Radio spat between London's cycling commissioner and 'lying' reporter over cycle superhighway use

For anyone commuting in tomorrow, LBC trollumist Theo Usherwood  will be out again Monday morning 7am at Victoria. Do give him a warm greeting.

Shame it's not t-shirt weather - https://www.tboom.co.uk/upset-the-idiots

Why's there no law requiring pedestrians to use the pavement? That would make about as much sense as a law to require cyclists to use a cycle path.

Of course motorways already exist where cycling and walking are not allowed.

The irony...

"2nd cabbie: They're just overtaking each other like lunatics, cutting up drivers. D’you see what I mean? You’ve got the speed merchants, they just want to overtake. They don’t want to be stuck in behind a load of slowcoaches, basically."

As much as I hate Ferrari et al, I think Andrew Gilligan is the last person on earth who could call a journalist out for lying. People have very short memories.

This is what Nick Ferrari thinks is the solution to safe cycling in London.

Seriously. That was a real campaign ran on his show last year.  He's the fat lad on the right (in more than one sense) if you hadn't already guessed.

Let's not forget this was for the Nick Ferrari show. Nick has been against the cycle routes from the start, I gather it holds his limo up on the way home. Theo Usherwood isn't going to disagree with LBC's main star.

I've just sent this to LBC, couldn't help myself.

Wow, Usherwood had a clear agenda with the cycle superhighway did he not?!  He was falling over himself to put words in mouths, complete fail and very obvious, very poor work.

I drive, I cycle.  Factually, motorists kill each other and everyone else.  I've been hit whilst riding and left with a brain injury, 18 months in re-habilitation.  A car also killed my 5 year sister in 1998, she dies whilst waiting for the air ambulance.  I've also had a motorist mount the pavement whilst distracted and nearly squash myself and others against a wall.  

So, I do take deep offence, as does anyone who has had a loved one snatched from them when media very obviously try and paint cyclists as the principal danger on our roads.  Yes, some of them are a pain in the arse but focus on the real issue here.

When you're driving or walking with your loved ones it's not someone cycling that will kill you.  It's the guy in his souped up BMW who thinks he's special, it's the young girl playing with her phone whilst driving, it's the Sheikh in the Aston Martin with enough money to ensure he's more important than you when it all goes wrong, it's the banned driver who has no insurance to ensure your family can meet the mortgage when you're left brain dead, it's the drunk who's been doing it for years and thinks he's in control, it's the ecstacy user that has no idea of what he's doing...need I go on?

The statistics for motor deaths and serious injury are horrific.  The number of uninsured is terrifying.  If you want a story and want to actually achieve something go look at that and sort that out.  Once you've managed to do that then sure, pick on a cyclist with no lights, moan about the cyclist on the pavement simply trying to avoid being killed by the tipper truck driver on the phone.

Whether I choose to cycle or drive (yes people can do both) I will do so on transport routes I have funded with my working taxes.  I will not be dictated to in terms of where I can do that, whether that be a road or a cycle path.  This 'mandate or forcing of' cyclists to use a specific lane is draconian.  Use your media clout to force motorists to stop killing and maiming everyone then sure, after that go back and pick on everyone else simply trying to get somewhere in peace without becoming yet another statistic.

There is nothing more tedious than watching the media misdirect their resources on tittle tattle side stories to antagonise and inflame when they could be working on making the world better.

Shameful effort and so obviously skewed from the off.  You should and can do much better, people are not stupid and frankly Mr. Ferrari got owned quite publicly, embarrassing at the very least.

I've just listened to the radio clip and what is extremely obvious is there was an agenda.  Usherwood is almost desperate to put words into the mouths of people passing, a pretty pathetic bit of work and frankly he comes over as a tit, as does Mr. Ferrari who seems quite taken aback that anyone would think a 'journalist' would lie in the interests of inflaming an otherwise pointless story...I mean that never happens does it?!

Mr. Gilligan showed something very rare for someone in his position, a pair of cahonies so my sincere congrats to him for standing up against a clear attack against a transport scheme that doesn't involve pandering yet again to motorised traffic.

As for Nick Ferrari going on about forcing/mandating cyclists to use the cycle lane why should anyone be forced to do anything?  We all pay for transport budgets so the very notion that someone cycling should be denied access to something they've helped fund (namely the road network) purely because it suits cars is clear evidence that the agenda was solely to create tension between cyclists and drivers...reckless and very poor 'journalism'.

Tell you what Nick, let's force motorists to stop killing people and we'll pop back and take another look at forcing cyclists to use a cycle lane eh?

Owned.

Like all journalists, a story isn't really interesting unless it's negative.

As the cycling network extends in length more riders will use it. Over time less vehicles will be used because it is slow going for them.

Never believe any figures TFL put out, we had a bus stop in Clapham that needed moving, TFL refused stating how busy the stop was backed up by a count they had done. Local people complained and eventually TFL were forced to use cameras to record how busy it was.

Guess what, the video footage showed TFL had exagerrated the number by about 80% and so the bus stop was moved. Oh and nobody was held to account for the extra cost or time wasting.

Classic troll, must be ex Daily Mail perhaps?!

Asking Cabbies?  Recognised as impartial of course...they'll happily sit in traffic all day long breathing in the fumes of the wonderful chariots around them as the meter keeps ticking but ask them to spend a minute navigating a new system to protect lives and the world is ending.

Pedestrians now threatened by cyclists?  Well why not...cyclists are expected to be content with being slaughtered and maimed by cars so quite fair that cyclists start the near on impossible task of catching up with the wonderful death count set by motorists is it not?

Not fair?  Why not?  Way of the world isn't it?  The bigger and faster moving take priority over the slower and the weaker...it's practically the entire Department of Transport doctrine after all.

I have wondered in the past if cyclists started killing 6 pedestrians per day and seriously injured a few hundred along with a raft of minor injuries if government and society would also accept that as 'inevitable and unpreventable' accidents we simply need to accept, besides everyone knows walking is dangerous and none of them ever wear helmets.

The answer of course would be a nationwide condemnation by the media overnight of 'lethal and reckless cyclists' putting everyone at risk, mothers being interviewed by regional TV stations complaining about their kids being put at risk blah blah, it would be a complete circus of double standards and hypocrisy.

Evidence if ever were needed that cycling deaths are considered ok and that plenty have a very simple agenda of prejudice and hatred towards anything that doesn't involve sitting on their fat arses in congestion.