterryrjsterry Posts: 19,334
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    prj45 wrote:
    The Standard also states that the "war on the motorist" is over. What war?
    Excessive taxes on motoring, proliferation of speed cameras etc. Do you own a car? If so, you would know what they meant.

    My wife and I do own a car (although I don't drive - long story) and I don't see my wife donning a tin hat every time she heads out. You don't like VED? Get one with a smaller/more efficient engine. You don't like speed cameras? Stick to the speed limit. You don't like parking fines? Don't park where you aren't supposed to. Speed bumps are a pain, but then if people stuck to the speed limit they wouldn't be needed. Petrol is expensive, but then get a car with a smaller/more efficient engine. Sorry for the rant, but the 'war on motorists' is nonsense.

    EDIT: Back on topic, does anyone on here have him as their local MP? If so, then maybe time to start turning up at his constituency surgery with some well argued and reasonable requests (I'm thinking not like the Steve Coogan character in In the Loop - "I am calm! I'm f***ing Zen, I am!)
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Liberal metropolitan, remoaner, traitor, "sympathiser", etc.
  • rml380zrml380z Posts: 244
    I kinda agree with all his comments in the Evening Standard interview, but I'll wait (without a great deal of hope) to see what will actually change. After all, we've had similar comments from Boris, and we're now seeing how that translates into actions (Super Highways, for instance).
  • rjsterryrjsterry Posts: 19,334
    Aha. Mr Hammond is MP for Runnymede and Weybridge. Anyone from out there on here?
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Liberal metropolitan, remoaner, traitor, "sympathiser", etc.
  • MonkeyMonsterMonkeyMonster Posts: 4,628
    I've never actually cycled in London. I'd have to take a deep breath. I think you need to know what you're doing to cycle in London

    Might not be encouraging to all of the masses but he's correct.
    Cyclists need to be more aware of the risks around them. It frightens me to death when I see them pull out around other cyclists, completely unaware that there is a car behind. Maybe they need wing mirrors.

    No need for wing mirrors - shoulder check yes. Cyclists who do pull out without looking are nutbags.
    We have to make it [cycling] less risky. The more separation your can create between cyclists and motorists the better.

    Separation is the wrong word as has been said. Less risky yes - but that will come with education and acceptance of said education by both the cyclist and the car driver in any situation.

    I'd like massive fines for cars/lorries etc that park/loiter in cycle lanes that then force the cyclist out of said lane. [not really but would be nice] to see compulsory license reviews of all addison lee drivers every 2 weeks. Snipers to get any rl jumpers be they car, motorbike or cyclist. You might believe its safer (not going to argue that point) for you but you tar all cyclists with the idea we're all cnuts who don't care about rules.
    Le Cannon [98 Cannondale M400] [FCN: 8]
    The Mad Monkey [2013 Hoy 003] [FCN: 4]
  • Chewy CheeksChewy Cheeks Posts: 234
    He is the standing MP for Wimbledon not Runnymede - grand piece of journalism from ES.
    No Babbit No, Look what Birdy doing
  • Eau RougeEau Rouge Posts: 1,118
    Phillip is our local MP.

    During the last two years or so Wimbledon
    has had its roads being dug up to improve
    the infrastructure - fair enough.

    But having the same piece of road dug up 2 to 3 times in this
    time period is wasteful, in terms of costs and time.
    It has also caused his constituents to have a massive
    pain in the ars*.

    Hmmmm Transport you say - Him and boris will make
    a right pigs breakfast of it - I reckon.

    The roads being dug up is the responsibility of the local council, not the MP. He can maybe talk to the council about it, but he has no actual power. The local council seems to be a Labour-led one, so maybe they don't get on with him anyway.
  • rjsterryrjsterry Posts: 19,334
    He is the standing MP for Wimbledon not Runnymede - grand piece of journalism from ES.

    Err, no, that's Stephen Hammond, also a Tory. Checked this on 3 different sources.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Liberal metropolitan, remoaner, traitor, "sympathiser", etc.
  • hooliohoolio Posts: 139
    I've never actually cycled in London. I'd have to take a deep breath. I think you need to know what you're doing to cycle in London

    Seems fair enough. I think you should know what you're doing if you're going to use the roads in London or anywhere else. Seems to me he knows his own lack of experience needs a bit of improving.

    Cyclists need to be more aware of the risks around them. It frightens me to death when I see them pull out around other cyclists, completely unaware that there is a car behind. Maybe they need wing mirrors.

    Yep, a look behind lets the following car know you're about to do something (assuming they're paying attention). I don't agree with wing mirrors though. NO.
    Some of us are well aware of the risk around us, and how much it hurts when things go wrong. But there's plenty out there for whom ignorance is bliss, and seeing what they sometimes do is frightening.

    We have to make it [cycling] less risky. The more separation your can create between cyclists and motorists the better.

    I don't entirely agree with the word seperation. If he used the word "space" then I'd be happier.

    Overall his comments aren't unreasonable, and maybe if he goes out with Boris on the bike he might learn a thing or two. Lets hope.
  • hooliohoolio Posts: 139
    Double post
  • Chewy CheeksChewy Cheeks Posts: 234
    hangs head in shame
    No Babbit No, Look what Birdy doing
  • bails87bails87 Posts: 13,317
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    prj45 wrote:
    The Standard also states that the "war on the motorist" is over. What war?
    Excessive taxes on motoring, proliferation of speed cameras etc. Do you own a car? If so, you would know what they meant.

    So the "war" actually means catching people who are breaking the law? I like when criminals are caught and punished, I thought most people did. How about we stop using DNA evidence to end the war on rapists?

    As for the tax, it's more expensive than somewhere like America, but not much more, if at all, than a lot of places in Europe. If you want to pay less tax then get a more efficient car.

    Edit: And yes, I own a car and drive over 15 miles to work every day (I don't know what I'm doing in here!).
    MTB/CX

    "As I said last time, it won't happen again."
  • biondinobiondino Posts: 5,990
    All 3 comments made by Mr Hammond are essentially correct

    Edit

    No I wish to withdraw that and instead....

    Neither of the 3 comments made by Mr Hammond seem entirely unreasonable

    +1
  • PorgyPorgy Posts: 4,558
    Stevo 666 wrote:
    prj45 wrote:
    The Standard also states that the "war on the motorist" is over. What war?
    Excessive taxes on motoring, proliferation of speed cameras etc. Do you own a car? If so, you would know what they meant.

    I owned a car between 1998 and 2008 - drove regularly around London and have no idea what they mean by "war on the motorist". TBH - my own views are that motorists have it relatively easy - costs seemed reasonable to me, and I'm not exaclty rich. Got fined a few times due to illegally parking. Fair enough - I shouldn't have done it. And always kept to speed limits - therby avoiding the etirely avoidable "tax on speeding" or fines as I like to call them. :lol:
  • ketsbaiaketsbaia Posts: 1,718
    The so-called war on motorists is now over, is it? That'll be why the congestion charge is going up to a tenner a day, then, is it? Except for those in the western extension, which is being scrapped.

    The war on motorists in expensive bits of west London is over. Woohoo.
  • davmaggsdavmaggs Posts: 1,008
    I think that the war on motorists might mean putting 40mph speed cameras on a motorway (M4) that raise thousands a day in fines, whereas local schools have none outside. It could mean your local authority charging you to park outside your own house on a street that you pay to maintain. It might mean CCTV on Putney being used to bust traders unloading, but not being used to alert the police when an assault is in progress outside the station, It might mean TFL retaining details of number plates for months even if your vehicle is exempt from the charge, or ANR cameras on motorways scanning your plate and storing that data. It might even mean the DVLA selling private details to all sorts of dubious people for £2.50.
  • Eau RougeEau Rouge Posts: 1,118
    davmaggs wrote:
    I think that the war on motorists might mean putting 40mph speed cameras on a motorway (M4) that raise thousands a day in fines, whereas local schools have none outside. It could mean your local authority charging you to park outside your own house on a street that you pay to maintain. It might mean CCTV on Putney being used to bust traders unloading, but not being used to alert the police when an assault is in progress outside the station, It might mean TFL retaining details of number plates for months even if your vehicle is exempt from the charge, or ANR cameras on motorways scanning your plate and storing that data. It might even mean the DVLA selling private details to all sorts of dubious people for £2.50.

    It means not prosecuting drivers involved in 'minor' incidents as it's not in the public interest despite the fact they have actually crashed into something! It's not having the police patrols on the roads to catch the drunks, the texters, the incompetent, the ignorant, the downright rude etc as it's all left to a camera that any driver should be able to see and slow for anyway. It's letting people drive cars without paying any VED at all, giving them the incorrect impression that driving their car is "green". It's still designing roads as if the only traffic on them is motorised. It's not closing roads for public events as roads, despite being payed for by everyone, are apparently not public space.
    I could go on....
  • davmaggsdavmaggs Posts: 1,008
    I agree with those observations.

    Funny how easy opportunities to raise revenue are really well enforced, but the ones you state that take a little work have been left alone. Kind of proves the point.

    There are cars like the Google ones driving around central London looking for outstanding fines, but not doing anything about uninsured drivers.
Sign In or Register to comment.