"A load of tosh": Cyclists' reaction as latest person ordered to pay eye-watering fine for riding bicycle through town centre; Tory candidate's questionable LTN claim; Remco cools criticism of ex-teammate; Froome crash update + more on the live blog

Who the hell is Carly Johnson?

Not really sure what she has done but found this
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greate...

ktache wrote:

Who the hell is Carly Johnson?

Probably meant Carrie Johnson.

Exactly.  Now, what was it all those local councillors were saying/complaining about public money being thrown at cycle lanes? 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/06/uk-fuel-duty-cut-regres...

Quote:

Combined, the fuel duty freeze, which has been in place since it was introduced as a temporary measure in 2011, and the 5p cut to fuel duty, have cost the Treasury £100bn since 2011, according to the SMF (Social Market Foundation) analysis.

The two tax cuts to fuel are expected to knock £27bn off Treasury coffers over five years. The Conservatives attacked Labour’s ditched £28bn green investment promise over the same period as ruinously expensive.

Critics have said the fuel duty cut “helps the rich” while doing “little for the economy” as public transport worsens in quality.

In total, the SMF found the bottom fifth of earners would receive just 10% of the savings, compared with the top fifth who would pocket 24%.

.

Hirsute wrote:

The War on Motorists continues

Fuel duty frozen again, with the 5p cut in fuel duty on petrol and diesel, due to end later this month, kept for another year

"will cost another £6bn on top of £14bn annual cost of freezes since 2010"

Probably time to stop describing these fuel duty freezes as “temporary”.

Meanwhile train fares went up again this week. A return ticket to work now costs me £18.50. I reckon if I drove, the fuel cost would be about half that (70 miles, diesel car).

Fuel duty has been frozen for 14 years now. Here's how rail fares have risen in that time:

2011   6.22%

2012    5.9%

2013    3.9%

2014    2.8%

2015    2.2%

2016    1.1%

2017    2.3%

2018    3.4%

2019    3.1%

2020    2.7%

2021    2.6%

2022    3.8%

2023    5.9%

2024    4.9%

Hirsute wrote:

Fuel duty has been frozen for 14 years now. Here's how rail fares have risen in that time:

2011   6.22%

2012    5.9%

2013    3.9%

2014    2.8%

2015    2.2%

2016    1.1%

2017    2.3%

2018    3.4%

2019    3.1%

2020    2.7%

2021    2.6%

2022    3.8%

2023    5.9%

2024    4.9%

I bought my car in 2014, at that time fuel was £1.45 a litre (I remember weighing up extra cost of diesel engine over extra cost for buying more litres of petrol) It's now 1.60. Average annual inflation 0.8%

This right here is the "war on motorists". The war on motorists is a propoganda story designed to ensure favourable conditions remain, or become even more favourable. It's working very well.

The bit I don't quite get is we have politicians who stake a claim to be all over the finances and either are for "profit!" (or its cuddly sibling - "bettering yourself") OR "growth".  (The latter - every party I think?)

...so you'd think they'd understand that if you make something cheaper than other things, or spend more money on it, then people will choose that thing.  Just basic economics, innit?

That's driving relative to other modes.

Yes - there are fixed costs e.g. insurance.  However because we're humans we tend to look at costs per journey e.g. "petrol costs" vs. e.g. train ticket cost.   That almost always says "car!" but then in addition everyone's got a "crap public transport" story.

Presumably "we get the mode (driving) we (lavishly) fund" view of things is not one these folks take.  Is it because "we are where we are" or "we must deliver (personal) choice" / "traffic is the lifeblood of the city" / "transport is what enables growth" mantras?

Hirsute wrote:

Police drop charges

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/dave-clifton-prosecution-cyclist-r...

Please shed a tear for the poor cycle haters who thought that it would be the end of filming bad drivers.

That's just asking for a complaint to be made. I doubt if a defamation case would get anywhere for the Met Police suggesting that the cyclist was breaking the law.

I don't understand why the driver wasn't fined for mobile phone use - must have been a friend of the police officer.

I'm glad that the nonsense of going after the cyclist who did nothing wrong has ended.

Albeit it shouldn't have happened in the first place.

My own prediction was wrong: that the case would actually get to court and then get thrown out with the Met police being told "Don't waste our time.".
https://road.cc/content/news/cyclist-who-reported-driver-using-phone-fac...

I hope the cyclist's complaint against the Met police has real consequences and leads to better/correct outcomes.

A while ago I put in a formal complaint against one of the staff who reviews evidence.
He seemed to have quite a high rate of "no further action" or simply issuing warning letters to drivers, compared to other Met staff members who would have NIPed similar/identical incidents.
I suggested, in my complaint, that the bad apple was simply doing it to improve his own stats on closing cases and that management do a thorough review of his caseload and outcomes to identify anomalies.
I later learned that the individual is no longer in that team.
Though of course, they would never admit that it was because of any findings that might agree with my suspicions.

He did plenty wrong.  It just didnt reach the threshold of careless riding.

He rode like a plonker.

Not_so_secret_troll...

Indeed.
If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck...

brooksby wrote:

Susan Hall?  This Susan Hall? - https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/15/conservative-london-may...

I thought this bit from that article was notable:

Quote:

Hall, who has deleted all her tweets sent before December 2017, has also seemingly endorsed Islamophobic abuse of Khan.

Deleting comments/tweets is not the sign of someone with integrity, but someone who realises that they've shown too much of what kind of person they are.

Tories - the party of wealthy, old white bigots

Where does the tory party find these people? Its like they are holding a competition to be the worst person alive. 

Patrick9-32 wrote:

Where does the tory party find these people? Its like they are holding a competition to be the worst person alive. 

And just when you think they've hit rock bottom, they manage to keep digging.  I've lost count of the number of times I've thought "Surely they can't get any worse." but they always find a way.

After reading about Susan Hall I am strongly suspecting that the Tories don't actually want to win the Mayoral election, why else would they choose someone so inept

Unfortunately the tories could stick a blue ribbon on a literal pile of shit and it would still be a close race in some constituencies. 

Patrick9-32 wrote:

Unfortunately the tories could stick a blue ribbon on a literal pile of shit and it would still be a close race in some constituencies. 

"Welcome to North Somerset"

But their Mammy/ Daddy / etc voted blue, so they are just keeping up tradition #TurkeysVotingforChristmas

HLaB wrote:

After reading about Susan Hall I am strongly suspecting that the Tories don't actually want to win the Mayoral election, why else would they choose someone so inept

I have suspected this since she was selected: the Tories have attempted to wreck London in an effort to bring down Khan by imposing huge cuts on the police budget, refusing to allow him control of local railways (something they were prepared to give to a Tory Mayor if one had succeeded the blond shitgibbon) and imposing electorally damaging conditions to Covid bailouts such as extending ULEZ and raising the congestion charge and imposing it 24/7. They've now realised that Londoners, sensible folk that we are, have seen through this and are set to re-elect Khan by a landslide, so they don't want to risk any chance of having to take over the disaster they have created with their punitive financial sanctions.

HLaB wrote:

After reading about Susan Hall I am strongly suspecting that the Tories don't actually want to win the Mayoral election, why else would they choose someone so inept

I think the reason they chose Hall was that they made a decision that the national Conservative brand was so toxic, that they wanted someone with no link to the Parliamentary Party.  And that was why they didn't go with the obvious front runner, Paul Scully (co-incidentally, my MP).  And then Hall was pretty much the only choice they had.  Scully has been pretty scathing about the decision and, to be fair, in a way which doesn't just come across as sour grapes.  (I'm not a great fan on his, but he is clearly whole levels more competent that Hall.)