Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
I know about the law firm and know they do a lot of good work but reading the judgement I can’t see how the £35k has been worth it & can’t see how spending more money is going to help anyone. The judge says that even if he had ruled against the council he wouldn’t have quashed the traffic orders. (Law firms do still have to make money, it doesn’t look like they’re acting pro bono here and this is getting them publicity).
Gramsci - do you have any view on the judgement?
Gramsci - do you have any view on the judgement?
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
No, that’s his summary of his decision in this case (“grant permission to bring the judicial review claim” = Sheakh has passed legal test to be able to bring JR claim at first instance). No mention of right to appeal.
snowy_again
Slush
I’ve skimmed this twice and already spotted 2 fundamental factual errors that are answered by google or the Justice Kerr text...
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
The right to appeal is normally dealt with in the judgment. Perhaps chowce5382 can enlighten us.
snowy_again
Slush
Totally normal. OLJ calling Claire Holland ‘part of a sick cult’. They seem to be scaling up abuse:
“What a piece of filth that you scrape of a turd @willnorman is. Celebrating a judgement against a disabled member of the community. This ladies & gentlemen is the Cycling Lobby. Vile. Inhuman. Selfish. Scum. They’re like vermin.”
With Ed / Buzz now apparently biased against them (and Sofia complaining about it on twitter).
Last edited:
Jesterburger
Well-Known Member
The escalation of language from the antis is really quite scary.
a_chap
When the world came apart, where were you?
Quite possibly. I have a shocking memory for names. Trying to keep track of twitter names and Urban names. I forget my own name sometimes.
In which case, my apologies to Gramsci if they've never posted anything even remotely vile.
I've reported someone, anyway.
This is where it ends up if their resonable supporters don't call this crap out and instead make excuses.
This “fuck tfl” slogan is written on the planter by Holy Trinity primary school!
It's been covered up with hearts:
a_chap
When the world came apart, where were you?
I haven't linked anyone's U75 identity to any Twitter accounts.
editor
hiraethified
I'm banned from their FB group and no one sent me a press release,. but I'm stil expected to chase after them for a statement
Anyway I published this One Lambeth respond to the High Court’s rejection of their challenge to Lambeth’s Low Traffic Neighbourhoods
newbie
undisambiguated
That blogpost doesn't 'prove' anything, it's just an attempt to use statistics to endorse policy irrespective of outcome. It appears to be written by someone whose background is in 'active travel interventions'. It doesn't use the words 'collateral damage' but that's clearly how all those dead cyclists are viewed.Going back to @newbie’s comments that it was irresponsible to let more cyclists on the streets, bigger analysis of the road safety stats has been done - which proves just the opposite.
“The fatality data does show a huge 40% increase in cyclist deaths. Over a third of these happened in the ‘lockdown months’ of April – June when we saw the biggest rise in cycling, which was associated with quieter roads and largely fair weather. When the 45.7% increase in cycling is taken into consideration however this means that ‘cycling became 14% safer’.”
Comprehensive KSI analysis (of all forms of transport) here:
Record low road deaths but did our roads actually become more dangerous? | Agilysis
The provisional 2020 Great Britain casualty data has been released by the DfT and shows a record low number of road deaths but the story behind these results requires a little further investigation.agilysis.co.uk
And the National Statistics updated data: Reported road casualties in Great Britain, provisional estimates: year ending June 2020
With more pedestrian and cycling analysis on September.
Turns out that older people may be dying more in car crashes as they weren’t used to driving after a period of absence.
The only group of road users with increased fatalities during the year of lockdowns and reduced traffic was cyclists, in particular there were fewer pedestrians and motorcyclists killed. Yet one of the things I notice is that people and groups who might otherwise be putting out white bicycles, holding vigils and using words like 'carnage' are noticeably more than just silent, they are actively attempting to endorse what's happened as showing that cycling is safer!
To my mind that's irresponsible.
I’m not sure anyone’s arguing that cycling is safe - in fact the opposite it needs to be made safer. You’re answer just seems to be to stop people cycling!
Wonder what you’re going to say when this year’s car death figures are released and inevitably show an increase?
I'm banned from their FB group and no one sent me a press release,. but I'm stil expected to chase after them for a statement
Anyway I published this One Lambeth respond to the High Court’s rejection of their challenge to Lambeth’s Low Traffic Neighbourhoods
They also seem happy to publish your DMs as well….
editor
hiraethified
Could you PM me screengrabs please?
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Who are these people and groups who are "silent"? I mean specifically? Give us some twitter accounts or whatever it is you are talking about.
I see people using these figures to point out that cyclists are safer when there are fewer cars on the roads.
Your strange reasoning suggests that anyone who does stuff like holding vigils for cyclists killed on the roads, should also be campaigning for fewer people to cycle. Not just in the light of these figures, but generally.
This is a bit like noting that many house fires start in kitchens, and saying that it's irresponsible to encourage people to cook at home. Instead of campaigning for things that reduce the danger, such as getting people to fit smoke alarms, or stopping manufacturers from selling dodgy appliances, or resisting cuts to firefighting services.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
You have a really fucking weird way of looking at this.
snowy_again
Slush
I know Twitter is generally a sewer, but there’s a certain level of qanon/ woo-anon to some of the main OLJ supporters - apparently ‘Kerr recommended an appeal against his own ruling” and appeal papers have already been lodged.
they'reI'm banned from their FB group and no one sent me a press release,. but I'm stil expected to chase after them for a statement
Anyway I published this One Lambeth respond to the High Court’s rejection of their challenge to Lambeth’s Low Traffic Neighbourhoods
according to one of them on twitter it was because you made abusive comments!I'm banned from their FB group and no one sent me a press release,. but I'm stil expected to chase after them for a statement
Anyway I published this One Lambeth respond to the High Court’s rejection of their challenge to Lambeth’s Low Traffic Neighbourhoods
snowy_again
Slush
^^ failing to mulitquote whilst queuing in the post office...
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Sure, not exactly, but you've suggested there's an identifiable link between a U75 poster and their twitter account, and also suggested that they are posting nasty stuff there. I quite often disagree with Gramsci but he's a long standing and thoughtful poster and I'd be really surprised if he was acting otherwise on twitter - I just think it's unfair to leave that suggestion out there with the potential for people to jump to very wrong conclusions about who is who and what they are saying in different places.
editor
hiraethified
I never made 'abusive' comments on their FB page.
Meanwhile, some prick called Jonathon Price has taken to calling me an 'arsehole' via private message on Facebook because he was told that OneLambeth sent me a press release which I ignored.
Except I received no press release and instead had to copy their statement from another Facebook page.
Similar threads
