London Versus London

London – Following on from our article London – Motorcycles Forever which looked at the consultation to improve London’s air quality from Transport for London (TfL) and introduce a charge for vehicles, including motorcycles, in an Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ), there has now been published another report on motorcycling in London.

However, leading up to and then after our previous article, rider organisations and groups, opiniated blogs as well as individuals have set out their views in relation to the charging of motorcycles in this ULEZ.

Separate from this issue but sometimes included in these reports was issues around, motorcycle theft, motorcycle enabled crime, access to bus lanes. Motorcycle safety issues were also considered in these reports as outlined in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy 2018 which was published following consultation.

One particular article set social media on fire when it headlined with – Khan Wants Private Motorcycles Out Of London.  The article (which you can read about in full in the comments section of our article London – Motorcycles Forever) reported on a recent London Assembly meeting.

At the meeting a London Assembly member, Andrew Boff asked the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan and Deputy Mayor for Transport Val Shawcross CBE to state what provision for motorcycles had been made in the London Transport Strategy document, in consideration of their contribution to reducing congestion and pollution in the Capital.

The assembly member Mr Boff, then berated and continually interrupted those (Mayor Khan and Val Shawcross) attempting to reply to his question with – “You are discouraging motorcycling.”

This brought Mr Boff accolades on social media, while the Mayor of London was vilified by the aforementioned rider organisations and groups, opinionated blogs and social media platforms. With other articles entitled – “Khan’s bike tax will charge poorest workers £12.50 a day for ‘privilege of emptying his bin’” – “Think you can ride London, no you Khan’t” there was certainly justified frustration regarding the issue of charging older motorcycles within the ULEZ zones, but the end result was the targeting of the Mayor specifically.

This targeting took the form of vitriolic, racist, hate filled comments directed at the Mayor. The  “motorcycle community” has always put itself across as all-encompassing and has in the past and still continues to complain against discrimination and unfair treatment against itself.  This community has in the past, presented itself as people who would never let their individual anger suppurate out into racism and hate.

We asked the question, whether social media is an instrument to bring riders all together to celebrate their form of transport and joy of motorcycling, or is it just a platform to divide people and bring out the trolls and the worst elements?

Motorcycle Industry Into The Fray

Stepping into this fray at the start of March, the Motorcycle Industry Association (MCIA) gave us a headline that the, “Motorcycle industry urges London Mayor to rethink transport strategy” with the message that, “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.”

It was fighting talk from the MCIA as they stated, “In its war on motorised transport, TfL is lumping commuter motorcycles and scooters in with cars, taxis and construction traffic, despite the fact that PTWs significantly reduce congestion in the capital, take up less road space and are far less damaging to air quality.” while the CEO of the Motorcycle Industry Association, Tony Campbell, said,  “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.”

Letting us know that, “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 finished up with more pleas, this time for the mayor to, “Take another look at his plans to not only fulfil his pre-election commitment to riders and London voters, but also to honour his words at the recent meeting with Industry.”

From past experience, when you go into lobbying an authority and your “target” says he agrees with most of what you are saying, not all but most, you should be in a good place – that’s the nature of lobbying and compromise – in other words, you don’t expect to get all you have lobbied for first time round.

Are There Different Ways and Means?

If we go a bit further back to January 2018, the Motorcycle Action Group (MAG) reports that it met the Chair of the Greater London Authority (GLA) Transport Committee, Keith Prince, to begin a serious dialogue about the future of motorcycling in London.

MAG reported that the meeting held on 10th January 2018 at the GLA’s City Hall headquarters, covered a number of policy areas:

• Bike-related crime
• Secure parking
• Charging riders for using the roads
• Case for promoting motorbikes as a net reducer of congestion and pollution
• Access to bus lanes – all London Boroughs

MAG’s Chair, Selina Lavender said that as the Chair of the Greater London Authority (GLA) Transport Committee is a rider that, “It made him easy to talk with and meant there was little need to explain the benefits we all get from the freedom of two wheels. This enabled us to focus the meeting as he could see our viewpoint. Keith was most supportive of riders and I look forward to MAG maintaining an open dialogue with him and the GLA.”

That is what we would consider a piece of grown up lobbying without the rhetoric.  It projects the hard work that goes on in the background which needs to be maintained for ongoing and future dialogue and tongue in cheek, action from a group with “Action” as its middle name.

London Assembly Transport Committee

Finally, we have arrived at the published report on motorcycling in London from the London Assembly Transport Committee ‘Motorcycle Safety in London: Update report – March 2018’

A major distraction of this report was the attention grabbing headlines – Motorcyclist deaths still way too high.  This took away the focus on the more pressing issues

The report gives a clue to where it is heading with the subtitle explaining that the London Assembly holds the Mayor to account and investigates the issues that matter to Londoners, acting as a check and a balance on the Mayor.

So eyes down look in as the report in brief reveals:

• Motorcyclists face an unacceptable level of risk on London’s roads
• The rate at which motorcyclists are injured in road traffic collisions is disproportionately high
• Motorcyclist casualties in London have not fallen since TfL published its Motorcycle Safety Action Plan in 2014
• The Plan is now outdated and needs to be renewed with new safety measures.
• The condition of the road surface is crucial for safe riding

The Transport Committee report recommends the Mayor and Transport for London (TfL):

• Get serious about ensuring motorcyclists can ride in all bus lanes
• Update the Motorcycle Safety Action
• Reinstate plans to develop a ‘London Standard’ or an equivalent measure for motorcycle safety training
• Allay concerns about reductions in TfL’s road maintenance budget

In more detail the key findings state:

• Despite a new focus on motorcycle safety in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, TfL has failed to implement key recommendations made by the Transport Committee in our 2016 report.
• A change in methodology makes it difficult to compare casualty statistics for recent years, but it is clear from the evidence we heard that riding a motorcycle in London today is not noticeably safer than it was in 2016.
• TfL needs to increase access to training for motorcyclists. A new accreditation scheme for courier firms could help achieve this, and TfL needs to find a way of including courier firms that do not employ riders directly.
• TfL’s progress in persuading boroughs to allow motorcyclists access to bus lanes has been far too slow. No boroughs have made this change since our last report. A more proactive approach is needed.
• TfL needs to produce a new Motorcycle Safety Action Plan with a renewed set of priority actions with clear timings and outcome measures.

In addition, members of the Transport Committee are quoted as stating:

• Caroline Russell AM, “Is not convinced that Transport for London fully considered the evidence of safety issues at the time it made the decision to allow motorcyclists to ride in bus lanes. Caroline Russell AM is not convinced there was a compelling case for TfL to make this change and does not agree that London’s boroughs should be urged to adopt TfL’s policy of permitting motorcyclists to ride in bus lanes.”
• David Kurten AM of UKIP, “Adds that Cycle Superhighways take up a lot of room on trunk routes which make things less safe for motorcyclists as lane width is reduced and they are squeezed into fewer lanes with other motorised vehicles.”
• David Kurten AM of UKIP also adds, “That it would also improve safety for motorcycles if they could use Cycle Superhighways at less busy times of the day outside rush hours, when there are hardly any bicycles on them and they lie dormant and empty.

While this report focuses on motorcycle safety and not the ULEZ daily charge for motorcycles, one sentence supports the fact that motorcycles reduce congestion, “Motorcyclists can legitimately filter between lanes to make progress through traffic, helping them to avoid danger and to reduce congestion.”  with the extrapolation that by being congestion reducing, motorcycles can travel with reduced emissions compared to the surrounding traffic.

The text that I am sure will have riders agreeing completely with, is from Keith Prince AM, Chairman of the London Assembly Transport Committee as the committee in this report appear to be standing in support of positive solutions to motorcycle problems in London:

“Motorcycles are an efficient form of transportation which can cut congestion – and motorcyclists shouldn’t be dicing with death every time they take to London’s streets.

In 2016 this Committee published a report outlining its concerns about the safety of motorcyclists. It’s clear from the evidence we have recently heard that riding a motorcycle in London is no safer than it was two years ago. Why is that the case?

TfL has failed to implement key recommendations made by the Transport Committee and we are also disappointed to see the Mayor change his previous proposal to improve safety training. The landmark commitment to a ‘London Standard’ for training needs to be reinstated and a more proactive approach is needed from boroughs to give motorcyclists access to bus lanes.

How many more motorcyclists need to die for TfL to sit up, take notice and do something?”

Original Sources – London Assembly – Motorcyclist deaths still way too high – London Assembly Transport Committee  – Holding the Mayor to account and investigating issues that matter to Londoners – Motorcycle safety in London: update report – March 2018 – pdf

Note: We will be publishing a survey for those who ride London. The survey aims to identify motorcycle, scooter and moped riders who typically commute to work in the proposed ULEZ zones of London.  The objective is to find out the profile of the riders and the type of powered two wheelers (bikes/scooters/mopeds) travelling in these areas.  The results will hopefully offer riders the opportunity to put forward a case for continued access to all areas in London for all powered two wheelers (PTWs) and to highlight the importance that this form of transport offers.