Wednesday, 25 November 2015

Protest outside Transport for London this Friday

Dear Friends,

I'm writing to you to alert you to a GLA funded organisation called London Travel Watch who claim to represent cyclists' while actively campaigning against protected space for cycling.

London Travel Watch pitch themselves as the 'voice of London's transport users', and identify cyclists as one of the groups they speak for, but advocate polices most cyclists are specifically opposed to. We feel this is totally inappropriate, however few cyclists have even heard of this organisation so we wanted to let you know. Details and links to their policies are here.

We need to send a message that most cyclists want protected space for cycling. If you're able, please join Stop Killing Cyclists' protest this Friday on Blackfriars Road to support real cycle campaigners and demand protected cycling.

No More Coffins Protest - Friday from 5 pm - 6:30 pm

Kind regards,


London Travel Watch do not represent cyclists!

London Travel Watch claims to be 'The voice of London's transport users' with a staff of 20 and one million pounds each year from the London Assembly [1]. They claim to speak for cyclists & pedestrians and identify cycling as the 4th most significant transport mode [2].

How are London Travel Watch representing cyclists?

London Travel Watch are actively involved in trying to influence London's transport policies and also respond to consultations. They are well resourced and also claim the mandate of representing everyone who travels - including people on bikes. However many of their policies are at odd with both major cycling organisations and also grass roots groups.

In their Cycle-Superhighway policy document [3], London Travel Watch insist the best thing is for cyclists of all ages and abilities to be mixed in with other traffic and "share the road" (the opposite of providing safe and protected space dedicated for cycling). London Travel Watch are promoting a policy which is known to fail, in fact it's the policy which has meant many felt excluded from cycling and led to the massive decline in cycling in London and the rest of the UK

London Travel Watch acknowledge the desire for more and safer ‘cycling facilities’, but claim there no settled consensus on what they might be (despite the huge success of the LCC's Love London Go Dutch campaign). They oppose protected space for cycling:
Devices to separate cyclists from motor vehicles will add to the difficulties of pedestrians, particularly the mobility and visually impaired and it will lead to a less attractive, and less well used, public realm.

Further to that they propose that a better solution is wider traffic lanes with no cycle infrastructure at all [4]:
We have promoted the use of wide (4.5m) bus lanes and wide (4.5m) inside lanes as the best way of ensuring the safety of cyclists and improving the operation of bus services along links between road junctions.
Finally, when setting  priorities for the current mayoral term, their only reference to cycling was to complain about the cyclists who jump red lights - ignoring cycle superhighways completely [5].

What do people on bikes (and people who want to ride) really think?

The supporters of this petition come from a wide range of backgrounds and each year we've run a survey to identify the most pressing issues to campaign on. The 2015 Survey had almost a thousand responses and over 65% wanted us to demand every council has a programme to build protected cycle facilities at junctions and along main roads.

In addition we had many comments in support protected cycle lanes:
The main focus of the campaign should continue to be on the construction of the cycle super highways and the demand for more separate and protected cycle routes running off the super highways.
At the moment the focus is having a nice ride at the weekend with family, often involving getting on and off the bike, going through parks which are closed after dark, spitting you out unexpectedly into busy roads and traffic and taking long detours, making commuting a mission which puts people off. That simply reduces cycling to a hobby rather than what it is in the city - an extremely effective mode of transport. We need better routes that are direct and navigable as well as being separated from traffic and pedestrians.
I have cycled in London for over twenty years - now I just take the back streets and try not to stress out - I ignore the painted highways and allow longer to get everywhere as its so dangerous on the main roads

London Travel Watch need to stop falsely claiming to represent cyclists.

It is clear that London Travel Watch are not a voice for cyclists (nor those who want to cycle but find the roads intimidating). However they still claim their organisation represents all transport users including cyclists. I feel this use of public money, to misrepresent cyclists, is totally unacceptable and puts cycling at an unfair disadvantage.

This organisation is concerned with championing bus and rail travel and should have cycling (and any associated funding) striped from it's remit. If the GLA want this type of organisation to represent bus and train users that's fine, but it shouldn't claim to represent people it doesn't speak for.




Sunday, 15 November 2015

City of London Quietways consultation

The City of London are consulting on their Cycle Quietways and their proposals lack the quality and vision to make cycling accessible for everyone - We need your help to get this improved.

The City's aim "to improve safety and cater for the predicted increase in cycling, whilst minimising the impact on other road users and local occupiers" has led them to a watered down scheme where most of the changes are "minor, such as new or amended road markings, wayfinding signage, parking bay alterations". You can view detailed plans of the proposals here.

This approach has led to a scheme which fails to adequately provide for the "new and less confident cyclists" they are hoping to encourage.

Please respond to the consultation by emailing

I have copied my response to the consultation below, please feel free to use it as the basis of your response:

Dear City of London,
I am responding to your consultation about the proposed Quietway cycle routes through the City.

I fully support the aim of these schemes to encourage "new and less confident cyclists" to cycle more. Some of the sections proposed seem to provide the kinds of safe and protected conditions which would persuade people to cycle when they otherwise wouldn't.

However there are several other sections where the roads are left largely the same, such as installing a larger Advance Stop Line Area. Many potential new cyclists are concerned about safety on the roads and small adjustments to provision will make little difference to cyclist's experience and perception of the route, so this will not help persuade more to use it. If the City of London wants to really encourage non-cyclists to take up cycling as a form of transport the provision needs to be consistently of higher quality rather than the current patchy proposals.

In addition, the routes proposed are somewhat indirect so to ensure the routes are attractive to cyclists the phasing and priority at junctions should be adjusted to ensure the route is not more inconvenient than the more direct roads. Otherwise large numbers of cyclists may end up ignoring those sections of the routes.

Some specific comments on the plans as numbered in the consultation documentation:
  • Plan 1: I welcome the use of segregation to create an inviting route, however I am concerned by the junction between Snow Hill and West Smithfield west-bound cycle lane as there is a lack of visibility for both cyclists and motorists. The position of the crossing, just past the corner, is less than ideal and this should be orientated so the crossing is more perpendicular to the road. In addition the inside kerb of the roadway needs to be adjusted to take account of the lane on the far side, there is a risk that a motorist following the inside kerb line realise late that they are heading straight in to a cycle lane. Ideally this whole junction would be redesigned so the cycle route crossed Snow Hill in one go with a single safe crossing, rather than having to deal with the arms separately and rather awkwardly.
  • Plan 3: Cloth Fair is too narrow to accommodate motor traffic and should be made access only. I note that drawing a picture of a bike on the road next to an arrow doesn't make it any easier for a beginner to make a right turn and is exactly the kind of 'provision' which makes it difficult to persuade people cycling is a safe option they could try out.
  • Plan 4: The pinch point which is created at the entrance to Beech Street for cyclists heading east is bound to cause conflict and will feel very unsafe for new and less confident cyclists, especially given that many cyclists experience aggression from motorists associated with situations like this, where the driver wants to get past to a clear road ahead and isn't prepared to be a little patient. In addition the left-right from Middle Street to Long Lane looks difficult and unappealing for the "new and less confident cyclists" this scheme is aimed at.
  • Plan 6: I welcome the introduction of the no-through route for motor traffic and am sure that a large number of potential cyclists would regard this as safe and inviting.
  • Plan 8: I am concerned by the junction between Wood Street and London Wall. For cyclists heading south the junction encourages cyclists to start off on the left hand side and traverse the traffic diagonally. This arrangement simply isn't acceptable given the numbers of cyclists who have been killed in 'left hook' type collisions, it encourages cyclists to put themselves in the danger zone and increases the risk of a fatality. The markings encouraging cyclists to cross the lane diagonally from the left should be removed and the radius on the bend tightened to ensure there is no space for a vehicle to get on the outside of a cyclist. Alternatively southbound traffic should be removed from Wood Street as part of a one way system for motor traffic, with a segregated counter-flow cycle lane introduced.
I hope these suggestions help you improve the quality of these proposals.

Kind regards,


Proposed Quietway routes (purple)

Monday, 9 November 2015

London Assembly votes to End Lorry Danger

Dear Friends,

Our call for the Mayor to End Lorry Danger is gaining momentum with cross party support in the London Assembly

In response to everyone who emailed the Mayor and London Assembly this summer (that means you!), our demands are being debated and supported in City Hall. Initially the Mayor's office responded with cautious support but no concrete proposals [1]. However our calls have now been taken up by Darren Johnson AM who bought together a cross party motion to the London Assembly which was passed unanimously [2].

This is a big step for the campaign and shows there is political will in the London Assembly to address HGV danger.

We need to keep up the pressure on the Mayor to ensure this is followed up by decisive action to address this endemic problem.

- No More Coffins Protest

Thankfully it's been several months since we've had a vigil on London's roads and while I hope that will continue for as long as possible, many of the dangers facing cyclists haven't gone away.

On Friday 27th November Stop Killing Cyclists are holding a demonstration outside Transport for London's HQ calling for action to make London's roads safe [3]. The event runs from 5-6:30 pm so please join after work to help maintain the pressure for safer cycling in London.

No More Coffins Protest event details - 27th November, 5-6:30 pm

- Demand Protected Cycle Lanes in Wandsworth

This campaign has always demanded safer roads for cycling in London, especially protected cycle lanes on main roads to make safe cycling accessible to all. Unfortunately although there has been progress in places many schemes still fail to provide safe space for cycling.

TfL's proposals for Balham High Road fail to provide protected space for cycling [4]. We want to send a clear signal to TfL that this level of provision just isn't good enough. All schemes like this should include:
  • Continental style protected cycle lanes (as recently opened in Vauxhall, Embankment and Oval)
  • Bus stop cycle lane bypasses

The consultation closes at the end of the week, so please respond now!

Thanks for all your support and I hope to see many of you on the 27th.

Kind regards,


[2] The details of the motion and the Assembly members supporting our campaign are here:
[3] No more coffins protest - in support of Stop Killing Cyclists' '10 by 2020' demands -
[4] via the 38degrees petition (please support!).

Sunday, 8 November 2015

Demand Protected Cycle Lanes in Wandsworth!

This campaign has always demanded safer roads for cycling in London, especially protected cycle lanes on main roads to make safe cycling accessible to all. Unfortunately although there has been progress in places, we are still seeing many schemes which fail to provide safe space for cycling.

Balham High Road scheme just not good enough

We are supporting calls for TfL to do better and revise the plans to include:
  • Continental style protected cycle lanes (as recently opened in Vauxhall, Embankment and Oval)
  • Bus stop cycle lane bypasses

You can read more about the failings of the scheme on the Traffik in Tooting blog here.

The scheme is currently out for consultation - please respond to TfL's consultation before it closes at the end of the week!

Want to keep up to date with other campaigns & consultations in Wandsworth?

This scheme was highlighted to Save Our Cyclists by another 38degrees campaign - Let's make Tooting High Street safe for all. Please sign their petition if you want to keep up to date.

There are also a series of related 38degrees petitions aimed at specific improvements around the Wandsworth area our supporters may also be interested in: Wandsworth Cyclists' 38degrees petitions and campaigns.

Friday, 23 October 2015

Our 2015 demands - Reviewing the Mayor's responses

Our 2015 demands are making real progress thanks to all our supporters who have emailed the Mayor and members of the London Assembly in the summer:

This is a sea change in the debate around HGV safety which signals significant political will across the board to address this endemic problem.

While the responses from the Mayor have been positive, they don't include the decisive action we need (yet). However there are signals that significant progress is possible and our campaigning can make that happen.

Rush Hour Lorry Ban

The Mayor says:
I have asked TfL to examine the practicality and potential implications of restricting certain vehicles at certain times as part of its wider freight programme. A full assessment of the implications of any peak time restriction is needed to avoid unintended consequences, such as an increase in vans on the road or an increase in HGVs at other times of the day. 
While it is good this option is being considered, this statement puts the Mayor a long way from implementing any ban.

However, the email also indicates they are looking at ways to remove HGV traffic from cycle routes. This could achieve the same objective - separating HGV traffic from bike traffic to reduce accidents.

The Mayor says the GLA will start using it's planning powers to force construction HGVs to use designated routes & avoid roads with large numbers of cyclists and "Discussions with the London boroughs and the construction industry have already started to ensure that this happens as fast as possible."

The discussions the boroughs may possibly be about existing ‘weight limit enforcement action’ powers which are generally not being enforced. Hackney has successfully been enforcing their ban for a number of years and the City of London are set to start enforcing their central area ban (which includes junctions where HGVs killed cyclists in 2015). As these are existing powers many other boroughs could start implementing these immediately in order to keep cyclists safe this winter. This is an area where pressure from cyclists can make a real difference.

Construction Industry to adopt CLOCS

The Mayor has stated he is working with TfL to encourage companies to adopt CLOCS, which is welcome lacks any requirement for contractors to use this system. They go on to say:
In January the Mayor will consult on requiring further safety modifications including the retrofitting of bigger side windows to further reduce driver blind spots. Bigger side windows, in the lower panel of the cab door, give the driver direct vision of any cyclist who may be alongside them, and can be fitted to most lorries for around £1000. This consultation will be complete and a decision taken before the Mayoral election. In the meantime, as soon as the work can be physically completed, it will be ensured that such windows are fitted to all vehicles undertaking work for TfL, Crossrail, or any other member of the Greater London Authority (GLA) family.

This step towards 'direct-vision' lorries is a very positive sign as 'blind spot minimisation' is one of the measures needed to implement CLOCS. Not only will this make lorries safer, but it is potentially a step towards the roll out of CLOCS in the future and sets a strong precedent for the boroughs.

We need to keep making the case for CLOCS to be adopted by all GLA and borough HGVs to make sure this is adopted as widely as possible.

Confidential reporting of bad practice

The Mayor has responded:

I support any measure that exposes bad practice and increases our understanding of how incidents occur and what needs to be done to prevent future collisions. CIRAS is a whistleblowing scheme widely used in other transport sectors to allow confidential reporting of bad practice by employees, but does not currently cover HGV operations and is not available to members of the public to raise concerns. I have asked TfL to investigate whether CIRAS would provide any additional benefit to the existing range of measures in place to report, investigate and manage bad practice.
It seems clear that CIRAS would contribute to making a much more robust reporting system for bad practice - it is in everyone's interests that potential problems are picked up before they result in tragedy. We will continue to call for for confidential reporting systems as part of improvements to the way TfL identifies and investigates bad practice.


We have recently set up a Freight Compliance Unit (FCU), formed of officers and staff from TfL, the MPS and DVSA and the FCU shares information on operator compliance in order to ensure that enforcement is intelligence led and our efforts are coordinated.
We hope this team will bring new energy to enforcement action in London. This unit will be judged on the number of dangerous lorries taken off the roads, the impact on compliance rates, and the ability to crack down on rogue operators. We will probably need to wait until next year to fully see what the impact of this unit is, but should push for regular status updates before then to ensure it receives the attention it deserves.

The Mayor also says:
I encourage Londoners to report any illegal activity or failure to comply with the law via the RoadSafe London website, which is run by the MPS.
Unfortunately there are many reports suggesting that the RoadSafe website is not always an effective place to report dangerous driving (possibly due to lack of resources and a large number of reports). For alternative places to report bad driving please see this post from the Safer Oxford Street blog.

Thursday, 22 October 2015

London Assembly motion on HGVs and safety - Wednesday 4th November

The following motion for the next London Assembly meeting has been proposed by: Darren Johnson AM (Green Party) and seconded by: Andrew Boff AM (Conservative Party). Supportive comments have also been made by the Labour Group and Lib Dems. It is hoped that the London Assembly will reach a consensus on this crucial aspect of cycling and pedestrian safety:

This Assembly notes the tragic deaths of eight people cycling in London so far this year, seven of whom were killed in collisions with Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs).

Despite positive initiatives led by the Mayor, TfL and the MPS, this Assembly believes there are still too many dangerous HGVs on London’s roads.

We therefore call on the Mayor of London to work with the Government and commercial partners to implement the following policies:
  • a rush-hour lorry ban, subject to the completion of a full impact assessment;
  • the construction industry to adopt Construction Logistics and Cyclist Safety (CLOCS) standards across the board, including direct vision lorry cabs;
  • confidential reporting of bad practice to be rolled out to all HGV drivers, irrespective of whether their employer wants to take part;
  • comprehensive enforcement so that rogue operators do not permit unlicensed, untrained lorry drivers, or unsafe vehicles, to operate on our roads.

GLA motion on HGVs and Safety

Monday, 19 October 2015

Official response to our campaign email

Further to the Mayor's written response to our demands in the Question posed by Darren Johnson AM we have also received a direct response from the Mayor's public liaison unit via email, copied in full below:

Dear Fred

Thank you for your petition to the Mayor about HGVs and cycle safety. The Mayor is committed to improving cycling safety and is particularly conscious of the dangers posed by Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) to cyclists. That is why he and Transport for London (TfL) have taken a number of steps to address this issue.

HGVs, and particularly construction vehicles, are involved in a disproportionate number of fatal collisions involving cyclists and pedestrians. On 1 September 2015, London launched the UK's first Safer Lorry Scheme, which is designed to protect these vulnerable road users. The scheme legally requires every vehicle driving in London weighing more than 3.5 tonnes to be fitted with basic safety equipment. Under London's scheme, most vehicles that are currently exempt from national legislation for this equipment, such as construction vehicles, will have to be retrofitted. Class V and Class VI mirrors give the driver a better view of cyclists and pedestrians around their vehicle. Side guards protect cyclists from being dragged under the wheels in the event of a collision.

As part of the Safer Lorry Scheme launch, the Mayor also set out plans for strengthening the scheme in the future. In January the Mayor will consult on requiring further safety modifications including the retrofitting of bigger side windows to further reduce driver blind spots. Bigger side windows, in the lower panel of the cab door, give the driver direct vision of any cyclist who may be alongside them, and can be fitted to most lorries for around £1000. This consultation will be complete and a decision taken before the Mayoral election. In the meantime, as soon as the work can be physically completed, it will be ensured that such windows are fitted to all vehicles undertaking work for TfL, Crossrail, or any other member of the Greater London Authority (GLA) family.

Extensive trials are also now being undertaken at the Transport Research Laboratory of a variety of electronic sensors for lorries, aiming to alert drivers to cyclists' presence. If any of these devices are shown to offer significant and consistent benefits, it may also be required that they be fitted to lorries in London.

Many of the most dangerous vehicles are construction-related. For future major construction projects, GLA planning powers will be used to strictly prescribe the routes which HGVs serving them can follow - requiring, for instance, that they avoid a road heavily used by cyclists or take a route that minimises the number of left turns, the most dangerous manoeuvre. Discussions with the London boroughs and the construction industry have already started to ensure that this happens as fast as possible.

Following the launch of the Mayor's Cycling Vision for London in spring 2013, there has been a step change in the approach to cycling facilities across London. Two new, substantially segregated, high quality Cycle Superhighways will be built, running east-west and north-south through Central London. Construction has begun on the north-south route and on the first phase of the east-west route with completion expected in spring 2016. The new Superhighways will provide clear and convenient routes through London for cyclists, physically separated from other vehicles.

Similarly, the Better Junctions programme aims to improve safety at high profile junctions and gyratories in London. Thirty-three locations have been identified where significant improvements can be delivered for cyclists and other vulnerable road users. TfL will deliver improvements at 10 of the 33 Better Junctions by May 2016. Consultations so far have included Aldgate, Blackfriars, Elephant & Castle, Lancaster Gate, Oval, Parliament Square and Tower Gateway. TfL is also trialling a range of innovative cycle infrastructure measures including Dutch style roundabouts and cycle priority junctions. A number of these innovations have now gone live at Oval junction, including cyclist specific traffic lights and a new 'hold the left turn' feature.

These programmes dovetail very closely with what cyclists have been demanding. The Mayor is committed to making progress as quickly as possible, while ensuring that these improvements are done properly. Cycling safety has been and will remain at the heart of the Mayor's administration and the Mayor is determined to make things better for cyclists in London.

Thank you again for contacting the Mayor.

Yours sincerely

Mohammed Rahman
Public Liaison Unit

Dear Boris, Jennette, Caroline and Darren,

7 out of the 8 cyclist fatalities this year have involved HGVs [1] and we need the mayor and GLA to do more to protect cyclists and pedestrians. There are still too many dangerous lorries and too many dangerous junctions in London. We are calling for urgent action to reduce injuries and deaths:
  • A rush hour lorry ban. When we asked earlier this year over half of our supporters wanted a lorry ban in the rush hour [2]
  • The construction industry must adopt 'CLOCS' safety standards to prevent further deaths. Construction industry HGVs have killed 5 cyclists this year already [3], CLOCS safety standards should be made mandatory in every public section construction contract in London.
  • Confidential reporting of bad practice needs to be rolled out to all HGV drivers, irrespective of whether their employer wants to take part [3].
  • Stronger enforcement. Operators must never be allowed to put profits before lives by allowing unlicensed, untrained lorry drivers, or unsafe vehicles, to operate on our roads.
These urgent measures must be the starting point for a target of zero lorry deaths on our streets. Safe segregated routes will be key to eventually eliminating road danger but we must start with action which can save lives in 2015-16.

This call comes from the Save Our Cyclists petition and has been circulated to our supporters who have been encouraged to contact you with their personal reasons for wanting action. The petition currently has 37'946 signatures:

We would appreciate responses to this call and will publish all the responses we receive on our blog and Facebook page.

Kind regards,


[2] - When we asked earlier this year over half of our supporters wanted a ban in the rush hour:
[3] -

Saturday, 26 September 2015

London Mayor's response to Save Our Cyclists' demands

Cycle safety and HGVs

Question No: 2015/2647
Darren Johnson

While your recent announcement on cycle safety and HGVs contains some welcome measures there is a very strong feeling that you should do more. Many hundreds of Londoners have been in touch with me since your announcement in support of the following measures.

  • A rush hour lorry ban.
  • The construction industry to adopt 'CLOCS' safety standards to prevent further deaths.
  • Confidential reporting of bad practice to be rolled out to all HGV drivers, irrespective of whether their employer wants to take part.
  • Stronger enforcement so that operators are not allowed to put profits before lives by allowing unlicensed, untrained lorry drivers, or unsafe vehicles, to operate on our roads.
Will you agree to implement these?

Written response from the Mayor 

I strongly support any measures to improve the safety of vulnerable road users. TfL is already delivering road safety improvements for all road users, including cyclists, but while there are no easy or quick fixes that can be applied, we believe we have a strong programme in place to make London’s roads safer for all road users.

I have asked TfL to examine the practicality and potential implications of restricting certain vehicles at certain times as part of its wider freight programme. A full assessment of the implications of any peak time restriction is needed to avoid unintended consequences, such as an increase in vans on the road or an increase in HGVs at other times of the day.

I fully support the adoption of the CLOCS Standard by the construction industry and will work with TfL to promote the aims of the CLOCS programme and to encourage construction organisations to commit to adopting the CLOCS Standard.

I support any measure that exposes bad practice and increases our understanding of how incidents occur and what needs to be done to prevent future collisions. CIRAS is a whistleblowing scheme widely used in other transport sectors to allow confidential reporting of bad practice by employees, but does not currently cover HGV operations and is not available to members of the public to raise concerns. I have asked TfL to investigate whether CIRAS would provide any additional benefit to the existing range of measures in place to report, investigate and manage bad practice.

TfL and its partners are committed to enforcing against unsafe operators in London, who are a danger to other road users and who damage the reputation of those operators who work within the law. We work with the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA), the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), City of London Police and other agencies to target those operators we know to have a poor safety record. We have recently set up a Freight Compliance Unit (FCU), formed of officers and staff from TfL, the MPS and DVSA and the FCU shares information on operator compliance in order to ensure that enforcement is intelligence led and our efforts are coordinated.

I encourage Londoners to report any illegal activity or failure to comply with the law via the RoadSafe London website, which is run by the MPS.

Thursday, 17 September 2015

Caroline Pidgeon AM supports Save Our Cyclists' HGV demands

Caroline Pidgeon AM has supported Save Our Cyclists' HGV demands in an email I have published in full below:

Thank you for getting in touch with me regarding the danger to cyclists in London posed by HGVs.

I am only too aware of the serious danger that cyclists can find themselves in when sharing the road with HGVs. Whenever I hear another cyclist has been tragically killed on London’s roads, I know it is highly likely to be someone crushed under the wheels on the inside of one of these vehicles. Too many people have died, and I support strong action to put an end to the danger.

I am in favour of trialling a rush hour ban on HGVs, and I recently questioned the Mayor about this - he admitted that he has now changed his mind, and TfL are now considering the possibility of conducting a trial.

I certainly support the introduction of CLOCS safety standards across all public sector construction contracts in London, and I’m happy to call on the Mayor to introduce this. I also support the introduction of the Confidential Incident Reporting and Analysis System (CIRAS) to HGVs – I lobbied the Mayor to introduce this on all London buses, and I am happy to lobby him to extend this to HGVs.

I have visited TfL’s HGV Task Force and I know they do valuable work. However, it’s clear there are still many poor vehicles on ours roads and I would support the expansion of the taskforce to make sure enforcement is as effective as possible.

Finally, I have also called on the Mayor to make more use of the Thames for construction traffic – if we can properly use the river to transport building materials, we can take many more dangerous HGVs off the roads.

Ultimately, it’s clear we need a high quality network of segregated cycle lanes to keep cyclists safe. However, until that is in place it is vital that we reduce the number of HGVs on ours roads, and that the remaining vehicles are as safe as possible.

Thank you once again for getting in touch.

Best wishes,


Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM
Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group
Deputy Chair Transport Committee
Deputy Chair Police and Crime Committee
LONDONASSEMBLY Liberal Democrat Group
City Hall, The Queen's Walk, London SE1 2AA

Follow me on twitter:     @CarolinePidgeon

Wednesday, 16 September 2015

Save Our Cyclist's concerns raised with Mayor

Darren Johnson was set to raise Save Our Cyclists concerns at the Mayor's Question Time today (see question below), however the session was disrupted by protesting cabbies.

Hopefully they were able to continue later and we will be back with more details once we have them:

Question Title: Cycle safety and HGVs
Member: Darren Johnson

While your recent announcement on cycle safety and HGVs contains some welcome measures there is a very strong feeling that you should do more. Many hundreds of Londoners have been in touch with me since your announcement in support of the following measures.
  • A rush hour lorry ban. 
  • The construction industry to adopt 'CLOCS' safety standards to prevent further deaths.
  • Confidential reporting of bad practice to be rolled out to all HGV drivers, irrespective of whether their employer wants to take part.
  • Stronger enforcement so that operators are not allowed to put profits before lives by allowing unlicensed, untrained lorry drivers, or unsafe vehicles, to operate on our roads.

Will you agree to implement these?

Tuesday, 8 September 2015

TfL must extend CIRAS to all HGVs working under TfL Contracts

This post is based on a guest post I wrote for the Safer Oxford Street blog here. I've reposted it to keep our supporters up to date with progress:
Dear Friends,

Thanks to campaigners like Tom Kearney, Bus Driver X and a Transport Specialist, from January 2016 TfL will be the first public sector transport agency in UK where both train and bus operations will have access to Confidential Safety Reporting. TfL has made the decision to adopt the Confidential Incident Reporting and Analysis System (CIRAS) for all London's buses in part due to campaigning by Tom's blog.

Significantly, this will also be the first time in UK history that the long-standing confidential reporting practice has been transferred from rail-to-road, marking a landmark victory for road danger reduction and also a forward thinking move by TfL they should be applauded for.

Despite welcome improvements to the safety of our buses this does not go far enough: Three cyclists in London have been killed by HGVs operated by TfL's Crossrail contractors since November 2013: Claire Abadie-Hitier, Brian Holt and Maria Karsa. When TfL's Crossrail goes live in 2018, all its rail operations staff will all have access to CIRAS; however currently none of their lorry operators have access to Confidential Safety Reporting during construction of the railway.

Last week TfL showed they have the power to lead the way on HGV safety by announcing glass doors will be fitted as a priority to all lorries working for the Greater London Authority, Transport for London and Crossrail. This is a welcome move which will reduce the risk of 'left hook' incidents by providing more direct vision to the front left of the vehicle where cyclists are often directed by cycle lanes.

Confidential Safety Reporting would compliment vehicle improvements by ensuring safety best practice is adopted throughout the organisation and potential dangers are addressed before they result in serious incidents. Now that TfL will be implementing CIRAS on London's streets we need them to extend this scheme to the most dangerous vehicles —and firstly—to the most dangerous vehicles under contract to TfL and its Crossrail Project.

We need TfL to implement CIRAS for all HGV contractors working for TfL and Crossrail. This move would show TfL and Crossrail leading from the front on one of the most pressing road safety issues faced in London and the UK: Cyclist Fatalities involving HGVs.

Adoption of CIRAS for its HGV subcontactors by TfL would pave the way for widespread adoption of Confidential Safety Reporting by HGV fleets working under contract to public authorities across the United Kingdom, a measure which is accepted best practice and already underpins a culture of safety on the railway.

This call on TfL is supported by the Save Our Cyclists petition which I help lead. We are campaigning for Confidential Safety Reporting to be rolled out to all HGV drivers and that needs a large organisation like TfL to demonstrate that this can be successfully implemented across a large fleet of HGVs.

It is only through the persistence and dedication of campaigners like Tom Kearney and his collaborators from TfL's Bus Operations, the Cycling Community and Transport Professionals that we can achieve the incremental victories which make the impossible achievable and give us hope for a future where avoidable road casualties are no longer a daily occurrence.

Extend CIRAS to TfL-contracted HGVs (including Crossrail) Now!

Fred Smith


Saturday, 5 September 2015

Greens respond to call to end lorry danger

Darren Johnson, a green member of the London Assembly has responded to the call for action on HGVs. He and Jenny Jones AM are supporting our demands for a rush hour lorry ban, CLOCS safety standards, confidential reporting and stronger enforcement.

We welcome his announcement that he will be tabling formal questions to the mayor asking for these measures to be implemented. His message is as follows:

Many thanks for your message. I am responding on behalf of the Green Assembly Members, myself and Jenny Jones AM.

We completely share your concerns and support these safety demands to help eliminate deaths and injuries from HGVs on London’s roads and make cycling safer for everyone. While I welcome the Mayor’s recent announcement on left turns and mirrors, the Mayor and TfL need to do more and I will therefore be tabling a formal question to the Mayor asking him to implement these demands (a rush hour lorry ban, CLOCS safety standards, confidential reporting and stronger enforcement).

Promoting cycling and decreasing road danger have been consistent priorities for the Greens on the London Assembly. We will continue to urge the Mayor to urgently redesign the most dangerous junctions, impose a default London-wide 20mph speed limit, segregate cycle superhighways so that they meet ‘Go Dutch’ standards as well as crucial safety measures for HGVs. 
If you would like to be kept informed about our work on cycling then please email and we will add you to our email circulation list (emails are approximately once a month). Please be assured of our continued commitment to making our streets safer and more attractive for cyclists through our work with cycling campaigners, through putting pressure on the Mayor and TfL and through our formal committee work here at City Hall.

Darren Johnson AM
Green Party Member
London Assembly
City Hall
Queens Walk
London SE1 2AA

Monday, 31 August 2015

Call on the Mayor and GLA to End Lorry Danger

Dear Friends,

7 out of the 8 cyclist fatalities this year have involved HGVs [1]. Much more could be done to protect cyclists and pedestrians from lorry danger:

  • A rush hour lorry ban. When we asked earlier this year over half of our supporters wanted a lorry ban in the rush hour [2] when 40% of cycling fatalities involving lorries occur
  • Construction industry HGVs have killed 5 cyclists this year already [3]. The construction industry must adopt 'CLOCS' safety standards to prevent further deaths. These standards should be made mandatory in every public section construction contract in London.
  • Confidential reporting of bad practice needs to be rolled out to all HGV drivers, irrespective of whether their employer wants to take part [3].
  • Stronger enforcement. Operators must never be allowed to put profits before lives by allowing unlicensed, untrained lorry drivers, or unsafe vehicles, to operate on our roads.

These urgent measures are the starting point for a target of zero lorry deaths on our streets. Safe segregated routes will be key to eventually eliminating road danger but we must start with action to save lives in 2015 not 2025.

Please forward this message along with your own demand for action to:;;;;

This list includes all the parties represented in the GLA. We need to make sure HGV danger is firmly on the agenda as the parties look forward to the next mayoral election. We will be publishing their responses so please copy us in.

Kind regards,


[1] -
[2] - When we asked earlier this year over half of our supporters wanted a ban in the rush hour:
[3] -

Monday, 24 August 2015

End Lorry Danger

7 out of the 8 cyclist fatalities this year have involved HGVs - Please support the London Cycling Campaign's call for urgent action including a rush hour lorry ban, introduction of 'direct vision' lorries and enforcement to catch rogue operators.

Support the call to End Lorry Danger here

These urgent measures are the starting point for a target of zero lorry deaths on our streets. Safe segregated routes will be key to eliminating the danger in the long run but the process must start with a commitment from the mayor to put a stop to these tragedies and a willingness to take bold action.

The LCC's three demands for urgent action:

  • A rush hour lorry ban – 40% of cycling fatalities involving lorries occur between 8am and 9.30am. (When we asked earlier this year over half of our supporters wanted a ban in the rush hour).
  • Improved driver vision – It’s time to get lorries with restricted vision out of our city and only allow in lorries with “direct vision” design. (In a traditional lorry cab the driver can barely see the road close to the front and sides of the lorry, relying on various small mirrors to cover the numerous blind spots).
  • Stronger enforcement – Operators must never be allowed to put profits before lives by allowing unlicensed, untrained lorry drivers, or unsafe vehicles, to operate on our roads.
You can read more about the LCC's campaign here and analysis from the Road Danger Reduction Forum here.

Higher standards needed for lorries in London

In addition to these urgent actions, there are many more measures which could be introduced in the next few years to improve the safety of lorries. These include widespread adoption of CLOCS style standards for operators, confidential reporting for concerns & bad practice and changes by national government. You can read about this in more detail here.

Physically protected Space4Cycling essential

While measures to improve the safety of lorries have the potential to significantly reduce the numbers of cyclists killed on London's roads over the next few years, they will only go so far. For the longer term we must continue the campaign for physically protected cycle lanes on busy roads until London achieves a comprehensive grid of safe cycle routes.

Sunday, 23 August 2015

Higher safety standards needed for lorries in London

Lorries in London pose an unacceptable risk to cyclists and pedestrians. A range of practical measures have been identified to improve safety through better design, operation and regulation. We must insist adoption of these measures as a high priority for the mayor and TfL.

Higher standards

The Construction Logistics and Cyclist Safety (CLOCS) standards were developed to reduce the high numbers of cyclists being killed by lorries from the construction industry. They note:

There is a particular issue in London and between 2008 and 2013, 55 per cent of cycling fatalities involved a vehicle over 3.5 tonnes, despite these vehicles representing just 4 per cent of the road miles travelled in the capital.

Analysis of the cycling figures found that a disproportionate number of the vehicles involved were construction related.
This year five of the seven lorries which killed cyclists were tipper trucks operated by the construction industry (the other two lorries were supplying the  retail industry).

While construction industry lorries pose a particularly high risk to vulnerable road users, in order to eliminate lorry deaths there will need to be safety improvements to all lorries on London's roads.

These standards, or equivalent, should be rolled out to cover coaches and lorries outside the construction industry. Compliance with these standards should also be made a mandatory requirement for companies working on public sector contracts in London

Confidential reporting of dangerous practice

Many industries use confidential reporting systems to improve their safety record - in fact the construction industry already has confidential reporting for structural safety. Following a concerted campaign the confidential reporting scheme CIRAS is being made available to bus drivers in London.

A confidential reporting scheme should be extended to all HGV drivers and become a mandatory part of the CLOCS standards for fleet operators. It should also be made available to drivers whether or not their employer wants to take part as the worst operators should not be able to avoid the measures which would make them accountable and prevent accidents.

Action needed to improve the safety of all lorries in the UK

The CTC are campaigning for improvements at a national level and you can read about their campaign for higher lorry standards and stronger enforcement nationally here.

Wednesday, 19 August 2015

What can Public Health do for cycling?

We know cycling is great for people's health, and in a country like the Netherlands the population gain significantly from the regular exercise they get from their bikes. As we hear more about the impact of lifestyle choices on health, what are the people in charge doing to promote active transport for everyone?

Ask not what cycling can do for public health, ask what public health can do for cycling. 

A couple of years ago responsibility for 'public health' moved from the NHS to Local Authorities. This change means councils must consider health when they plan all of their activities - education, transport, planning and all the rest.

It was hoped this change would cause a step change in the way councils worked with a new emphasis on cycling and walking. However that didn't happen, so what are the reasons and what can we do about it?

The problem

Public health professionals know that a big shift to active travel is needed to combat our sedentary lifestyles & improve the health of the population. However this hasn't translated in to action from councillors and engineers who are following different priorities.

    We can't afford the NHS if we continue like this.

    Lack of physical activity places a huge burden on our health services. The cost of treating the associated health complications comes at a time of constrained budgets. The rapid growth of conditions like Type 2 Diabetes could make the NHS unsustainable as we know it. Unfortunately there isn't a magic bullet and public health can't solve this on their own.

    Must transport be part of the solution?

    Transport departments will ask why they're being expected to adopt a new set of aims and priorities. To answer this local councils need to consider other ways they could fill the physical activity deficit in their communities and whether that is affordable.

    For instance we could ask:
    • How much money did they spend on leisure services last year?
    • What proportion of the physical activity needs of the population were realised by their leisure services programmes?
    • Can this fulfil the activity needs of the community and is it affordable?
    We can't afford to solve this without using all of the opportunities we have to promote healthy activity. Transport departments are in control of much of our public space and budgets public health professionals can only dream of. We need transport to be part of the solution by promoting active transport, improving our health and saving the NHS from spiralling costs.

    Because it's no longer just about cost effectively getting people from A to B.

    • We need to emphasise and give credit for outcomes (like more people cycling) rather than big showy projects (many cycling schemes are about small scale interventions with small budgets).
    • We should not accept health impacts being regarded as secondary considerations with journey times being used to justify projects which fail to promote cycling and walking.
    • Roads must be designed to make cycling and walking viable options for everyone.
    We need to keep reinforcing these messages with every consultation and when we talk or write to our politicians.

    The invisible killer you can't escape

    Finally, we all need to talk about air pollution a lot more. The impacts on children, the old and the weak are truly shocking and the evidence continues to pile in.

    Progress has been made by Client Earth and EU regulations but the scale of the problem is huge and far too little is being done about it. We need to push for local government action to address sources of pollution close to our homes, schools and hospitals. 

    Sunday, 16 August 2015

    Will London's mayoral candidates support Space4Cycling?

    With Labour's national leadership contest all over the news their London leadership race has slipped under the radar. However if you live in London this could be quite a big thing - the winner of this contest will help set the debate in the run up to the mayoral elections and could even replace Boris as the next mayor.

    So it seems like a good time to review where the different parties sit on cycling commitments and also to return to a subject I've discussed before - Labour's sometimes lukewarm attitude to cycling.

    Where do the different parties sit on Space4Cycling?

    The Space4Cycling campaign was run over a year ago for the local elections. Although the responses only record support for the campaign and not the candidates' other policies, the results are stark:

    Party Elected 
    Conservative   61211218%
    Lib Dem1166959%

    This shows Labour councillors form a significant majority of those supporting Space4Cycling and the percentage support is greater than all other parties except for the Green Party. The Lib Dems and independent candidates have slightly lower support rates.

    Fewer than 1 in 5 Conservative candidates supported Space4Cycling (three times less than Labour). It is important to note that there are several vocal Conservatives cycling advocates, notably Boris Johnson who has overseen implementation of the most ambitious cycling plans London has seen to date.

    Irrespective of the candidates' other policies it is clear the LCC and cycling campaigners have not been able to reach and engage with the Conservative party effectively. From experience most mayoral elections have been two horse races and it seems that cycling campaigners in London need to do more to get Conservative supporters and politicians supporting cycling.

    Only a single UKIP councillor supported Space4Cycling and at the other end of the spectrum the Green Party fully supported the campaign.

    Election for leader of London Labour

    It's too late to sign up as a supporter but cyclists in London who signed up for the national leadership election will soon be able to vote in London's race. This is a chance for cyclists to send a clear message to the London Labour Party demanding ambitious plans and aspirations for cycling.

    At this point I should say that I am not a member of the Labour Party, however I did spend the £3 to become a 'supporter' so I could put in a vote for Christian Wolmar and his cycling advocacy.

    Wolmar has stood with a strong pro-cycling stance addressing many of the key issues faced by cyclists in London. I have copied his cycling manifesto below and if you're able to vote in the upcoming selection process consider putting Wolmar at the top of your list of preferences. He says:

    I know the problems faced by cyclists. I am a lifelong cyclist and covered 3,500 miles on London’s roads last year and I was a board member of Cycling England until its abolition.

    Cycling will be at the heart of my transport policy. There are 600,000 cycle journeys in London every day, representing a key mode of transport. It is vital that London is made safe for cyclists of all ages and abilities so that more people can enjoy this fantastic means of getting round London

    So I will:
    1. Create a network of Dutch style segregated lanes
    2. Encourage local cycling schemes by funding ‘mini Holland’ type schemes in every borough
    3. Endorse a ‘vision zero’ on road deaths
    4. Ban HGV traffic at peak times on busy cycling routes
    5. Introduce a 20 mph limit that is properly enforced
    6. Build a cycle bridge across the Thames in the east, and scrap the Garden Bridge
    7. Extend the cycle hire scheme to more boroughs and reduce the cost
    8. Ensure cyclists are at the heart of every road junction redesign
    9. Create 50,000 new cycle parking spaces
    10. Keep cycling commissioner Andrew Gilligan to give the programme continuity

    Thursday, 25 June 2015

    Another cyclist killed by an HGV. Seven HGV deaths already in 2015

    Dear Friends,

    On Monday a young lady, 26 and recently married, was killed by an HGV while riding her bike to work in the City of London [1].

    Shockingly this is the seventh death this year involving an HGV, out of only eight cyclist fatalities in total. Despite many calls for action in the last few years the current approach is not working and the number of cyclists killed by HGVs seems to be increasing.

    We must demand our politicians act now to stop the senseless killings on our streets. There have been too many deaths already, we cannot wait for more cyclists to die before meaningful action is taken.

    Please join Monday's vigil outside the Bank of England after work to demand action (meeting 5:30pm for 6pm start) [2]. We want to make this protest as big as possible to show the huge strength and depth of feeling on this issue.

    This protest will be followed up with more campaigning and will be back in touch once we have details.

    I hope to see as many people as possible there on Monday.

    Kind regards,



    Tuesday, 19 May 2015

    Should diesels be banned from London's streets?

    It is estimated that diesel vehicles are responsible for around 90 per cent of road based transport emissions.

    That is the figure quoted by the Mayor in response to a question from John Biggs AM (Question No: 2014/3701). With the huge health impacts due to air pollution and possible enforcement coming from the EU the need for action is greater than ever.

    The strategy from the mayor seems to be a combination of improving the standards of vehicles generally and banning the most polluting from central London. A complete ban seems off the table due to EU single market rules, but given the challenge of meeting the EU's air quality standards will Boris' plan be bold enough?

    Ultra Low Emission Zone proposed

    ULEZ will require most vehicles to meet a Euro 6/VI diesel standard (or an equivalent Euro 4/IV for petrol vehicles). For heavy vehicles, Euro 6 will reduce NOx emissions by between 80 and 90 per cent compared to Euro 5/V diesel vehicles.

    The contrast between the new and existing standards shows the disproportionate pollution caused by a legacy of dirty diesels which will affect London's air quality for years to come. Even in the current Low Emission Zone (LEZ), 45,832 penalty charge notices were issued in 2013 for vehicles not meeting the current low standards, over 800 every week!

    Many of the buses which are controlled by the mayor are currently only operating to the Euro III standards set over a decade ago, emitting ten times the NOx and particulates of Euro VI vehicles.


    In the last year London have been running over one hundred Euro II buses and almost two thousand unimproved Euro III buses. That amounts to more than one in five of our buses emitting high levels of air pollution and contrasts with only 14 buses at the cleaner Euro VI standard.

    Boris wants the entire fleet to meet the Euro IV standard "for these emissions" by 2015. The cynic in me would add that "for these emissions" means retrofitted Euro III buses count so we won't actually have fully compliant Euro IV standard buses. Therefore this means is retrofitting the remaining Euro IIIs and scrapping the handful of Euro II relics.

    I think it's also worth asking that given the size of the problem and the importance the Mayor has placed on reaching Euro six, will achieving Euro four achieve the scale of improvement we need?

    Buses in operation by Engine Type, the data:

    • Euro VI - 14
    • EEV * - 853
    • Euro V - 3,151
    • Euro IV - 1,683
    • Euro IIIs retrofitted with SCR** - 1,017
    • Euro III - 1,917
    • Euro II - 121
    Total - 8,756

    * EEV stands for enhanced environmentally-friendly vehicle.
    ** Euro III buses fitted with selective catalytic reduction which meet the Euro IV standards for particulate matter and nitrogen oxides.

    Licensed Taxis

    Data shows over half of taxis are currently at Euro 3 engine standard and currently there are only a handful of electric and hydrogen taxis operating in London. However Boris has said from 2018 all newly licensed taxis will have to be zero emission.

    Similar to the buses, it seems we will be living with a legacy of older highly polluting vehicles for many years to come. Is this going to be fast enough or will this need to be replaced with a more ambitious plan to provide clean taxis for London?

    More help needed?

    In addition to these measures Boris says he has lobbied Government for a change to fiscal incentives (tax) and proposed a national diesel scrappage scheme to reduce the number of diesels on our roads.

    Following the big Client Earth win on air quality, it seems likely Boris will need to review his plan to see if he can achieve more faster.

    In fact this will be one of the first things Boris is asked when he starts back at Westminster City Hall.

    Saturday, 16 May 2015

    Assembly Members responses to concerns about Canary Wharf

    Following our email about Canary Wharf's shady lobbying last year, many of our supporters contacted their London Assembly Members. Here are some thoughts on the responses we recieved.

    The first response we got was from Murad Qureshi AM telling us in a brief email he had referred it to TfL's legal advisers, which was a welcome development.

    Darren Johnson AM copied us in to his letter to the Mayor and TfL Commissioner, clearly setting out his opposition to Peter Anderson having any say in regard to cycling. We also had a response from the Lib-Dems.

    We didn't get a response from the Conservatives but having a TfL board member from an organisation actively lobbying against the Mayor's proposals must have been an unwelcome revelation to say the least.

    The good news is that with the LTDA dropping it's legal challenge to the cycle superhighways and endorsing protected cycling this fight is now won.  We are still waiting for for Canary Wharf to take a more balanced and approach to cycling.

    With cycling in London still too dangerous and unpleasant for most people we need to build on this win and look at the next big challenges:
    • Action on HGVs.
    • Getting all boroughs building protected cycling facilities.
    • Safer Junctions.
    With Boris' attention shifting* and the election for his successor not until next year, we need to turn up the pressure on the Councils which have been getting away with very little scrutiny for too long. *You can read about his legacy here.

    The most popular focus for our 2015 campaign survey was "Demand every council has a programme to build protected cycle facilities at junctions and along main roads". Which would be a huge step forward given only a few boroughs have any plans to build protected cycle facilities on main roads.

    What do Labour think about cycling?

    Labour have the largest number of Assembly Members and although a Labour AM responded first in this instance I've generally felt their voices have been lacking from the cycling debate. So I decided to look on to find out their latest thinking on cycling. I used the search to look for 'cycling' and it returned "No results"...

    After a bit more searching I found Val Shawcross has raised the issue of dangerous junctions. I should also note we hear a lot of very positive things from Christian Wolmar, but he hasn't been selected (yet) and isn't an AM.

    Labour are a huge party in London politics and once Boris leaves could well supply the next mayor for our city. As cyclists we really need labour to start talking more about cycling, and some of their supporters agree. Many of the boroughs with the highest numbers of cyclists are Labour, so cycling should be well represented by their members.

    Wednesday, 22 April 2015

    Supporter Survey 2015 - Responses

    Thanks to the 900+ people who filled in the supporter survey, you can read about the responses below, and a few responses from me.

    What should we campaign on in 2015?

    In order of popularity:
    • Demand every council has a programme to build protected cycle facilities at junctions and along main roads. 624  - 66.4% 
    • Ban HGVs from the rush hour and make them deliver early in the morning or during the day. 472 - 50.2% 
    • Tfl to conduct and publish an urgent review in to all cyclist-lorry fatalities since 2000 to identify common factors. 369 - 39.3%
    • Ban TfL funding from being used on schemes which consist only of paint with no physical improvements to our roads. 352 - 37.4% 
    • Target businesses who haven't signed up to a safer lorry scheme - name and shame. 328 - 34.9% 
    • Lobby every council to sign up to the LCC's safer lorries pledge in full. 322 - 34.3%
    • Lobby TfL and the mayor to provide start up funding for 50 cargo bike delivery hubs across London. 80 - 8.5% 
    • Other suggestions (see below for details). 

    It is clear that putting pressure on the councils is an essential step for better cycling in London. With the limited resources of this campaign we will only be able to target key councils, so I'd encourage any of our supporters who have a bit of time to get involved with a local cycling group - you can find your local LCC group here.

    How could you support the campaign?

    Again, in order of popularity:
    • Email your MP. 562 - 59.8%
    • Share the petition with friends. 531 - 56.5% (hopefully everyone who ticked this one also did it - if not please do it now!)
    • Email your local councillor (with some suggested emails to help). 495 - 52.7%  
    • Attend a protest. 342 - 36.4%
    • Write to a local paper. 105 - 11.2% 
    • Contact a business. 93 - 9.9%
    • Research businesses/local councils. 49 - 5.2% 
    • Other suggestions (see below for details).

    More than half of our supporters want to get involved by directly contacting their elected representatives, which is great and we will definitely try to pick up on this with our future actions and highlighting the actions of other campaign groups. If you feel moved to write to your councillor, MP or local paper please share your letter with us and we will publish it here!

    For the people who can attend protests we will continue to highlight the key protests in London. I've also noticed more groups around the country running protests so have a look online and follow people/pages about cycling in your area, there may be one near you (in the last couple of weeks there have been events in Tunbridge Wells & Bristol).

    Suggestions for 'What should we campaign on in 2015'?

    Reviewing the 'other' responses there are some themes mentioned several times:
    • There are a lot of calls for 20mph zones across London, which we certainly support and will continue to support.
    • Several others suggest variation of restricting or banning HGV and other traffic reduction.
    • The incentives for HGV drivers which encourage hurrying (and the lack of incentives for safe driving).
    • Cycle training (note that this is freely available from some councils - see here for London or contact your council).
    I also wanted to specifically respond to a comment about the campaign:
    Broaden campaign nationwide There are millions of cyclists (including kids!) outside of London facing identical problems which are not limited to London commuters yet local authority indifference & apathy is stifling change
    This is so true, unfortunately our campaign resources are very limited and we're not able to fill that role. I would strongly encourage supporters of this petition around the country to get involved in the existing local and national campaigns for better conditions for cycling, or to start their own. You can find campaigns near you via, social media and twitter can also be a really good way to stay in contact with what's happening near you.

    We also encourage people to engage with other related campaigns which are making the roads safer for all of us.

    Suggestions and Feedback:

    There were many suggestions and a selection are listed below. There are some really moving stories below unfortunately we can't respond to these individually, but have highlighted some of the messages. Note that publishing these messages does not mean I agree with all of them, a few have been edited out as they are clearly at odds with the aims of the campaign.
    • Police encforcement of current cycling safety provision needs to be improved (e.g. bicycle boxes next to traffic lights, occupied by cars...)
    • make all residential roads and roads cyclists need to share with motorists 20mph or less and install speed camera and introduce fines for motorists who exceed the speed limit. close roads that are too narrow for a car to safely overtake a cyclists and make them car free or one way only get someone who is an experienced cyclist to design London's cycle routes rather than a pen pusher who doesn't know how to ride a bike Nationwide: make riding a cycle in traffic part of the driving test examination (this will aso be good for some dodgy cyclists!). This needs to extend to lorry drivers and for them repeated once a year if they want to keep their licence
    • We are at a tipping point and we have to gain traction in all steps to improve roads. I have been cycling in and around the capital for 25 years and the risks have increased to cyclists as he volume of cyclists have grown.
    • I am an ex-Londoner who now lives in Swansea. I support your campaign because I am horrified by the carnage of cyclists on London's roads. Being in Wales I can't join in much of your practical campaigning. It is self evident that a rolling review of all cycle fatalities should be conducted to assess for common factors and particular accident hot-spots.
    • I have cycled in London for over twenty years - now I just take the back streets and try not to stress out - I ignore the painted highways and allow longer to get everywhere as its so dangerous on the main roads - I really am at a loss to understand how the councils and state (our state ?) have not managed to improve things on the roads for cyclists when it has been obvious to me along what needs doing - i am at a complete and total loss as to what we should do (sorry)
    • I'm a daily cycling commuter. I see on a daily basis how cyclists ride unsafely, ex. no lights at dawn, jumping red lights, overtaking lorries and buses on the inner side when no traffic etc. In my opinion educating us should be the first step in a process of making our roads safe.
    • Get the Skycycle happening.
    • If you insist on HGV's being banned from the rush hour and make them deliver early in the morning or during the day, just remember that this may hike up prices of goods, as HGV drivers might start insisting on more wages!
    • How about outside London - there were 5 deaths in the first 6 days of 2015!
    • Surely the main improvements we need are infrastructural. Is it realistic to expect HGVs to only deliver at certain times? And is it even a guarantor of cyclist safety? As a cyclist myself, I want road structures that simply separate me from these things so the obviously high risk of human error is removed as near as possible completely. And would the cycle facilities at junctions include separate lights for cyclists? Because in many instances, I think that's what's needed. I had a run-in with an HGV at a junction recently. I was in the box for cyclists just before the lights and the driver started edging into it before the lights changed so he could overtake me and turn without letting me go first. I stopped him doing this and he accused me of dangerous driving and nearly hit me, except that I got away. Clearly, for me to be really safe from people like this, my rights on the road need to be formally enforced somehow, though I don't know how that would work exactly. But it feels as if, for me to be really safe at junctions, I'd need to be able to cross before any motorised traffic is allowed to, which is why I raise the subject of separate lights.
    • Need to coordinate with Space4Cycling campaign
    • I would ideally like to see cycle lanes like those in France or Holland, where cycle lanes are physically removed from everyday traffic, with a brick divide or a clear distinction, so cyclists lives are not in jeopardy riding down the road. Especially when the government is trying to encourage more people to get into cycling (e.g. cycle to work scheme) they therefore need it to be a safe experience if they want to promote a healthier lifestyle.
    • My brother, Ninian Donald, was killed by a tipper truck turning left (from the right hand lane) in Hackney in 2007. In find it very hard to believe that the no of identical preventable "accidents" is still at this level nearly 8 years later. Am happy to provide support where I can. Kind regards Saskia
    • I was hit by a skip 10 months ago and had to have my right foot amputated below the knee. I was not at fault and in a cycling lane. He says he did not see me; it was a very clear day he had all the mirrors and I was v visably clothed inc crash helmet; I am 70 yrs and have cycled a lot
    • Broaden campaign nationwide. There are millions of cyclists (including kids!) outside London facing identical problems which are not limited to London commuters, yet local authority indifference & apathy is stifling change.
    • This is urgent - cycling is such a great way to travel around London but the dangers are so high.
    • Unfortunately there is a big increase of behaviour changes of traffic participants which follow the rule ‘the bigger one is the more rights they have’. I experienced this on lesser ‘civilised’ countries during traveling. Whereby the opposite needs to be enforced by law that weaker traffic partners have more rights: Pedestrians -> Cycles -> Motorbikes -> Cars -> Lorries and Busses Offenders who leave someone injured or even get someone killed getting off to lightly. I’m from Germany and when I saw the paint on the road I firstly laughed about this ridiculous idea of this would preventing any incidents or accidents. Why does an organisation spend money on that. Are there no experts in government, councils or the TfL? How about using the knowledge of other countries in Europe/World to achieve a safer environment rather than putting useless speed bumps on the road or painting some silly markings on the road hoping this would prevent anything bad happening.
    • I founded the See Me Save Me campaign to eliminate lorry danger We need calls to sign up to CLOCs national standard for construction logistics We need to join forces We have been campaigning on this for 6years and Cynthia Barlow OBE longer  
    • Some time in the mid 1990s the met carried out a major operation on tipper trucks on the Kinds Cross development (I think they set up a road block on the Caledonian Road or Goods Way). It was reported in the Evening Standard. The results were shocking with high numbers of drivers testing positive for alcohol, defective vehicles, unsafe loads etc. It was a shocking expose - but mysteriously it was never followed up and never repeated but the problems with these lorries (and their drivers) have been known for a long time.
    • There needs to be more awareness mainly for bus and hgv drivers but also cyclists I was hit on zebra crossing by a cyclist overtaking a car that had stopped for me I was half way across so plenty of time for him to stop pedestrians are vulnerable to cyclist as are cyclists vulnerable to road vehicles although the consequences are far worse for cyclist,
    • I'm not sure what the "Cargo bike delivery hubs" are or what they would achieve. I would support a ban on HGVs in the rush hour, but feel this is an unrealistic demand, as big business rules the world.
    • As a cyclist myself I am amazed that more cyclists aren't killed in London. Yes, cyclists would be safer if you banned motor vehicles from the roads, but I honestly believe you would be better off campaigning for better education of cyclists, if you wish to save lives.
    • The continuing death toll shows that pledges and voluntary schemes are not nearly effective enough. In the short term, HGV’s should be kept apart from cyclists and pedestrians through restrictions on the hours that trucks can be driven. Significant reductions on the speed at which HGV’s can travel should be imposed immediately. The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency should subject HGV drivers to enhanced proficiency testing, and psychometric testing to evaluate whether they have the necessary mindset to bear responsibility for the disproportionate threat of death they pose to other road users. In the medium term, wherever possible (note: let’s not confuse possible with profitable), freight should be carried by rail or tramline, or transported by river, such as has been done by enlightened demolition and construction haulage schemes. The design of trucks should be subject to special scrutiny by the Health and Safety Executive, and research should be conducted into the interaction between the vehicle, the urban road network and other road users. Our long term goal should be for cycling to be part of a safe and sustainable transport system for London, which will involve a shift of emphasis from private motor vehicles towards an integrated system that is based on respect for human life and the ecosystem that sustains it.
    • It would be interesting to learn what proportion of fatalities involving lorries were those of excessive length . There used to be a prohibition against such vehicles but EU regs. and business economics prevailed and the resultant damage evident, including to underground utilities, pavings and built structures. Earlier still, most goods were shifted around the country by rail with collection hubs for road carriers! [Fred: I started looking in to this but realised that the majority of cyclists killed by HGVs in London are killed by the shorter vehicles rather than the longer articulated ones. That doesn't mean there isn't a danger there but it's clear that the current HGV danger isn't about the longest vehicles, if you were to characterise them it would be non-articulated vehicles working for the contraction industry]
    • Although I don't live in London, I do sometimes cycle there and fully support this campaign. These problems are particularly acute in London but they affect all our major cities to some extent.
    • I can't see where else to write this many of the lorries involved were left hand drive? [I don't know, certainly something TfL should be investigating - from memory almost all of the lorries were based in the UK. It's also worth noting that the typical fatality involves a cyclist caught on the left of a left turning HGV, however left hand drive vehicles might be more likely to cause other collissions]
    • Until the law is changed, everything else is pointless.
    • This is not just an issue for London MPs as lots of cyclists that ride the capitals streets are from far and wide.
    • I don't know the detail around the cycler deaths, so am not laying blame when I suggest this...but I do believe that all cyclists on the roads should pass some form of cycling proficiency test. There are too many poor cyclists out there who give good cyclists a bad name.
    • I'm not a cyclist, so I hesitate to give my opinions as they may not be the most relevant, tho over the years I've lost three cyclist friends, two of them to HGVs. I've suggested targeting councils rather than TfL or Bloody Boris as I have little faith in him, or them under him, and this could wait till we've got a saner mayor in London. Many councils are likely to be more amenable, and they are more likely to listen to campaigners.
    • There has to be a sensible attitude towards the responsibility each cyclist takes for his or her own safety. Reinforce the basic steps that cyclists should take eg all to wear crash helmets and have proper lights and NOT to jump red lights.
    • Improve the cycling network in London. At the moment the focus is having a nice ride at the weekend with family, often involving getting on and off the bike, going through parks which are closed after dark, spitting you out unexpectedly into busy roads and traffic and taking long detours, making commuting a mission which puts people off. That simply reduces cycling to a hobby rather than what it is in the city - an extremely effective mode of transport. We need better routes that are direct and navigable as well as being separated from traffic and pedestrians.
    • I think the most useful thing you could mobilise is some mass evidence-gathering. Just getting submissions from cyclists with helmet cameras would be a start but having volunteers taking it in turns to film at relevant locations would be much better. [Fred: There are a number of groups which collect this kind of footage and can advise on how to report it, one such is]
    • Given that the same journalists / media attend each event, speeches should vary, and be increasingly assertive remonstrative. And you don't have to lick up to the police because they don't do anything for people's safety. If you really don't want to criticise them, just don't talk about them at all. Buzzwords we don't hear enough: 'corporate manslaughter', 'corporate responsibility', 'vision zero', 'institutionalized discrimination'... We need really passionate speakers (Donnachadh is good...)
    • We should get TFL (or cyclists associations) to look at how how cities with cyclists cope with HGVs - for example do they restrict them to certain times of day in the city, or are they banned from certain areas, or must HGV drivers going into London pass special tests or have special equipment fitted on their trucks? In parallel, cyclists need more training. There are still cyclists who cycle dangerously, disregard the Highway Code, and who put themselves needlessly at risk.
    • Hasn't the EU just delayed regulations to require safety features in HGVs until the 2020s, after campaigning by Volvo, etc.? The companies refusing to invest in viable safety equipment should definitely be publicly named and shamed. Also, I think your "safer lorries" isn't ambitious enough: automatic braking technology exists; it's installed in expensive cars today, it will be part of the technology included when lorries are self-driving, and should be the minimum today. [Fred: Yes, and can we highlight how after blocking the safer lorries Volvo is suggesting cyclists are pained in reflective paint, despite most cyclists already being well lit, with reflectors and also often wearing hi-vis. Sounds a lot like Volvo are making a tokenistic gesture which is about public image rather than cyclist safety]
    • If we had raised cycle paths then lorries/cars would not be able to mount them as they are just like a pavement for pedestrians.
    • Educate driver and cyclist to use road code.
    • I cycle to work 4-5 times per week. The element that hardly ever seems to be discussed is cyclist behaviour. A lot needs to be done to make cyclists aware that they should never cycle up the left hand side of an HGV stopped at a junction. The driver may not be signalling or hasn't seen a cyclist move up the inside. It takes two to cause an incident, and whilst I applaud efforts to improve HGVs, that alone only addresses 50% of the problem.
    • I suggest that there should be a fund to re equip all HGV's with all round vision mirrows.
    • Who are "Save Our Cyclists"? What are the group's contact details? PS: Please communicate with me via something other than this Google system, to which I have profound political objections... [Fred: Please get in contact via social media as this is currently just run by me and I will contact you. Note that we don't have people's email addresses and can only contact by messaging the whole group via 38degrees]
    • I was horrified to hear that TFL had only spent a fraction of the annual budget that had been put aside for cycling improvements. They should put an urgent programme of improvements in place this summer, particularly in the accident blackspots such as Elephant & Castle. No pavement widening schemes should be undertaken without segregated cycle paths being included
    • The verbal fight between drivers in London and cyclists continues. The drivers experience a couple of irresponsible cyclists, and all are tarred with the same brush. Cyclists die - our lives are constant peril - and yet driving habits do not change. Addressing road rage is surely key to part of the problem? I am living currently in a country where there is no road rage - it changes the care we take of each other on the road.
    • The main focus of the campaign should continue to be on the construction of the cycle super highways and the demand for more separate and protected cycle routes running off the super highways.
    • Banning HGV vehicles during rush hour seems like one of the best ways to deal with pedestrian and cyclist safely. That's assuming the figures stack up and show most serious accidents/fatalities occur during rush hour. Some proper analysis of the stats is definitely required
    • As someone who commuted on cycle for many years I think that the 2 things that need to be addressed are :- 1.cyclists jumping Red lights 2. going up the inside of lorries only to discover that they are moving to the right in order to turn Left. The latter is counter intuitive but needs to be learnt by cyclists for their own preservation. I think if we look out for ourselves then less of us will be killed on the road. Michael Clark
    • Full ban of HGVs during peak travel times.
    • only lorries with the best available safety kit-mirrors/cameras, side bars etc - should be allowed at any time of day. the disproportionate risk to women is also an important factor. The deaths have to be mentioned, but every effort should be made that they are in context and do not make cycling seem a dangerous means of transport.
    • I can't see that it's fair or practical to ban HGVs during rush hour, and it doesn't achieve a sustainable and safe network of roads for cyclists at other times of day. Dedicated, separate bike lanes and schemes at junctions seem a better option.
    • I live in Leighton Buzzard, where the council have gained funding by making the place "cycle friendly". This has been a cynical exercise with some to the provisions being laughable - a stretch of lane pained here/ there and then disappearing. Worse at least one is directly dangerous, directing cyclists the wrong way down a narrow one way street with a blind entrance for cars (they have no hope of seeing a cyclist approaching the junction as they turn in plus a blind bend where cars have no room other than to run over the painted lane. The response to complaints? Paint out the lane at the bend. Guess what - the overpainting has worn away anyway. There is clearly no thought being given to safety - only to financial consequences.
    • All power to you (us)
    • Address the misinformation being propogated by some organisations. In my French class today during a discussion, I was informed that the Metropolitan Police attributed 87% of all accidents involving cyclists to the disregard of rules and jumping of red lights by cyclists. I know this to be untrue but need to have the figures before me in order to argue against this gross misrepresentation I was left seething but unable to respond! [Fred: Yes, that's a completely false statistic, I think I might have posted about that on the blog previously. When it comes to fatalities they list errors by the driver twice as often as they list errors by the cyclist on the official road accident reports]
    • For your first target of 2015, please could you campaign against the misappropriation of Mini-Holland funds by RB Kingston Upon Thames? The current proposals are nothing to do with "Holland" at all and will not improve road safety (perceived or actual). While examples of misspent cycle safety funds on crap (e.g. Bedford Turbo Roundabout) are bad enough, the amount of cash involved here makes it far more egregious.
    • All bicycle shops should be more pro active and promoting campaign. Also the so called Cyclist campaign groups are very negative and do not think about potential local solutions and do all the above points you are raising. I tried to join my local one maybe 10 years ago and was very disappointed with their response."It was a matter of course that chalk farm road would become a bypass", that was it and no point in trying to lobby council dpt, write petitions, etc... So why bother in the first place, we need dedicated cyclists also in council department who have the jobs to implement changes on the road, otherwise they cannot understand the issues faced by cyclists. All new drivers should have at least a workshop and practice as a cyclist as part of the car licence, some drivers drive so close to cyclists but stop and feel scared when crossing another vehicle. Youngsters need education, take cyclist licence at school! Also responsibility of pedestrians, crossing the roads, no respect for cyclists either... Thank you very much, I really hope we find solutions for everyone to be safe! [Fred: If your local group isn't actively campaigning for the solutions you feel are needed link up with groups on social media like Stop Killing Cyclists and make your case, you might find there are a lot of people like you and people have started groups to ake sure these voices are heard - local groups have no monopoly and in several areas other groups have been started where they felt the local group wasn't good enough]
    • More education for cyclists not to pull up on the inside of Lorries at traffic lights. Go on outside, or if going left - just wait.
    • It is crucial to a green world to encourage cycling and walking
    • The rush-hour ban should be the first step towards a total ban. There should be enough alternative infrastructure options to accommodate central London deliveries - for example, better use of canals.
    • I would like to see priority given to cyclists turning left. They should be able to turn left on a red (if safe to do so)
    • Education of cyclists AND drivers to not use mobile phones whilst moving on the road, and concentrate on the job in hand!
    • the number of cyclists on the roads is growing quickly and there isn't the infrastructure to support this. this needs to be addressed. i would feel much safer being seperated from traffic as recently i have had many drivers being abusive and driving dangerously near or at me.
    • Any driver who kills a cyclist should be banned from driving for 5 years or life depending on the severity ( that might make them use their mirrors) Any lorry that has been involved in cyclist incident taken off the road for 1 year to make sure it has all the devises on it to make it safe and then it has to be tested within that year to checked to make sure it has been improved.
    • am in the last few months of an MA degree and would have more time after this. looking at the strategies used by other cycling cities like Vancouver and Seattle goole "How Smart Language Helped End Seattle's Paralyzing Bikelash"
    • there needs to be ruling that foreign drivers coming over the border are also fitted with proper mirrors as they are far more dangerous- drving much too close, cutting us up- nearly killed me a few months ago- not in rush hour- cycling with lorries in rush hour is probably safer as more cyclists so safety in numbers
    • No mention of providing training for cyclists. It puzzles me why cyclists insist on overtaking on the inside, coming up along the inside of lorries when they know it's the driver's blindside; cycle after having a drink; persist in using dangerous junctions (my council has provided 6 alternative SAFE cycle routes to get into central London), etc., etc. [Fred: Several people have mentioned this. It's something we voted on last year and wasn't very popular, so I did not include it again. Note that this training is already widely available]
    • Every local authority to be required to produce a comprehensive cycle path plan covering every main and sub arterial road in their borough. This should start with 'painted on' cycle paths on every one of these roads delineated by a solid white line at least a 1.5 metres wide and with absolutely no gaps in provision. The plan should include a timescale for converting these 'painted on' cycle paths into segregated paths over a realistic timescale, say 20 years. Implementation should be along the lines of the Dutch KROW road engineering guidelines, with engineering based on cultural and psychological understanding of the way in which pedestrians, cyclists and drivers interact, leading to intelligent design of the road and cycle network. All lorry drivers to be required to undertake not just cycle awareness but should be required to cycle on main city roads and take cycle test before being allowed to take an HGV test. Banning 19 year olds from driving HGV lorries (as in the recent Bath case); at least five years of driving cars, cycles and light vehicles before being allowed to take an HGV test. We should beware of thinking that lorry design will obviate 'accidents'. The culture of drivers, particularly waste and construction drivers behaving as 'Kings of the Road', is largely to blame. Severely curtailed speed limits enforced by local authorities on a civil basis rather than the police on a legal basis.
    • Make sure all local LCC groups know of and support SKC.
    • Perhaps cyclists can organise to protect themselves. Establish the use of 'Cycling Protection Pods' i.e. groups of cycles grouping as mini peletons on main commutes. These pods could be used in the first place to offer group protection and secondly they could raise the issue of cycle safety as they travel on a daily basis into town. Cycling is a vehicle for social interaction outside tin boxes. Use social media to get things going. :)
    • There needs to be a fixed protected area on the left at traffic lights where cyclists can wait safely which features a light high up to show lorry drivers that there are people there. also the sensor technology that can be fitted to lorries should be mandatory. I cycled in london for 8 years and i would never ever position myself next to any large vehicle on the road or at the traffic lights. I did it once, had a scare and never did it again. Do cyclists need to have a london license test which can simulate what can happen?
    • Changes in the law like strict liability would mean insurance companies would force safer HGVs. Other law changes, like allowing cyclists to turn left on red lights, would reduce the probability of cyclists coming into conflict with HGVs. I believe attitude change will be the only way to truly save lives, and only law changes can really change attitudes.
    • Lorries should only B allowed into cities between 1 am and 6 am; It's a no-brainer that cycle lanes should have kerb stones (or something) that would prevent motorized vehicles from straying into them. Cycle lanes should not have to be shared with pedestrians; I agree with all the suggestions above but have only ticked 3 as per instruction. Didn't understand how contacting 'a business' supports the campaign. What about leaning hard on Boris and ask WHY he hasn't done anything to make it safer for cyclists? Painting lines on the road doesn't count as it obviously doesn't work and never would have worked since vehicles generally feel they have priority over cyclists (because they are the smallest thing on the road and they don't pay Road Tax).
    • I support you in all your actions …but … I personally think the campaign should be much wider than a TFL issue … it's also about education, mutual respect between all road and pavement users whist in interacting in public and some very basic road driving education for drivers … I speak as a cyclist, driver and walking user of the pavements around london. There is virtually no give and take, respect and consideration given to others and some driving skill (or lack of) at times are breathtaking … literally!
    • I think that more money should be put into cyclepaths and other ways of making the roads safer for cyclists.
    • Cyclist priority at traffic lights and left turn when clear and safe at red traffic lights
    • Everytime a road is dug up/modified, cycling must be considered. So many roads are getting dug up and re-built, with no bike lanes and no alternatives for bikes (e.g. if there is a bike route parallel or nearby)! It seems to me like the planning of bike infrastructure is very "ad hoc" and needs to be overhauled so that everytime a road is getting re-done, there is a plan: where should cyclists go, if not on this street then where. There is so much money being wasted right now on roads that we will have to re-do/re-design to include cyclists in the near future when cycling levels continue to rise (they will because there are far too many good reasons for riding a bike and people are starting to see this and do something about it).
    • Although HGVs are very dangerous, coaches (not buses) are incredibly difficult on the roads and seem to have no scheme/ stickers/ training at dealing with cyclists.
    • I don't agree with segregation. We needs the roads to be safe for all, not closed off so motor traffic can do what it wants safe in the knowledge that cyclists aren't around. This approach makes unsegregated roads even more dangerous and widens the divide between different types of road user. We should be educating all, and removing unsafe vehicles such as HGVs. Company owners and directors should be legally responsible for their vehicles. If a cyclist is killed by an HGV then the company owner is prosecuted for murder. We will soon see businesses want to make their lorries and the roads safer then.
    • Devise a method of scoring councils for safe cycling facilities and initiatives and publish an annual league table.
    • i don't think an urgent review would do anything productive and it would just drop off the media agenda.
    • We need to Save Ourselves also - I think we have to make sure we take some responsibility too, to make the driver community come along with us. For example, I'm shocked by the number of young cyclists who wear all black - even at night, and rely on a light only. One said to me when questioned, that he 'liked the look of his black cycling clothes' and wouldn't change them for Hi Viz.
    • Why isn't it compulsory for every cyclist to have a lamp on the bicycle? Why don't cyclists think that is important? As a driver at night (or even as a pedestrian crossing a street) cyclists are often invisible in the dark until the last nerve-wracking moment. As so many cyclists ride at night without a lamp, I'm inclined to think them irresponsible. I wonder if that lack of care extends to their cycling in general. [Fred: Actually it is compulsory and the police do stop and fine people for riding without it]
    • I also think councils should enforce current 10 mph limits which seems to be more of a voluntary choice at the moment. The authorities should also come down harder on those using mobile phones when driving and not indicating!
    • Bicycle awareness should be made a compulsory element of learning to drive - rights, safety More campaigning should be done to raise awareness among drivers around rights and safety of cyclists.
    • Not sure how you overcome it, but one of the key forces behind these deaths is piece-work. The HGV driver has a financial interest in travelling quickly, taking short cuts (literally and metaphorically) driving through residential estates. etc
    • Lobby for advanced cyclist detection to be fitted to all HGV’s – Cameras, sensors and guards.
    • Make wearing helmets for cyclists a legal requirement
    • require people applying for drivers license to answer questions about cycling safety.
    • I am a keen cyclist and commute to work by bike. I think we also need to address poor cycling, get our house in order, and create an environment of all cyclists following best practice - helmets, lights, hi-vis clothing, stopping at red lights etc. When non-cyclists see someone cycling irresponsibly it creates an excuse not to address the real problems of serious cycling accidents; inconsiderate driving, uneven road surfaces and dangerous junctions.
    • Canpaign for cycle lanes physically separated from roads as in Copenhagen, Paris etc
    • I also think there should be better education of cyclists. A very small minority show scant regard for other road users and in some cases pedestrians.
    • Lobby the Secretary of State for Education to make cycle training part of the primary curriculum to educate future cyclists.
    • I believe that cycling lanes should be raised away from the traffic in the same ways as pavements are. In addition some quiet London Roads should be used only for cycling and no motor vehicles should be allowed. We should have safe cycle lanes raised like a pavement next to quiet roads to minimise the traffic fumes inhaled by cyclists because is very unhealthy to breathe traffic fumes and air pollution while they are exercising by driving their bicycles.
    • Would also be good to campaign for the design of lorry cabs to be changed with bigger windows and the driver sat lower down etc, so drivers have better visibility, similar to dustcarts.
    • L3 bikeability for all secondary school children where we discus potential hazards In a controlled ride. Teach them safe skills at an age it will stay with them forever. Make it compulsory and free for all. Valuable insight for children to see the dangers and then learn how to avoid them. Small groups of 2/3 children In built up urban areas. They won't forget.
    • Demand that all lorries driven in London have all-round visibility with no blind spots. This can be achieved through LCC's safer lorries design, or by fitting cameras.
    • Positive steps need to be taken to reduce/remove risks to cyclists and get this message across to the public,as well as those with power to bring that about.
    • Keep up the excellent work.
    • The problem with HGVs is largely that of their drivers. Many are paid per delivery, so they tear about with scant regard for other road users; they drive carelessly, or at too-fast speeds; turn without indicating or taking the time to double-check their mirrors; they bear down on bike riders who are perceived as being 'in the way'. Your campaign should focus on the drivers of these vehicles and those who utilise their services. For instance, how much training are the drivers given? How many are foreign nationals unfamiliar with London and it's cycling culture? How many are paid per delivery (which encourages speeding) and who benefits from this system aside from the drivers? What has been the increase in the number of HGVs over the past 5 years ? If these vehicles were forced to make deliveries outside the normal hours of say 7am - 7pm, who would lose out (big construction firms, wealthy landowners and property developers: many of whom have influence with those who propose laws and regulations perhaps)? I make these observations having ridden 300miles+ per week, in central London, for the past 5 years.
    • I missed today's protest but last year managed to attend most of the big protests and to publish videos of them on Youtube. I think media action is very important.
    • Gaining a full understanding of why not even half of the cycling budget was spent by the mayor last year should be a priority
    • I think HGV's should have dedicated routes in and out of London (to building sites in particular). Tfl could then provide info on quiet routes for cyclists accordingly. Permits should also be required for accessing these routes, this would prevent lorries from driving through London unecessarily.
    • I'm a CTC Right2Ride Campaigner, so want to liaise with the authorities about improving infrastructure and, particularly, increasing the police presence on our roads. CTC/Road Justice research shows a shocking decline in the numbers of police enforcing the Highway Code, which is reflected in the truly appalling driving seen by all cyclists every single FREAKING day!
    • Make London the other cities in UK cycle friendly ... cycle lanes, double mirrors on both side of lorries.
    • From my experience of cycling so many issues from drivers who just don't understand how vulnerable a cyclist is. Part of the issue is the 'us' and 'them' syndrome - drivers hate cyclists and vice versa. If drivers (presumably those who don't cycle as well) had a better understanding of the cycling experience and changed their driving habits accordingly then the world be a hell of a lot safer. Here's what I would concentrate on: 1. Do not ignore a cyclists signal - if a cyclist is signalling to turn right allow them to filter and make the turn - don't think you can put your foot down and make it past them. 2. Always leave a safe zone - at least a metre when passing on the right, at least two metres (preferably three) when approaching from behind. 3. Don't just rely on your mirror when turning left - take a look - especially when turning left across a bus lane 4. Respect the traffic light cycle zone 5. Just think how intimidating a ton of car can be if you have nothing between you and the tarmac but a plastic helmet and some lycra.
    • Set up participatory workshops between transport planners and cyclists to work out innovative ways to lay out roads and make them safer for cyclists - to make cyclists FEEL safer as well.
    • Lobby London Mayor Boris Johnson
    • "Ban HGVs from the rush hour and make them deliver early in the morning or during the day" would be a quick and relatively simple campaign to go for first. There are clear achievable aims and, compared to altering infrastructure, it would be cheaper, quicker and easier for TfL to enact i.e. they've got fewer reasons to say no. I cycle through the City of London and towards London Bridge every day, which is an area with high cyclist and pedestrian traffic. There are numerous building projects going on in this area that create a lot of HGV traffic. This is especially problematic as the roads are very narrow and bus traffic is high. It may be worth pushing for redistribution centres around there or time restrictions for HGVs. It might be helpful to team up with pedestrian safety campaigns as HGVs cause many pedestrian injuries and fatalities. Junctions are a problem, so teaming up with someone like Collideoscope ( to identify problem junctions may help the campaign push for safer infrastructure. A common argument against dedicated cycle infrastructure is that it would take up too much space. Ironically bikes take up much less space than HGVs, so perhaps a really simple picture campaign of the amount of space a bike takes up vs the amount of space a HGV takes up would be effective. It could be shared on social media and would be easy for people to understand. Other stats about the negative impact of HGV traffic e.g. fatalities, pollution etc. could be incorporated into the images rather like an infographic.
    • The first two of your options are impossible or counter productive. You can't ban HGV's from the rush hour as businesses open during normal business hours and are still travelling between destinations at other times. ASL's are a very effective tool in challenging motorists perceptions of cyclists and are a first step towards improving junction safety. A deserved campaign though, good luck. [Fred: I've tried to include a variety of options to find out what people are thinking and get ideas and opinions. It's important we explore options fully and don't reject ideas just because they're not easy]
    • Sadly, at the moment I can do nothing as, although an everyday cyclist, I live in Phnom Penh, Cambodia....
    • reduce/ban private cars being used by commuters in central London congestion charge zone in rush hour, to provide more road space for essential users, eg taxis, buses, delivery vehicles including HGVs, and cyclists
    • Billboard and other poster campaigns to alert cyclists of the danger of cycling on the inside of large vehicles.
    • Well done thanks for your work!
    • I am in complete agreement with the notion that something needs to be done about this terrible state of affairs but, ALL parties need to take responsibility for their actions. As a motorcyclist/car driver/HGV driver AND cyclist, one definite part of the problem is the cyclist! What would possess a cyclist to travel so close to a turning/manoeuvring HGV or bus/coach? I see enough risk taking by cyclists that I wonder that there are any left on the roads. By all means prosecute inattentive DRIVERS but, the amount of cyclists prosecuted for riding through RED LIGHTS - especially at places such as Bow flyover - beggars belief. SOME cyclists definitely don't comply with road rules - so don't automatically assume that "something needs to be done about HGV's" when cyclists themselves are a big part of the problem!
    • Thank you for all the work you are doing.
    • I strongly support the second of your campaign options – physical improvements to roads. Cyclists in cities such as Copenhagen (with admittedly a fraction of the buses as London) can successfully use quite narrow lanes if they are protected from the rest of the road by a raised kerb.
    • Raise awareness about avoidable fatalities on the roads and encourage public support for better measures to protect cyclists. Particularly using other exemplary European countries like Holland to showcase how effectively their roads protect cyclists.
    • increase number of ASL's in whole of London
    • The immense quantity of site traffic has to be dealt with. At present, it's totally unmonitored as far as I can see.
    • Given a forth choice for Q.1 I'd pick "Lobby TfL and the mayor to provide start up funding for 50 cargo bike delivery hubs across London" because businesses sometimes need to be shown there are alternatives, and to have those alternatives made available. As for protesting, I would be reluctant to take part in an A-B march,/ride because it's very easy to ignore those, but direct action can be much more effective.
    • The CTC reports research among lorry drivers, and one issue was design of safety features for HGVs. Obviously more appropriate mirrors and/or appropraitely placed TV cameras on the vehicles. Also, better side protection on the lorries. Recently, travelling by car on a motorway, I looked at HGVs. On some, though nowhere enough, there are side panels extending down far enough to push a cyclist or pedestrian sideways if (s)he is unfortunate to on the close LHS while the vehicle turns to the left - this is one of the most liekly positgions for a fatality. Thisd could ber mandated for all lorries over a certain tonnage using urban roads Have you contacted CTC?
    • Thanks for all your efforts. Keep up the good work!
    • One thing that needs to be addressed is the design of lorries - why is the cab so high up that the driver's visibility is so restricted? I am told that on building sites it is necessary to avoid splashes of mud, etc., but that represents a very small percentage of the vehicles' use. Buses are big vehicles too and don't kill nearly as many cyclists as HGVs do. Perhaps TFL should impose a ban on certain types of HGVs that are perceived as dangerous to other road users, not just cyclists.
    • limited hours of operation for HGVs in London and other cities or towns should be madatory. For example, no HGVs allowed between the hours of 07:00 and 10:00 AM or between the hours of 17:00 and 20:00
    • Figures released regarding injuries as well as deaths in accidents involving cars, vans and hgv as well as other cyclists
    • Promoting cycling safety to cyclists who do not currently wear helmets and or have lights, enforce laws; helmets save lives too
    • Make separate cycle lanes for cyclists, away from cars. It is the future.
    • I am a city bike rider, but I do not always like the direction of these campaigns. They cannot always be 'want, want, want!'. Cyclists need to give something themselves. I have seen some dreadful driving in my time, but I have also seen some very selfish riding. Cyclists gamble with their own lives, pedestrian's lives and those of their fellow cyclists everyday. For every bad HGV driver there are many more bad cyclists. It is just the truth. I received two simple words of advice from a colleague when I started cycling in London. Beware pot holes and avoid HGVs. I have never over/under taken a large vehicle until it was 100 % safe. Patience is everything when you are cycling in the city. If cyclists are prepared to take safety seriously, then the HGV companies may be more prepared to listen.
    • All of the choices seem to suggest that the fault lies solely with the HGV operators, drivers, the councils, the mayor, the infrastructure, etc. Addressing these is going to help me become safer because I ride defensively and with the intention of reaching my destination alive & well. There is no suggestion here to attack the problem of cyclists that still feel the need to sneak up the left of a stationary HGV and generally ride irresponsibly. Even worse are the naive cyclists who simply have no idea that certain manouvres on the road will place them in such grave danger! It's time that we stopped acting as cyclists against the world (and vice versa) and started looking at ALL of the problems resulting in these tragic and unnecessary deaths!
    • Publicity campaign to insist that ALL cyclists use lights, wear helmets, proper cycling clothing or clothing that at least allows physical movement and is not destabilising. So very many cyclists (especially since teh advent of the 'Boris bike' cycle without helmets and women are very often seen in dresses, skirts, sandals or even stilettos!! Cyclists who dress inappropriately endanger not only themselves but others. Nobody in the cycling community is saying this but it is a real issue and does need drawing attention to.
    • Ban Lorries with blind spots. If the lorries cannot see cyclists to the sides and front of their vehicles, their mirrors aren't sufficient. It's that simple.
    • It occurred to me that the dangerous junctions could be temporarily modified by the use of those weighty, sand filled pyramid thingies that are used to block off roads. If separated cycle lanes are the answer to cutting down lorry related deaths than surely these could be created more or less immediately with those pyramid things.
    • The issue between motorists and cyclist is deeply routed and needs to be addressed at the infancy of people's driving life. People need to understand why cyclist ride in the positions of the road that they do and how to manouvre around them safely, that more cyclists = less traffic and face the fact that in London a cyclist will generally get there quicker than they will. Given that major infrastuctre changes are slow to happen and some of the ones in place are utterly useless (i.e. bike lanes adjoining to parking bays) these changes in attitude are needed urgently. Until they do more cyclist will continue to die on our streets; all because they have dared to go from A to B on their bike.
    • Make TfL pay £1m to next-of-kin of all cyclists killed on London roads.
    • I've been signing petitions, sending e-mails, answering surveys for what seems like years, but see so little actual change out on the roads which makes cycling safer and more accessible to more people. Until the UK, especially big cities like London begin to have the same genuine commitment to prioritising serious cycling infrastructure etc etc etc as far more forward looking countries like the Netherlands, Denmark etc have already done years ago, people will continue to die and be injured and many people will still consider cycling to be far too dangerous a choice for getting to A to B The UK is so far behind ...........
    • Thanks for the good work you are dong on behalf of cyclists
    • I agree that more can be done to improve road safety for cyclists, but I think we should put more emphasis on how cyclists behave on the road as well. We, as cyclists, have to be careful! Too many of us seem to think that road rules don't apply to us, crossing with red lights, cycling past lorries without thinking the driver MIGHT NOT SEE us, ignoring signs... etc. I'm a cyclist and I feel sooo sad for every single accident that occur to each one of us. I'm sure that all the cyclists perished in these recent accidents didn't have any fault and that road improvements would have saved their lives, but I also think that a better education on how to drive and cycle would do a great good to all of us.
    • There should be lobbying to introduce early phase starts at traffic lights for cyclists and also there should be changes in the law that mean drivers always have some responsibility in an accident with cyclists (both of these measures are part of what they have in Holland and help in the overall picture)
    • Not sure who this group 'we' is and where you fit in within the campaigning groups LCC, CTC, Living Streets, Stop Killing Cyclists, RoadPeace, Traffic Justice Alliance etc. Good range of campaigns planned by 'we'. Obviously a huge amount not covered by survey such as restricting of rat running especially HGVs, last mile delivery strategies, restricting HGV routes; safer HGV design; enforcement of current regulations; etc.
    • I'm supportive of this but many of the things are less relevant to this campaign as I don't live in London.
    • I don't live in London but the same applies in other cities. You could make this a national campaign.
    • I find the longer the HGV (yes I do mean longer, though it tends to go with tonnage), the better the driving round cyclists. Is it not the case that you need more qualiifcations to drive longer, larger vehicles? So the relationship between level of driver training and experience and the type of vehicle they are permitted to drive may currently be inadequate for busy urban streets.
    • Supporting presumed liability And seeking better policing/prosecuting of our roads.
    • Beware. The lorry lobby is spending much money on convincing that lorry deaths are because either (a) cyclists' faults - being in wrong place or (b) too difficult to drive a lorry safely. This is not true - we have all seen many instances of lorry drivers behaving carelessly and recklessly. It is this which is causing deaths, not the excuses presented in the hauliage lobby's propaganda.
    • With changes in road safety must come changes in cyclists' practices. I am concerned at the risks fellow cyclists take every day
    • I'm not really sure what would be most effective, I'm responding based on other campaigns I've seen. I think we need more dedicated cycle lanes and cycle routes all over London.
    • Don't just look at fatalities, but also serious injuries, otherwise any research would be limited. Keep up the good work!
    • Enough is enough. There have been plenty of meeting, proposals and protests and not enough being done. Action needs to start taking place and with immediate effect.
    • The cyclist are increasing in number and we should have support from the government to make our roads safer as cycling is the future to save our environment and keep us fit to reduce the NHS bill
    • focus also should be on lobbying to police/councils to enfore indirect procedures that will protect cyclists, e.g. 20mph which so many motorists ignore where prescribed as not enforced, parking on cycling lanes where evading the parked car leads to dangerous situations etc.
    • Drivers need to be aware that turning left requires indication and to check to see if it's clear. This should be enforceable
    • I'm from Bristol and we are seeing Segregated cycle lanes in places, but it needs a concerted national programme/policy for us to get anywhere near what the danes/Swees/Dutch have. We should be looking at Scandinavia and following their model.
    • Traffic free cycle tracks are the real way forward. We can share companionably with pedestrians where both are welcomed so long as all users are considerate….
    • Creating momentum for delivery by cargo bikes - and public antipathy to automatic delivery by mega-truck - is a fantastic idea.
    • I have recently moved from London to Bristol so am unable to attend a protest in London and my local councillors and MP are not appropriate contacts for this. You have my full support however, the cyclist killed on the South Circular in Dulwich in 2014 was a close friend's colleague, and I grew up around that area so know that road well. I cycled across London for many years and regularly took my life in my hand with buses and HGVs who seem to throw their weight around on the road. I believe there are simple preventative measures such as better mirrors & sensors for vehicles, compulsory cycling education for all HGV and bus drivers (so that they can see it from the other side) and better education to cyclists about taking the priority position and awareness of vehicle blind spots. I would be more than happy to contact businesses on behalf of this campaign.
    • I'm an avid cyclist and passionate about safety, but the times that the live protests happen are always inconvenient - I'm sure others are in the same position.
    • The second option above from the campaigning priorities would be my next choice - i.e. lobbying councils to sign up to the LCC's safer lorry pledge.
    • Control the speed of the HGVs to the maximum of 20 miles/hour.
    • If this doesn't happen already, I think it should be standard practice that HGV learners are given a significant amount of instruction/tuition of other road users and especially cyclists. Also HGV drivers who may have been driving for years should be periodically re-tested with an emphasis on safety. A lot of cyclists are fairly ignorant about basic safe cycling on city roads and many (those who don't drive especially) don't appreciate things like driver's blind spots (especially the high position of driver's cabs in HGVs). I think it's essential that ALL cyclists are given adequate information about safe cycling and THIER responsibility for their contribution to their own and others' safety. Sadly, given the number of cyclists and the density of traffic in cities and as long as both forms of transport are sharing the same roads, I fear there will continue to be accidents and fatalities. I speak as both a motorist and a cyclist.
    • I am often overseas at present, so difficult to help. Am still a London cyclist whenever I return!
    • Vehicle manufacturers to be required to implement cyclist safety design features
    • research into infra red sensors to be fitted near blind spots
    • I am a cyclist & steer clear of lorries even stop when lorries are slow down. I am saddened by the deaths of cyclists who just want to live life to the full by cycling.My deepest condolences to the families & friends who have lost loved ones who cycled. Random drug tests & alcohol tests on Lorry Drivers may identify those who go unnoticed. "I killed a cyclist" on lorries who have done this.To name & shame the company.
    • I don't cycle but I know a lot of people who do. It would also help to encourage cyclists to cycle carefully ie don't jump the lights, wear helmets and visible clothing.
    • This is one of my pets. I was at the die in tonight and have been involved in many of the protest and support groups since their inception LCC/Stop Killing Cyclists/Sustrans in the UK and in Holland.
    • I did a free police training session where you get to sit in the cab of an HGV to experience what they can and cannot see first hand. Was an eye opener. Should do more of those for cyclists across London, especially targeting non-native cyclists to London (seems a disproportionate number of cyclists killed are not from London so don't understand the risks fully). [Fred: I've also sat in the cab and would encourage anyone to take that opportunity if they have it]
    • As a daily cyclist in central London for 10 years and one who has been the victim of a serous crash that was not my fault, but yet one that I could have avoided with more knowledge, I believe not enough is being done to educate cyclists in practical road safety and reasonable expectation of on-road conduct by other road users. As I mentioned above I think the govt. should fund a free but mandatory cycling licence for all cyclists in central London. Many have no idea of how to cycle safely and this knowledge is crucial for all road users.
    • Stop urban traffic and create cycle only roads into and out of London in peak hours. It is wrong that we have to fight people in metal boxes to get out tiny bit of space on the road.
    • I also think should have more action to increase cyclist awareness of the dangers. I am much more wary of blind spots now and do not go alongside a lorry unless really sure that it won't move while I pass it. Also I try to be sure that I am visible in their mirror.
    • More needs to be done about some of the major concessions made on the E/W and N/S superhighways, in the face of overwhelming support for them as they were - particularly on Thames St where they mean moving the proposed protected cycle lanes onto the pavements
    • Just to repeat - HGVs can come to the periphery of London only. They are killers and the drivers are clearly not of the brightest. HGVs should onload their wares into smaller vans then go back where they came from.
    • All HGV lorries to have vocal vehicle turning announcements so cyclist can hear as well as see! Also further awareness for cyclist to know the dangers of passing these vehicles on the left at anytime!
    • You need to join with the See Me Save Me campaign. We have great profile and respect within the construction industry. We know where changes need to be made but we have no resources. Please can we work together?
    • Could you use available funding and internal expertise (members with relevant skills willing to give free time) to create a mini documentary on the topic of cyclist deaths since 2000 which can be posted on youtube, say no more than 5mins. If you hit the right tone that resonates with the public then general support will grow across London and the UK which in turn helps put pressure on businesses and local government to do something...Am thinking about how successful this approach has been for some other good causes such as Virunga, albeit on a much larger scale. I still think cyclists are a relatively small group to force change would be good to get the general public on board (a lot of whom I believe feel quite ambivalent about cyclists).
    • Block rat runs and 20mph limit imposed across London inside the M25. I see tipper trucks, skip lorries and scaffold wagons rat running the whole time
    • Segregated cycles lanes from housing estates to schools, connecting to shops and leisure facilities. GLA to enforce the zero car parking in new build housing 
    • Abolish 'piece-work' for drivers of all kinds removing incentives to hurry or speed
    • allow more left turns where rest of traffic can only go straight
    • At junctions have a phased light system so that cyclists can set off first and be seen
    • Ban companies from paying HGV drivers by the load - pay by the hour instead would save drivers taking risks rushing from job to job
    • Better cycle training and publicity to stop cyclists riding on the left of HGVs
    • Block rat runs and 20mph limit imposed across London I see tipper trucks skip lorries and scaffold wagons rat running the whole time
    • Campaign against the "Cyclist stay clear" tfl yellow stickers on vehicles - it's not ok to run people over because you have a sticker These stickers are used like permission for manslaughter
    • campaign for lorries to have some sort of sidings so cyclists are not pulled underneath The same accident with a bus would not be fatal as we can put our arms out / are not dragged under and chewed up as happens with lorries
    • campaign for mirrors to be installed at many many more junctions
    • Campign to improve education for both cyclists and lorry drivers (I'm a cyclists but I've seen to many cyclists putting themselves at risk on the road!)
    • Change the law so that in any RTA involving a cyclist the motorist is always assumed to be at fault until proven otherwise
    • Changes in the law like strict liability would mean insurance companies would force safer HGVs
    • Cheap insurance for cyclists
    • Clearer and safer (less potholes/ drains) on-road cycleways with a space between the road if possible (cycleways on paths are too often useless due to their short length or lots of obstacles Priorities should be given to cyclists over all vehicles and this should be enforced for everyone's safety
    • compel the budget of 50 million set aside to make roads safer for cyclists to be spent Boris Johnson admitted it had not all been spent A no brainer
    • Councils need to build protected cycle facilities BUT there needs to be fair funding for this Some Councils will have more some less
    • create more bike lanes where they are physically separated in some way from the pavement and the road and disallow any vehicles to ride on it
    • Have cycles have their own separate traffic lights to work ahead of road users
    • create safe bike paths
    • Cyclist driver education
    • cyclists need to be taken as seriously as cars (or more so) on all counts but how that is done in a world run by money obsessed morons is beyond me
    • Develop a proper network of cycle super highways
    • draw awareness to cyclists to perform all necessary actions such as hand sign jestures and not cycling in the middle of the lane etc I personally witness lots of cyclists not following those points and creating danger to themselves as well as the drivers [Fred - Cycling in the middle of the lane is actually the recommended position]
    • Driver awareness campaign
    • Educate all drivers in the rights of cyclists on the road
    • educate cyclists how to deal with lorries
    • educate cyclists not to undertake slow vehicles at junctions
    • existing cycle lanes should be raised so that they become part of the pavement In Germany cyclist travel on wide pavements let's implement this in the UK
    • Finance infrastructure change for all the above
    • focus on regulating lorry drivers - huge no are unlicensed or banned
    • focus the campaign on the makers of the lorries the companies who use them and the drivers It needs to call this phenomenon out as what it is - murder: this is what worked in the Netherlands
    • Form protests in rush hour in the mornings that finish at 8am - more people can attend as they can control their day at that time - in the evenings is not as effective as it could be
    • fund a free but mandatory cycling licence for cyclists in london many have no idea of how to cycle safely and this knowledge is crucial for all road users
    • Get the police to enforce road safety legislation
    • Give cyclists priority the same as in Denmark/Copenhagen
    • Have a signal to announce a lorry turning left
    • HGV design -mirrors/cctv?
    • HGVs are all killers and none should be allowed into London  They need to stop transfer their load to smaller vans then go back for more  This would be good for employment
    • increase congestion charges; increase public transport
    • Install cameras to film what is really happening out there and use that to inform policy - without a sufficient body of empirical evidence policy-making is guesswork These cameras could also be used to actually enforce the current rules that are so systematically flouted
    • Introduce presumed liability laws as on the continent
    • Lobby businesses to switch to vehicles meeting CLOCs best standard
    • Lobby councils and TfL to increase funding for transport police so there is more policing of unsafe driving -jumping amber/red lights; not indicating; etc as these are often factors involved
    • Lobby for advanced cyclist detection to be fitted to all HGV’s – Cameras, sensors and guards
    • Lobby for the understanding that careless and reckless driving cannot be tolerated by society as it is now and will be prosecuted in all cases
    • Lobby Met police to enforce road safety laws such as speed limits mobile phone use etc more rigorously
    • Lobby TFL (and other local government transport depts) to introduce mandatory cyclist awareness training for all HGV drivers in order to be allowed to operate in large cities Compulsory repetition of this training every time an HGV driver is involved in a cyclist collision Targeting of this awareness training towards those freight companies which have the worst accident record
    • Lobby Tfl/mayor to spend their full fund allotment on cycle safety
    • lobby the judiciary to use the charge of corporate manslaughter against TfL and Councils
    • look at providing a safer infrastructure for cyclists - segregated lanes ability to avoid busy roads
    • make quiet cycle routes priority for cyclists with signage telling drivers they are entering a cycle route
    • make sites co-ordinate skip lorry and aggregate lorry traffic - currently there is no co-ordination - I've counted 0-odd aggregate lorries on the Southwark Bridge Road and the Bloomberg site manager on the other side of the bridge said there is no co-operation between sites
    • Mandatory mods to vehicles (side bars cameras etc); fast track legislation to introduce low-cab vehicles only for London streets; Oblige the HSE to investigate HGV accidents resulting in death or serious injury
    • More publicity needed to cyclists to avoid these dangerous situations
    • More signals and road reminders
    • more space at front of junctions or bicycle lights before traffic lights
    • More traffic police to stop drivers from texting or calling while they drive
    • need to also target foreign hgvs as they are way more dangerous
    • New ways to educate non-regular cyclists about the imminent danger of HGVs Maybe more informed road signs/reminders tailored for cyclists rather than just cars (ie Cyclists - caution of HGVs turning left here) Often these incidents are blameless because the driver can't see the cyclist and vice versabut giving more advise to cyclists about how to position themselves on that particular road could help them see danger before it's actually danger
    • Offer free training/advice for cyclists How many have passed or remember their cycling proficiency?
    • Passenger side of cab to have exterior mirror to show side of HGV when a cyclist may be there
    • people on bicycles need completely separate roadways
    • Promote road-awareness training to cyclists - this has saved my neck so many times
    • Provide safe green cycle lanes around London schools
    • Publicise cycle training  and asking cyclists not to sit by the kerb or cycle up inside a stopped lorry.
    • Put pressure on construction industry to change remuneration procedures for drivers - piece work offers incentive to drive faster
    • The prompt mending of pot holes [Fred: Agreed - also please report these, there are several apps like this one]
    • TV adverts to highlight dangers (like 'Think Bike' adverts)
    • Use existing data to recommend a minimum safety standard for lorries (This could include working hours limits for drivers) Ban HGVs that do not reach the standard from the rush hour

    Other responses for "how could you support the campaign?"

    • Create awareness by attending the 'Critical Mass' ride
    • e-mail the Mayor
    • I am going to try to encourage the Churches in London to declare support for and adopt the aims of SOS
    • Join See Me Save Me
    • Plan promote and lead flash-rides to publicise the campaigns [Fred: Stop Killing Cyclists are doing that in London and we'll continue to support those, I've seen other groups around the UK using similar tactics too]
    • Support and design cycle safety education classes

    Blog Archive