London – A consultation on detailed proposals to improve London’s air quality from the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, through Transport for London (TfL), would see pre-2007 manufactured motorcycles being charged in an Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) which is to be introduced in 2019.
The consultation which is due to close on the 28th February 2018 indicates that a ULEZ would apply 24 hours a day, 7 days a week every day of the year, including weekends and public holidays where all vehicles will need to meet exhaust emission standards (ULEZ standards) or pay a daily charge. Currently for motorcycles this would see a £12.50 charge to travel in the zone for those bikes built before the Euro 3 standards (2007).
According to the consultation from TfL – Have your say on changes to the Ultra Low Emission Zone and Low Emission Zone – “The Mayor has now confirmed the introduction of an Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) in central London from 8 April 2019.” and “Expanding the ULEZ from central London up to, but not including, the North and South Circulars in 2021 for light vehicles (excluding taxis), so that all vehicles in this inner London area are subject to emissions standards.”
No To ULEZ On Bikes And Scooters
Rightly or not, rider groups in the UK are challenging the exclusion of motorcycles – scooters – mopeds – the Powered Two Wheeler with other polluting vehicles that, according to TfL are part of the challenge and “…..affecting the health of all Londoners. It (pollution) contributes to thousands of early deaths each year and impacts our health over the course of our lives – leading to decreased lung function in our children and greater risk of dementia and strokes as we get older.”
Both the Motorcycle Action Group (MAG) and the British Motorcyclists Federation (BMF) have written about the ULEZ and motorcycles.
As far back as 2014 the BMF was commenting, “Not everyone will benefit from Ultra Low Emission Zone” stating, “These motorcycles produce the smallest percentage of the Nitrous Oxides and other gases but enable many folk to get to and from their places of work without blocking streets, taking-up large areas for parking or demanding very expensive alterations to the layout of the streets and footways of the city.” with their then Government Relations Executive adding, “I must regard this proposal as socially divisive, in its proposed form; it will strike at the so many of the least well-off workers in central London.”
MAG published their consultation response – MAG submission regarding ULEZ proposals – last year and this week have thrown into the mix, similar claims to those made by the BMF that – Khan’s bike tax will charge poorest workers £12.50 a day for ‘privilege of emptying his bin’
London’s MAG Regional Rep, Tim Fawthrop states, “He (Sadiq Khan) doesn’t offer a single data source for his claims yet the poorest workers in London who depend on older motorcycles to get to, say, City Hall to clean his office, and whose commute currently costs about £1.20 a day, will pay an extra £12.50 every day to him and his authority – for the privilege of emptying his bin. That’s not just wrong, it’s disgusting.” asking, “Will Khan compensate the thousands of low-paid workers using small, older motorbikes because it’s all they can afford…….?”
Protesting Ride Out – We Ride London
Meanwhile a protest on the streets of London on the day the ULEZ consultation ends – Wednesday 28th February – is being hosted by the group We Ride London – No to ULEZ on bikes and scooters
The information on the We Ride London Facebook page and poster graphics say that the ride will meet at 4.30pm at North Side Regent’s Park, Outer Circle, near the running track.
Although with cold weather closing in, We Ride London have explained that, “Yes we have a snow contingency plan. If it is snowing those willing to ride, ride but for others, are foot-based protest hold the banner holders and wielding leaflet at Parliament Square. Bring their helmets and dress like bikers so we look the part.”
NB: We Ride London – www.weridelondon.com – was launched in 2016 as the lead group to lobby for fair changes and improvements to the way transport policies from Transport for London and the way the Mayor’s office treats powered two-wheeled vehicles (motorcycles and scooters).
We Ride London, has stated, “Around 55,000 motorcycles and scooters travel in London each day. (with around 135,000 registered inside the M25). Many of these bikes will have to pay up to £12.50 EACH DAY once the ULEZ charge is introduced. This will force bikers off their bikes and into cars, trains, tubes & buses making congestion worse in London. Bikes are as much of the solution to lowering pollution and congestion as bicycles.”
Who Rides In London
Who are these riders in London?
The only statistics we can find that socially profile riders, is from an Institute for Transport Studies University of Leeds 2004 report – Difference Between London Motorcyclists And Those From The rest Of The UK.
Apart from the study being over ten years old, the numbers involved in the survey were 112 motorcyclists who resided in Greater London and 867 who lived elsewhere in the UK used for comparison. There is a question as to whether the sample is representative of all riders in London, but consider that the conclusions (see below) of this study were also used by MAG in their response to the ULEZ consultation.
Accordingly, the thirteen year old study appears to have been used as the typical London rider’s profile, “London motorcyclists are more likely to be younger and single, with full-time jobs earning a higher income. They are more likely to own machines under 250cc, compared to the rest of the sample, and much more likely to own scooters. London riders are three times as likely to ride for commuting or as part of work and half as likely to be leisure-only riders. They report choosing to ride a motorcycle mainly to avoid congestion compared to the UK sample’s general “love of motorcycling and for financial reasons (presumably associated with parking costs etc).”
The study concludes that “With the introduction of the London Congestion Charging scheme, it is possible that motorcycling will become even more popular in London due to their exemption from payment.” The London Congestion charge was introduced in 2003 and remains free for motorcycles (Two-wheeled motorbikes (and sidecars) and mopeds) as does the T-charge (toxicity charge) introduced in 2017.
MAG however (perhaps disingenuously) suggests that London riders are low paid cleaners who ride small older motorcycles and clean and empty the bins of the London Mayor. But this description appears to contradict the Leeds study. So, has MAG overstepped its A-political stance by trying to hit the nerve of a Labour Mayor (son of a bus driver) and his left wing social-democratic political party that was formed to represent the interests of ordinary working people?
Have we just witnessed a below the belt pot shot by MAG?
Older Motorcycles
Let’s have a closer look at the introduction of a ULEZ charge which would include certain motorcycles as well as other vehicles.
Setting out our own position which is simply that we believe that there is a place for PTW – Powered Two Wheeler (the motorcycle/scooter/moped) – use in all cities including London, but as with the rest of the world, we recognise that there is a problem with pollution which needs to be addressed.
The main drive in all transport plans is the reduction of emissions and congestion in respect of urban transport and where Powered Two Wheelers sit within these plans needs to be considered and discussed. Equally, concerns need to be highlighted.
What is being proposed by TfL, is that riders of older motorcycles will have to pay for their use in the London ULEZ. Effectively this is not a ban but those older motorcycles must meet the requirements of Euro 3 emission standards, introduced in 2006/2007. What this means is that motorcycles manufactured before this date would be charged.
After that date (2006/2007) emission standards moved on with new type approved motorcycles on European roads which now must meet Euro 4 emissions, introduced in 2016/2017. The Euro 5 standard is to be introduced 2020/2021. The relevance of these standards is very important.
According to ACEM (European Manufacturers Association) since 1999, in the course of the development of the “Euro steps”, the reduction process between Euro 0 and Euro 3 achieved a considerable 94% reduction of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions, and a 50 % reduction of nitrogen emissions. For example, Hydro-carbon (HC) and Nitrogen (N0x) emissions are Euro 1 : 3.3 HC+N0x and Euro 2 : 1.3 – Whereas Euro 3 is 0.5.
Broadly speaking PTWs registered as new with the DVLA (Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency) from 1st July 2007 as Euro 3 compliant and after that date, will not have to pay the ULEZ charge of £12.50.
PTWs would be over 12 years old when the proposed introduction in 2019 takes effect and over 14 years old when the proposed expansion in 2021 takes effect. Only in those circumstances will riders have to pay within the ULEZ.
There are also exemptions proposed which include, “All vehicles that have a ‘historic’ vehicle tax class or are registered prior to 1 January 1973 will be exempt from the ULEZ.” The reasoning being from TfL that, “These vehicles were built before emissions standards came into force and are exempted because of their unsuitability for engine conversion or replacement.” Specialist vehicles such as Military vehicles are also proposed to be exempt.
However Blue Badge holders will be required to meet the new ULEZ emission standards or pay the ULEZ charge unless their vehicle has a ‘disabled’ or ‘disabled passenger vehicle’ tax class which will be exempt from ULEZ until 10 September 2023. With all residents living in the ULEZ, up to the North and South Circular roads (including central London), would need to comply with emissions standards or pay the daily charge from 25 October 2021.
Why Them Not Us?
One argument being used is – if these are exempt and polluting, then why are motorcycles not exempt. Furthermore, MAG UK argues, “Why are riders of older, small-capacity bikes being charged when other forms of transport, e.g. taxis, which produce considerably higher emissions with a single occupant, aren’t? We’re not asking for taxis to be charged – only for a level playing field.”
TfL states that, “London licensed taxis are exempt from ULEZ. Every licensed taxi is fully accessible for wheelchair users, so offers a vital travel option for passengers with accessibility needs or heavy luggage, or when public transport is not suitable. They are also designed specifically for London’s streets. As they are specialist vehicles, drivers have a limited choice of models.”
However, the comparison with black cabs by MAG is misleading because all new cabs have to be battery powered – from 1st January 2018, with regards the older cabs, taxi drivers will also be entitled to a discount of £7,500 for the cost of a new taxi, and will run a decommissioning scheme for older cabs.
What we are dealing with is an overall plan to reduce vehicle emission levels by various means, with the inclusion of Powered Two Wheelers manufactured before a certain date before their emission levels reduced, included as unacceptable polluters.
The Environment and Motorcycles
The environment is a very important debate and motorcycling needs to be at the centre of this debate with credible adult mature arguments.
The main drive in all transport plans is the reduction in emissions and congestion in respect of urban transport and where Powered Two Wheelers sit within these plans and bans is a concern.
Do we have to accept the facts and live with the harsh reality and difficult decisions of swallowing the bitter pill? This is the acceptance that ultimately our mode of transport – the motorcycle – will have to change to fit into transport strategies wherever in the world they are.
As our motorcycles are in the main, driven by the internal combustion engine – an exemption to charges or bans for whatever reason does not appear to be acceptable unless the use of a base line of cleaner environmental emissions is used.
Ultimately, what we are dealing with is a plan to reduce vehicle emission levels by various means, with the inclusion of Powered Two Wheelers manufactured before a certain date before their emission levels got cleaner, included as unacceptable polluters.
All the arguments on congested busting – quicker travel times – efficient mobility use – space saving – less time stopped in traffic – environmentally friendlier that other vehicles – does not seem to count.
What’s the Solution?
Perhaps we can look elsewhere for an answer. Throughout Europe, LEZ (Low Emission Zones) – Urban Access Regulations In Europe – apply in almost all major cities as well as other areas of concern where there is a problem with emissions/pollution.
A few cities in Europe do allow access to their LEZ zones based on times of the day and night and days of the week. This would include Paris – Monday to Friday 08:00 – 20:00 and motorcycles first registered after 1 June 2000 (usually Euro 2).
MAG’s representatives demand to know “Will Khan compensate the thousands of low-paid workers using small, older motorbikes because it’s all they can afford…….?”
We at Motorcycle Minds have scanned the horizon looking out there to find a compromise.
Would the solution be to allow motorcycles older than Euro 3 the opportunity of circulating in the ULEZ zone during certain times of the day/week, with the proviso that the rider is effectively commuting to work?
We assume that these low paid workers as highlighted by MAG, e.g. cleaners, carers, food preparers, zero – hour workers and so forth, would in the main work outside normal working hours. If a motorcycle is travelling in the ULEZ during unsociable hours – outside of “normal” commuting hours, then surely it must be reasonable to assume that the only objective for these riders is to achieve a hard earned crust.
Would that not be a win/win solution?
Information
- Riders have until Wednesday 28th February 2018 to have their say through the Transport for London online questionnaire
- Plus the opportunity to make their feelings known by taking part in the – We Ride London – No to ULEZ on bikes and scooters
Appendix One
Key Part In Urban Transport
While we know that PTWs can play a key part in urban transport and should be included in transport policies as congestion friendly, using less space, less travel times as set out in the Federation of European Motorcyclists Associations (FEMA) Mobility Tests in 2017. The test was undertaken by cars, motorcycles, mopeds, speed-pedelecs (faster breed of electric bicycle), e-bikes (Electric bike), conventional bicycles and public transport traveling a route from outside a city to an office inside the city during morning rush hour.
This was a repeat of a similar test in 2014 – Save Time And Money – in fourteen European cities, stating at that time, “The mobility test proves that powered two-wheelers can contribute to improve mobility and reduce congestions all over Europe. Individuals would spend less time and money commuting to work if they use a PTW. A switch to PTW is also profitable for society as a whole, which has been stated in several studies.” adding “It would be easy for the European cities to promote PTWs and improve safety to a low cost, for example by allowing filtering, give access to bus and taxi lanes, open dedicated parking space for PTWs and exempt PTWs from congestion charge.
Even globally this is recognised through international Ride to Work day and in the UK “Ride to Work Week”. www.ridetowork.org – www.ridetoworkweek.co.uk – www.ridetowork.eu
Riding to work is hugely advantageous, as a cheap and affordable means to get to work, in business for getting to city centre meetings or getting out to rural locations for work, not forgetting getting about for leisure, beating weekend and bank holiday traffic congestion.
The Motorcycle Industry in Europe represented by ACEM, in their – Riding in a 21st century environment – The motorcycle industry’s commitment to the environment – document ACEM states, “From congested super-cities such as Paris, London or Rome to the most remote places of the European Union, hundreds of thousands of European citizens use these vehicles on a daily basis to get to their jobs on time, to get back home, to move around swiftly for professional purposes or simply to enjoy the feelings and emotions that these vehicles offer.
In effect, motorcycles play an important role in our modern lives: whilst police forces, paramedics and breakdown services use them in emergency situations, motorcycles are also used for the delivery of services and goods, the provision of leisure and tourism opportunities, and are a good solution to reduce congestion levels in urban and peri-urban environments and to compensate for the lack of public transport in remote areas.”
Even in the London Mayors draft Transport Strategy for London TfL which in itself looks to reduce the reliance on private vehicles for personal travel, including motorcycles, by providing Londoners with more opportunities for walking, cycling and using public transport, there are some positives in this strategy for motorcycles in London:
Apart from:
- Launching a programme of training, education and (working with the police) enforcement activities to improve the safety of vulnerable road users, including the development of a new London Standard for motorcycle training
- Improving the safety of street design by following the guidance set out in TfL’s Urban Motorcycle Design Handbook
- Educating other road users on the shared responsibility for safer motorcycle journeys
The draft strategy recognises motorcycle urban mobility
- Calling on all boroughs to allow motorcycle access to their bus lanes, to end the inconsistency between highway authorities that causes unnecessary confusion and risk to motorcyclists. According to MAG, at a meeting with the Chair of the Greater London Authority (GLA) Transport Committee, Keith Prince in January he was supportive of enabling motorbikes to use bus lanes across London.
- Raising the safety standards of motorcycle courier businesses through training and accreditation
- Two-wheeled vehicles could, however, play a more significant role in low-impact freight and servicing trips, especially where these vehicles replace trips by lorry or van and are made by ultra-low emission motorcycle
- Create streets that function better not only for people who are walking, cycling and using public transport, but also for taxis and essential delivery, servicing, car and motorcycle journeys.
This draft strategy also outlines heavily on the reduction of harmful air pollution from road transport in London. This is the crux of the issue it’s about the environment. As we said above, what we are dealing with is a plan to reduce vehicle emission levels by various means, with the inclusion of Powered Two Wheelers manufactured before a certain date before their emission levels got cleaner, included as unacceptable polluters.
Lobbying
The thrust of the latest lobbying is that the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan wants to ban older motorcycles.
The London Regional Rep for MAG highlights a reply from the London Mayor to a letter from Conservative MP (now Minister) that reply is said to be ‘extraordinary and discriminatory.’ Stating that what the London Mayor replied was to “deter the use of older vehicles, including those with highly polluting two-stroke engines”.
Although there is no full copy of the London Mayors reply reproduced, Kelly Tolhurst in a letter to MAG South East Regional Rep the MP writes that, “Following your correspondence and my enquiry to the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, I have now received the attached response regarding the inclusion of powered two-wheelers in the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ). I note from this response that Mr Khan has no plans to exempt motorcycles from the ULEZ or the current daily charge for those motorcycles that do not meet the emissions requirements.”
The question to ask is – when does a bike become an “old” bike? Is a 12/14 year old bike just a bit old, or really old?
According to TfL, bikes before Euro 3 are definitely old and as the industry will confirm – two-stroke engines are being phased out in favour of four-strokes.
The substance of this debate is that older bikes DO pollute. From ACEM’s document – Riding in a 21st century environment – (in particular page 7) as mentioned above there has been a significant reduction in pollutants – “Since 1999, in the course of the development of the “Euro steps”, the reduction process between Euro 0 and Euro 3 achieved a considerable 94% reduction of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions, and a 50 % reduction of nitrogen emissions.”
A Broken Promise?
Perhaps one issue that sees this slant to the lobby by MAG is that while Sadiq Khan was campaigning in 2006 to become Mayor of London, he promised in the MAG member magazine – The Road – that, “As Mayor, I’ll work with the motorcycling community to make sure that riders’ rights and interests are taken on board as an integral part of the transport mix in the city.
It’s clear motorbikes and scooters generate far less pollution, save time and money for the rider – and don’t create congestion. It’s absolutely right for us to enable powered two wheelers to play their part in delivering a less congested road network… one clear policy area is the case for a more consistent approach to bikes in bus lanes – a scheme which has proved itself effective, without creating undue problems or risks for other road users such as cyclists. But riders can fall foul of regulations because boroughs don’t all have the same approach.
As Mayor, I’ll work to create consistency across the city to make bus lanes open to riders throughout the Capital…I will meet with representatives of riders’ rights organisations and learn at first-hand what you need and want….Politics is a dialogue, so that will be the beginning of what I hope turns out to be a very productive relationship between you and the city. From bikes carrying urgent blood supplies, Internet shopping deliveries through to commuters – this city IS big enough for all of us as long as we co-operate together.”
In the full statement Sadiq Khan states, “I don’t make promises I can’t keep” and he never made any promises in this statement that when trying to reduce emissions when in office that motorcycles would not be playing a part.
It would now appear that less pollution from post Euro 2 emission motorcycles (2006/2007) is acceptable and that a productive relationship was not forthcoming or this political dialogue was not a policy statement as MAG believed it was.
Perhaps a “warning” sign was when Sadiq Khan MP as the Labour Candidate for Mayor of London stated at the end, “I’m looking forward to serving London’s 130,000 biker riders.”
Then on the other hand at that time the Conservative Candidate for Mayor of London Zac Goldsmith MP in his statement to MAG said, “My Action Plan for Greater London will keep our city moving and growing, while cleaning up our air. And I believe motorbikes can be a big part of that solution. By getting people out of cars and onto other forms of transport, from bikes to motorbikes and scooters, we can cut congestion and pollution at the same time.”
However, the devil would have been in the detail.
End Note
One thing we have learnt in writing this is the meaning of Peri-urban areas, described as the interface between town and country, or also as the rural—urban transition zone where urban and rural uses mix and often clash.
This area sounds more like the ideal landscape for the use of Powered Two Wheelers as the older motorcycle is squeezed out unless they fit environmental standards in what is seen for cities and their leaders as an air pollution crisis.
Are Motorcycles For Ever?
You may wonder why we have posted up a video of Sadiq Khan the Mayor of London talking about the racism and hatred he has been subjected to.
Well! Let us tell you! As organisations and blogs have posted up news stories, (in particular regarding the ULEZ charges in London and Motorcycle theft and enabled crime – also in London), mainly on their social media pages (Facebook), there followed vitriolic, racist, hate filled comments directed at the Mayor.
While we know some Facebook groups spent last weekend removing these comments, others needed to be cajoled into doing so.
Our point is that the motorcycling community has always put itself across as all-encompassing and have in the past and still continue to complain against discrimination, unfair treatment.
However, what we actually have is a motorcycle community made of individuals that happen to ride motorcycles and have no issue of letting their individual anger suppurate out into racism and hate.
In the case of the ULEZ charges for older motorcycles, scooters and mopeds, what becomes more and more apparent is the subtle underlying racism and personal vitriol that has appeared in this debate. TfL have a major problem with pollution as does the rest of the capital cities of Europe.
Solutions are difficult to find, so taking it out on the Mayor, Sadiq Kahn because he’s Labour and because he’s the son of an immigrant bus driver from Pakistan, is not the way to find answers. Certainly, the MC industry (MCIA) and their entourage have at the very least, done their best to annoy TfL, with their refusal to find a common ground with regards motorcycle usage in London and the environment, but more importantly have not offered any answers to the problem.
Go to Europe and at least ACEM have tried to work together with governments and local authorities.
The various rider groups on Facebook and on the internet have, by degree, made the debate on London whether the ULEZ charges or the high proportion of theft in the capital city, into racial and religious abuse towards the mayor of London. Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson may have been ridiculed for their policies and attitude, but there was never the threat of death or religious intolerance as demonstrated with Sadiq Khan.
The question to be asked is whether social media is an instrument to bring riders all together to celebrate their form of transport, or is it just a platform to divide people and bring out the trolls and the worst elements?
There will never be any place on Motorcycle Minds for bigots and racists. If you fall into that category of rider, then we would be grateful if you go elsewhere.
motorcyclist – #endthehate
We Ride London – Protest
We Ride London have reorganised their protest ride that was called of last week because of the bad weather – snow-maggeddon.
The new date for the protest ride – No Mr Mayor – is Tuesday 27th March 2018 at 4.30pm – futher details can be found on their Face book page – http://www.facebook.com/weridelondon/
Meanwhile Anthony “Dutch” van Someren – Co-Founder of WeRideLondon and Founder of Bike Shed Motorcycle Club has written an article in the insurance broker Bennetts BikeSocial blog entitled – Blog: Think you can ride London, no you Khan’t
The blog looks at two aspects – “The Mayor, his deputy Val Shawcross, and Transport for London (Tf) do not like privately-owned motorcycles, and have policies designed to take us off London’s streets. And this is all coming to light now that the mayor has published his Transport Strategy for London; bikes are not just being ignored, they are being hammered.” and “The other massive problem we face as riders is the genuine, fast-growing and ever-present threat of theft, and even face-to-face robbery of our vehicles. 55 bikes are being stolen in London every day, usually by thugs on mopeds, and as security measures improve it’s becoming more common for thieves to rob riders at knife point while they are stopped at a traffic light – even in broad daylight.”
The blog is well written – hits all the points that riders want to hear – with a bit of authority that maybe misses the facts at some points – have a read and see whether you think motorcycling in London is facing an Armageddon via a London transport policy through the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan where – “biking becomes a thing of the past.”
Survival Skills – London bikes – should we be worried?
Survival Skills has posted up their thoughts on their Facebook page regarding the issue – Facebook where we would agree with what is being said and we have just written to the Mayor and the Deputy Mayor, Transport to ascertain what is going on – looking from the outside and with an eye to “diplomacy” there seems to be a personal backstory going on.
Survival Skills comment:
I have just seen the attached article on the Bikerandbike website under the banner headline: “KHAN WANTS PRIVATE MOTORCYCLES OUT OF LONDON”.
Pretty clear you might think?
But let’s read it again. The report is based on what happened at a London Assembly meeting held yesterday (Thursday 8 March), when member Andrew Boff is reported to have “repeatedly asked the Mayor and Deputy Mayor for Transport Val Shawcross CBE to state what provision for motorcycles had been made in the Transport Strategy document, given their contribution to reducing congestion and pollution in the Capital.”
According to the report, “Shawcross confirmed that because motorcycles are a motorised vehicle, they are not part of the strategy’s Healthy Streets approach, which puts walking, cycling and public transport ahead of all other considerations.”
Shawcross then apparently said that [because of] “the mode shift hierarchy, they are not a priority.”
What bothers me about this article is not the factual reporting, it is the tone of the way the article is written. For example, the Mayor of London is stated by the writer to have ‘piped up’ when he said “Motorcycling is not walking. It’s not cycling. It’s not public transport.”
Fundamentally, there is a clear difference between a mode of transport that is “not a priority” and a mode of transport that Saddiq Khan “wants out of London” as the headline claims.
In support of the ‘motorcycles out’ headline, the B&B article references an earlier article written regarding the draft Transport Strategy that was released back in July last year, which it claims was anti-motorcycle, even though the writer stated that on the page devoted to motorcycling:
“…there is an excellent idea. ‘The London Standard,’ of motorcycle training will involve, ‘offering improved rider skills (particularly those of young riders) by promoting a suite of voluntary training courses.’ These will be accredited through the MCIA (Motorcycle Industry Association). This is a good thing.”
The writer also reported positively on the fact that “street design must now be planned with the motorcyclist’s safety in mind” utilising the ‘Urban Motorcycle Design Handbook’ produced for TFL in 2016. All this seems rather at odds with the ‘bikers are bad’ line the article is trumpeting
It is pretty clear that private motorcycling is not a top priority, and that is undoubtedly something the MCIA would like to see. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that more motorcycles on the roads means more profit for the industry itself.
But putting other modes of transport first in support of a green transport policy isn’t automatically “anti-motorcycling”.
Whether or not, as the article alleges, this “backtracks on his earlier promises to include motorcycling in London’s transport future”, this article seems to me to be more of an attempt at stirring up anti-Khan feeling than a genuine debate about what the London Assembly and the Mayor actually propose.
Predictably, it has stirred up some strident responses online.
And that makes me wonder what their real motive is.
Biker&Bike – Khan wants private motorcycles out of London
According to an article by Biker&Bike which reports on a, “London Assembly meeting held 8 March 2018, London Assembly Member Andrew Boff repeatedly asked the Mayor and Deputy Mayor for Transport Val Shawcross CBE to state what provision for motorcycles had been made in the Transport Strategy document, given their contribution to reducing congestion and pollution in the Capital.”
The assembly meeting is available to view (see below) starts at 1:21:05 where the London Assembly Member Andrew Boff, “repeatedly pushed the Deputy Mayor for Transport by stating, “You are discouraging motorcycling.” while Mayor Khan appears to relay that motorcycles are included.
Interesting flow back and forward from the Deputy Lord Mayor with as Biker&Bike say, “The Mayor of London piped up, “Motorcycling is not walking. It’s not cycling. It’s not public transport.” This backtracks on his earlier promises to include motorcycling in London’s transport future. At this point, the Chair of the meeting stepped in to move proceedings to the next Member question.”
Not for the first time it would appear the the Assembly member and the Mayor have had techy words.
However if we look at the – The Mayor’s Draft Transport Strategy – pdf 22mb – page 74 has this text:
However, 75 per cent of congestion is caused simply by there being too great a demand for limited street space. This congestion cannot be solved through traffic management alone, however advanced. The longer-term solution must therefore be to better manage the way in which goods are delivered in London and to significantly reduce car use in favour of more space-efficient means of travel.
Over time, reallocating space to more efficient modes, combined with improvements to public transport, measures to manage demand, and applying the principles of Good Growth for new development, will create streets that function better not only for people who are walking, cycling and using public transport, but also for taxis and essential delivery, servicing, car and motorcycle journeys.
The policy states: “Policy 5 The Mayor, through TfL and the boroughs, and working with stakeholders, will prioritise space-efficient modes of transport to tackle congestion and improve the efficiency of streets for the movement of people and goods, with the aim of reducing overall traffic levels by 10-15 per cent by 2041.”
Is this talking in riddles or reading between the lines, that there is a place for motorcycles from the Mayor and Transport for London or that maybe that this has been inserted in “code” (civil servant speak) that motorcycles will be prioritised as a space-efficient mode of transport to tackle congestion?
If so what’s the beef from the Mayor and Deputy Mayor, Transport to the question at the Assembly meeting – Why all defensive? – Why do you not know what your document is saying?
MAG Changes Tack In Attack
In its latest press release – MAG calls for a sense of proportion on ULEZ enforcement – appears to have changed tack from attacking the Mayor of London Sadiq Khan to strongly urging Transport for London (TfL) to, “Drop its victimisation of the poorest in society to no public or environmental benefit, and has called on TfL to demonstrate ‘a degree of moderation and common sense.” while dropping its own accusations of Mayoral discrimination.
Referencing older smaller bikes, “20-year-old 50cc four-stroke moped”, MAG’s Director of Communications & Public Affairs, Lembit Öpik, has appealed to TfL, “To show a degree of common sense here.”
The change of tack sees MAG asking TfL to still do the right thing by recognising, “That they’re simply punishing those least able to pay more for public transport or for a newer motorbike.” saying that, “The category of riders using older machines is small, and they largely do so because they can’t afford newer bikes. It’s hugely socially unjust to hike up the cost of their commute.” adding that TFL will be driving, “these citizens out of work altogether.” MAG also states that they have presented TFL with, “A moderate and well reasoned case but we have received no indication that they are listening.”
Meanwhile the motorcycle industry – Urges London Mayor to rethink transport strategy – with swipe at the Mayor and TfL.
“London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s new transport strategy ignores the benefits of powered two wheelers and in doing so puts riders’ lives at greater risk. The Mayor clearly has his own agenda around motorcycles and scooters, which was not made clear to the riders who elected him following his promise to champion their contribution to reducing London’s congestion.”
At a recent meeting with the Motor Cycle Industry Association (MCIA), the Mayor said that he agreed PTWs had an important part to play. In doing so he also agreed to review his Transport Strategy, taking into account the feedback he had received during the consultation period. To quote Mr Khan: “I have read through the industry’s response to my Transport Policy Document and can say I agree with most of what you are saying, not all but most”.
The MCIA press release continues: “Given this statement, it is more than disappointing that the Mayor has decided to yet again ignore what is clear common sense for transport policy.”
While there is no specific mention of the topic of the moment in the MCIA press release, motorcycles having to pay a future £12.50 emission charge if the motorcycle (motorcycle and sidecar) scooter is pre-Euro 3 Emission standard (2006/2007), is the industry steering clear of an issue that relates directly to the motorcycles they build?
What is clear from all this “blaming” the Mayor is that both rider organisations (MAG) – the BMF decidedly missing at the moment from this press release. The motorcycle industry appears not to have the eye they thought they had with the mayor and TfL and reported with great rejoice in past, clearly is not necessarily the case?
MCIA say, he, Mayor of London, also agreed to review his Transport Strategy, taking into account the feedback he had received during the consultation period and quote Mr Khan: “I have read through the industry’s response to my Transport Policy Document and can say I agree with most of what you are saying, not all but most”.
What part of that is hard to understand – taking into account – agree with most – not all but most – doesn’t mean what you want is going to happen, must try harder when it doesn’t.
And while MAG has reported it has met the MCIA- with the conversation covering a lot of the things the industry and riders both care about, like crime. MAG states that they have been given the go-ahead to continue this relationship and are following up the action steps, the MCIA cannot bring itself to mention the MAG name in its press release, “The letter which Mayor Khan sent to a riders group….”
Something has gone amiss connecting with the Mayor and TfL, there is no singing from the same hymn sheet and definitely no singing in tune together.
It would appear that any relationship that either side thought they had, does not exist in reality with regards for the inclusion of motorcycles in transport plans.
Where do they go to now?