- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Metropolitan Police.jpgMet launches next phase of Operation Safeway after threefold rise in road deaths
Police in London have today launched the next phase of their Operation Safeway road safety campaign after a threefold rise in deaths on the city’s streets in the opening weeks of 2015 compared to the start of last year.
According to the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), 29 people have lost their lives on London’s streets – three of them cyclists – since the start of the year, against 10 in the comparable period of 2014.
From this morning, more than 600 officers belonging to the Roads and Transport Policing Command (RTPC), set up by Mayor of London Boris Johnson last month, will be deployed at key junctions throughout the city.
In an operation scheduled to last six weeks, they will target motorists and cyclists, with a “specific focus on mobile phone usage whilst driving, speeding, failure to wear seat belts, red light violation, failure to comply with advanced stop lines, vehicle defects and no insurance.”
Superintendent Robert Revill of the RTPC said: “As an organisation we are committed to road safety and must do everything in our power to influence road user behaviour to prevent people being killed or seriously injured on the roads.
“Every road death or serious injury is a needless tragedy that is devastating for the victim's family and friends. We must reverse this trend which is why over the next six weeks we will be focusing heavily on road safety.”
He added: “All road users have a responsibility for road safety and it is essential that everyone takes every step they can to keep themselves and others safe on the roads."
Launched by the MPS and Transport for London (TfL) in late 2013 after six London cyclists were killed in a fortnight on the capital’s streets, Operation Safeway has seen officers undertake spot checks on lorries in locations such as Vauxhall Bridge.
But the initiative has also come under criticism from cycling campaigners for issues such as officers stopping bike riders and telling them they should be wearing a cycle helmet or high-visibility clothing, neither of which are required under the Highway Code.
TfL’s director of enforcement and on-street operations, Steve Burton, said: "We care about every journey made in the capital, and are committed to working alongside our policing partners and other agencies to improve road safety.
"This phase of Operation Safeway highlights the benefits of the MPS RTPC - a highly skilled, flexible Command of over 2,300 officers who can be quickly mobilised to meet the policing needs of London's road and surface transport network.
“We fully support this phase of Operation Safeway, which focuses on balanced enforcement tackling risk and danger alongside education on the rules of the roads, to help make London's busy streets a safer environment for everybody," he added.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- EK Spinner 5 min 31 sec ago
I was thinking the same, I seem to remember a fair bit of press coverage when Prince Phillip did the same and no proceedings were started against...
- hawkinspeter 15 min 41 sec ago
Well, a large amount of traffic going along e.g. Beaufort Rd would be people not living in St George but merely travelling through the area and...
- Steve K 44 min 19 sec ago
It is, apparently, "packed with high visibility reflective details on back and shoulder."
- Rendel Harris 14 min 23 sec ago
The Battle of Thermopylae (480 BC) was one of the most important battles of the ancient world, where 7,000 Greeks, led by the Spartans under...
- ktache 10 hours 6 min ago
The people at Hexlox have asked me to tell others about their black Friday deals, but I don't quite know what the offer is yet. But saving anything...
- biking59boomer 12 hours 42 min ago
Sadly the cyclist hate in this country seems to have worsened of late. Dangerous motoring combined with anti-cycling officialdom in some places is...
- Cyclo1964 15 hours 14 min ago
Brilliant 🤣
Add new comment
33 comments
I wonder if anyone has ever got that 3pt penalty for the ASL infringement, ever.
“specific focus on mobile phone usage whilst driving, speeding, failure to wear seat belts, red light violation, failure to comply with advanced stop lines, vehicle defects and no insurance.”
Well about bloody time. Can we have this in Bristol too.
Erm, last 2 posts were in reply to bikebot and fluffykittenoft respectively.
I saw this on the lunchtime news today and one particular bit made my blood boil:
"29 people have been killed on London's roads this year and police are cracking down on dangerous motorists AND CYCLISTS"
So how many of these 29 were killed by cyclists? How many of the cyclists killed were at fault? (Way too early in the investigations for this to be known) and how many people are killed by motorists in proportion to those killed by cyclists per year? I believe it's something like 2000-6000 to 1...yet yes. Let's target those dangerous cyclists eh and tell the news people all about it.
FFS...
So, um, the last one was such a great success that road deaths tripled? Hence they are going to do the same thing again?
Seriously - is there any evidence that this is actually achieving anything? Has there been any attempt to evaluate the operation or to amend practices (*cough* concentrating on the most serious sources of danger *cough*) in the light of what appears to have been a failure?
Maybe it's because of this (as recounted to road.cc by a cyclist stopped on the first day of Operation Safeway in November 2013)?
Police officer: “Hi, we’re stopping all cyclists in light of the recent cyclist fatalities, to make sure that you’re making yourselves as safe as possible. Obviously it’s great that you have lights on and are wearing a helmet, but have you considered wearing a hi-viz jacket?”
Cyclist: “No, I’ve got really bright lights, reflective material on my coat and my bike, and I position myself in the road so that I can be seen.”
Police officer: “I just think that if a driver wasn’t wearing their glasses then they might not be able to see you.”
***
NB Wearing hi-viz may be optional, but driving without uncorrected eyesight is most definitely a crime.
"...the initiative has also come under criticism from cycling campaigners for issues such as officers stopping bike riders and telling them they should be wearing a cycle helmet or high-visibility clothing, neither of which are required under the Highway Code."
I really don't understand why this causes so much aggravation. Yes, there is a lot of bad driving out there and ignorance of or disregard for the Highway Code (I commute through London daily, I experience it and it drives me mad). I agree that changing motorists' behaviour is likely to have a far greater positive impact on road safety than insisting that more vulnerable road users wear a bit of hi-vis or a helmet (even before you get in into the debate about the efficacy of either) and that the focus should be on enforcing mandatory rules.
However, stopping bike riders and advising them they 'should' wear a helmet or visible clothing just reflects (no pun intended) the wording of the Highway Code - it's advisory, not mandatory:
https://www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82/overview-59-to-71
Every minute spent chatting to a cyclist about things which neither breaks any laws, nor is actually dangerous, stops that same police officer from pulling over motorists causing actual danger.
That's why it's so enormously aggravating, as it's a complete waste of time if the objective is to make our roads safer.
""This phase of Operation Safeway highlights the benefits of the MPS RTPC - a highly skilled, flexible Command of over 2,300 officers who can be quickly mobilised to meet the policing needs of London's road and surface transport network."
QUICKLY MOBILISED??? FFS
It only takes 29 road deaths for them to be quickly mobilised (3 times that compared to last year at the same time), I guess 28 wasn't a trigger point in which to get their highly skilled, flexible force in action.
Poor at best.
So, in 6 weeks it goes back to normal: I.e. not seeing any road traffic policing around at all in Greater London.
They need to be out 24/7/365 to make a difference.
I did however see them at Whipp's Cross Roundabout this morning, in a notorious pinch point intersection as you enter Lea Bridge Road west-bound.
So, at least it's not just central London.
Interesting choice of location. Presume you're talking about the left-hand bend off the roundabout here? https://goo.gl/maps/B31k1
Love that "cycle lane" on the pavement.
@mrmo
spot on with your comments
many politicians love making statements about "banning this, banning that.." i.e. '20 mph speed limit'
The reality is that we no longer have the resources to put enough Police onto the streets to make any meaningful difference to motoring offences to reduce road traffic collisions.
To make a real difference would incur a hugely expensive, ongoing cost of 'zero tolerance', similar to what was done some years ago in New York City.
Its very obvious that motorists realized long ago, the chances of actually getting caught are very slim, and continue to flout the law on a daily basis. Those who are caught, always seem to have some excuse or reason that is accepted when in front of a magistrate or judge.
Your earlier comments about "right to drive" is also very interesting.
From my layman's understanding there is no 'right to drive' or 'right of way' for motorists (what many confuse with 'priority' at junctions).
There is a licensing scheme granting 'exemption' for motorists and licensed vehicles to allow access to the highway, and this can be withdrawn at any time, to exclude the driver.
Only pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians have "right of way" to use the highway and cannot be excluded. Unless a cyclist can receive an ASBO for repeated cycling offences?
The untypically high number is likely to be a "spike" in the casualty statistics. This means that it is probably due to decline anyway over the next few months, irrespective of any "road safety" initiatives such as Operation Safeway.
So: while I'm a big believer in having good quality non-discriminatory law enforcement, this initiative is unlikely to be the cause of a probable decline in the casualty statistics.
29 deaths by the middle of February, in a city which normally has about 100 for the whole years seems like one hell of a spike. Considering that the weather hasn't even been that bad, hardly any icy roads inside the M25, that seems like quite an exceptional statistical variation.
'Regression to the mean', in other words?
I'm not convinced its purely a random fluctuation though. There could be underlying reasons.
could be.
The point I'm stressing is that IF deaths decline in coming months, it won't necessarily be because of a step p in policing.
Icy roads actually lead to a decline in deaths - people drive more carefully or not at all: generally more slow speed crashes and slight injures, but not KSIs (Killed and Seriously Injured)
29 deaths by the middle of February, in a city which normally has about 100 for the whole years seems like one hell of a spike. Considering that the weather hasn't even been that bad, hardly any icy roads inside the M25, that seems like quite an exceptional statistical variation.
"This phase of Operation Safeway highlights the benefits of the MPS RTPC - a highly skilled, flexible Command of over 2,300 officers"
Highly skilled ?
In what exactly?
From the looks of things it's central London only. Balls to enforcement through the nightmares of Brixton, Streatham or tooting.
Yeah, it's only mildly deadly through there. Only 2-3 cars/vans/buses going through each red light, or cutting across the traffic without looking.
It was chaos this evening! I think that all the drivers saw the poor conditions as an excuse to drive even worse than normal. I don't think I've ever been quite so frit on my bike as I was on the way home today.
Oh, I saw one police car, no bobbies....
26 pedestrians have been killed on London's roads (all by motor vehicles) so far this year. How does this specific police response deal with this? Why aren't pedestrians being stopped for not wearing helmets, or for crossing wherever they like, or not getting out of the way of those poor drivers?
I know it says 3 cyclists but nowhere does it say 26 pedestrians. I'm not saying your statics are wrong but please show the link to 26 pedestrians.
This time around (I have seen their previous operations whilst on my commute) it would be useful if the Police and PCSO stationed at these key junctions paid strict attention to the traffic, rather than having a nice chat with each other.
When groups of them are standing around talking, and not watching traffic offences being committed next to them, why bother?
I can think of one specific example where a "private hire" driver in a people carrier drove into the ASL whilst using his mobile phone, ending up on my right (I was on my bike).
I alerted a WPC who was standing talking with some PCSO by asking, "Are you going to do something about this?" pointing out what he had done.
The driver had noticed the Police by this point and dropped his phone. She claimed he was already in the ASL before the light changed, so had not broken the law. My word against hers, even though she was not watching what was going on.
Most cops are pretty thick so initiatives like this will never be as successful as they could be. They either CBA or are over stepping their powers, beating up or killing people e.g. Ian Tomlinson's death.
I was in the centre of town (on foot) yesterday and as we waited to cross the road, I spotted two traffic cops arguing strenuously with a driver they'd pulled over. They were still there arguing when we returned a short while later. Nearby also were two cycle cops who had pulled over another motorist. I heard him arguing too and he was denying having used his cellphone, though he admitted having had it in his hand at the time.
This is where the Police need to be able to check your phone logs, probably to much of a Big Brother power for the Mail readers though.
I go with the very simple fact, drivers are on licence. If you step out of line whilst driving then your licence should be revoked. I know It sounds harsh but if you are pulled over then the police should have the right to see when you made a call.
Too many drivers forget there is no right to drive, and the courts and the police have, maybe unwittingly, played a part by allowing drivers with more the 12 points to claim hardship.
Just having it in your hand is enough for a careless driving ticket. Like eating an apple is.
I never really understood why the powers that be went to the trouble of adding a specific piece of legislation regarding mobile phones, when the existing legislation regarding distraction was already there (viz - eating a sandwich, bowl of cereal, reading a book).
That said, what was the point of adding the legislation without any of the manpower to actually enforce it? It seems to me that it is now only really used to 'add value' if there's already a prosecution because of something else.
Pages