Would anybody like to go with me?



Tuesday 4 March 2008, 7-9pm

People's Question Time is your chance to voice concerns and ask the Mayor and London Assembly Members what they are doing for the capital and its people.

To request FREE tickets send us your name, your address and the number of tickets you need by one of the following ways:

Email peoplesquestions@london.gov.uk

Online at http://www.london.gov.uk/gla/pqt/20080304/online_form.jsp

Telephone 020 7983 4762 (answerphone service)

Text* PQT followed by your name, house number/name and full postcode, then the number of tickets you require to 62967.

*Texts cost 10p plus your standard SMS rate

what, like on a date?...

2 hours for people to voice their concerns about London? You wouldn't get passed talking about the LEZ surely?

Do you know how these things work roxy? Is it moderated so that it doesn't just turn into a massive slanging match?

thats what i was hoping for.
we should put together a londonfgss dream team!....looking for the most opinionated, grumpy and rude users to represent cycling in london :)

Quite possibly just working on a good question to submit.

Aidan, are you asking me out? Does Emily know? Better not tell Mike!

I requested 4 tickets, don't know how many I'll actually get. I was thinking fgss should all go and turn the whole thing into a cycling in London meeting?
What else crosses more social lines? Environment, Economy, Social Standing, Safety, Transport, etc etc...

hey ken - you wan arrospok?

Wicked. As we know Ken LOVES cyclists. I'm down.

We need to list (calm down smeaar), good questions to ask.

1. Quoting Nick Lester, London's Director of transport, environment, and planning "Cars are not allowed to stop, park or drive in mandatory bike lanes at present. However, enforcement of this by police is limited. Councils do more enforcement of the parking restrictions."
While the key phrase here is "mandatory bike lanes" I'd like to know why this isn't enforced on all bike lanes, and what the point of a bike lane is if cars, lorries, buses, etc can use them as well.

2. Heavy Good's Vehicles are the number one killer of cyclists (after beer) in London. They are dangerous, unenvironmentally friendly, and downright ugly. What are you doing to ensure that these HGV's don't kill people and how are you looking to cut down, restrict, or abandon their use outright in London?

3. There seems to be a "blame the victim" approach to public services regarding cycling and motorcycling in London. Your television ad's show that when a motorcyclist is doored by a car and killed it is his fault. That wearing helmets is needed to protect from dangerous cars, and that cyclists should themselves come to Trafalgar Sq, get in a HGV and see for themselves what the driver can see through his mirrors so they won't get killed. What are you doing to increase penalties on motor drivers who hit and injure or kill cyclists and pedestrians? What are you doing to enforce this? And what are you doing by way of Public Services to spread the word that "cycling isn't dangerous, the cars and trucks that hit cyclists are." ?

I think raising the issue of the problem of cycling outside of central / inner London where the facilities and attitudes are terrible. Riding though zone 6 without suffering some sort of abuse is dam near impossible.


Stolen bikes, the issue of stolen bikes as a career option due to the low chance of being caught. High profit low risk the perfect crime.


The share the road campaign. Stopping cyclist jumping red lights and stopping motorists pulling into the ASL/ bike lanes e.t.c. There are teams of police out stinging cyclist, but I believe that no one has ever been prosecuted for going into the ASL. (Would need something to back up this claim but I think I have read it on moving target as well as other websites). Thsi is an example of an uneven citing of effort.

Three to start from?

Bear left at zoo.

roxy apologies for the pedantry ! :)

unenvironmentally friendly = environmentally unfriendly.

+ I wouldn't weaken your (perfectly sound) argument with emotive thrusts such as '[HGVs are] downright ugly'.

Roxy just some personal points.

Your 1 and my 3 much up to the same thing.

3 Is largely good but I feel as road users everyone need to respect everyone so we need to except that a HGV is difficult to manoeuvre and the problem is not that there was a HGV for people to see what the drivers could see but there where not bike for the drivers to go out and ride on for them to see what the cyclist could see, feel experience. It is the one sided empathy that is the problem. We are expected to empathize with others by sitting in the cab but they don't have to empathize with us by coming out riding. This is just the same as old people pulling into asl and not being prosecuted but we are if we jump a red light thing. Maybe a slight rephrase will make this more obvious.

The advert points are very good as well I like them.


2. I would think could do with having the last bit of "abandon their(HGV) use outright" removed because it is unrealistic and people will instantly jump on that part of the question removing validity from the rest of the question and marginalizes the person asking the question as being extreme and 'not to be taken seriously'. I see you point but coming across to extreme can mean that your other points about the danger of HGVs are not taken as seriously.

Man I apologies for my poorly written reply. I am going for world worst grammar I think.

see even roxy thinks so!!

i think it is better to get make those mega big mirrors compulsory on the passenger side on HGV's purely to help them see the numpty cyclists going down the inside.

tynan, the ugly was just a joke

I think removing them from the streets between the hours of 8am and 6pm is a possibility with the exception of construction vehicles. Store deliveries and the like shouldn't be down while commuters are on the road. And if they must they can usually be done in smaller safer trucks.

don't worry its an open relationship...She wont mind.

Well we shall have to agree to disagree o that one as think lotts of smaller vans would be worse than the HGVs for many reasons.

not lots. I think the main thing is HGV's in London's tiny streets don't work during commuter hours. It would be environmentally unfriendly to have lots of little ones replace them. The answer should be perhaps that they get in and get out during unsocial hours.

Oh and stores should start selling less crap and everyone should ebay instead.

Good ! :)

Yep that is defiantly an ideal.

How shall we work this . Three of the people who are interested in going along elected to ask a question and see if we have any luck in getting our question asked?

im interested in coming along,not so interested in asking a question...maybe we could go out for a drink afterwards ;)

+1 to the no-HGVs-during-the-day point. Paris has had something like this in operation for years I do believe.

Can someone raise the issue of the use of racist remarks on murals?

There is a big mural round the corner from my house in Clapham for a guy who was shot last year and there are nice messages and often flowers. I understand that in a city certain areas might have language that is seen as somewhat colloquial but the use of "R.I.P MA NIGGA" written in foot high lettering on said memorial is slightly depressing and, in my opinion, not a very positive addition. Also, it has stood there for a good 6 months.

Just a thought..

The counter argument would be that we would be imposing unsocial working hours on one set of road users for the benefit of another group (in this case cyclists).

My own view is that you should attempt to achieve something achievable (tautology alert!) - your attempts to restructure London's commercial traffic would not even register on the back-up radar of the Freight Transport Association (the Road Hauliers Association's lobby group).

I think dissemination and diminution of language is a (fucking) good thing.

'Nigga' - leave it out there, make it common parlance, it soon loses it's power.

Censor and hide it and it is put back into the hands of racists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1I_ozVln3w

I vote RPM as the LFGSS ambassador. That man could start a fight in an empty room!

Removal of goods vehicles during the day wouldn't just improve the roads for cyclists. It would improve for everyone(pedestrians, cyclists, emergency sevices, cars, smaller business vehicles) entire swathes of London dominated by road traffic. A bit.

Agreed. But my point is that removal of HGVs from the traffic system during the day is not achievable.

bring back the canals i'd say!

*ahem*