Forum Topic

TfL's Looming Bankruptcy

Very concerning news currently on the front page. I presume a deal will be struck at the last minute but it is irresponsible of the government to use such brinkmanship with such a key part of the nation's infrastructure. Apart from undermining Sadiq Khan it is hard to see what they hope to achieve. Alternatively maybe they fully intend for TfL to go bust with the intention of redrawing employment contracts under a new body with tube drivers in particular having to accept less generous terms. Seems like a hammer to crack a nut if so.

Francis Rowe ● 2367d86 Comments

Never mind, I'm sure all these new cycle lanes will bail them out.

Claire Moran ● 2367d

All the governments fault and it will be down to the government to bail them out, and anything that goes wrong will also be the government's fault and if they don't its the government's fault, and any future ideas will be the government's idea and anything that falls within days will all be down to the government. It is the government's fault. In fact, according to someone, it is always someone else's fault and never us or to be precise, me.The answer, take it away and make the positions redundant because if you are in charge, the boss, you carry most of the responsibility for past operations and investment.

Julian Pavey ● 2367d

Some good information on the finances:https://www.londonreconnections.com/2020/tfl-the-impossible-finances-of-fighting-a-pandemic/

Michael Robinson ● 2367d

Of course you expect the Mayor to ask for the maximum he thinks he might get.Similarly you should expect the Chancellor to resist giving any more than the Mayor's case merits.And such negotiations are inevitably going to be complicated and drawn out, potemtially going on right up to "a minute before midnight".  Frankly, I'd be disappointed in each if he just accepted the other's first demand/offer, no further questions.The real time to jusge will come if/when TfL should actually go bankrupt (unlikely imo), or in another year ot two, when this present crisis has, let's hope, unwound.And that's when we can start pointing fingers.

Richard Cathcart ● 2367d

What a weird sequence of posts. The notion seems to be that TFL is a private company and it’s their own fault if they fail. Bankruptcy is too good for this failing operation. They are bleating because they want more money. Which they usually get when they bleat. All of which starts and continues from the wrong thinking. But knock yourselves out pretending that TFL is more like Virgin Atlantic than NHS. Years of relentless privatisation has got us all confused on priorities.

Alan Clark ● 2367d

In November 2018 it was widely reported that TfL were in serious financial trouble due to a number of reasons - the Crossrail fiasco being one of them, nonetheless they pushed ahead with other expensive 'field of dreams' schemes. The management at TfL didn't factor in for anything going pear shaped, which it now has, and need to be bailed out by Government. Unless there's a complete and thorough overhaul of management at TfL it would appear that it would be throwing good money after bad.Having said that, London needs a public transport infrastructure but one that's run efficiently and cost effectively but certainly not by the current management team who despite being aware of Crossrail being substantially over budget and behind schedule continued to invest in new schemes with money they didn't have and zero contingency funds in the event of a disaster.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2367d

From their words of wisdom, Loraine and others have obviously got lots of experience of running a city-wide transport system under immense pressure from the national government in one direction, and the travellers from the other. Not to mention extensive knowledge of managing mega infrastructure projects in congested environments, above and below ground.I'm neither defending nor attacking TfL which, I'm sure, is 99.9% staffed by people doing their absolute best in very trying circumstances. What I'm against is non-experts thinking there are simple answers to very complex questions.

Ken Munn ● 2367d

One of the simplest answers is not to freeze fare prices when you're already losing money.

Jeffrey Cope ● 2367d

There you go again.Have you seen TfL's modelling of increasing fare prices/declining ridership/net revenue? No, neither have I.

Ken Munn ● 2367d

'End of' austerity was more than we deserved. The government is now bankrupting the country, and is using a mild virus to do so; once complete, enslavement begins.

Michael Brown ● 2367d

"What I'm against is non-experts thinking there are simple answers to very complex questions." In that case Ken,i will shut down your view on everything you have a view upon as your a non expert. Not about being an expert but having a view. Are you shutting down people with a view ken because you don't have a view or don't want to give a view. Maybe il do a forum search later to see if you have had a view o something that is complex but you have had a view while being a non expert PS  Where is the simple answer to the complexed issue. I maybe see someone who thinks errors have been made that are up for discussion NOT A EXPERT,DONT POST A VIEW...otherwise ken will be after you for having a view when you are not an expert to having that view. That means ken is going to be a lot quiter on this forum ladies and gentleman

Julian Pavey ● 2367d

Ken dear..  Of all “forum experts” to pick on, why Loraine?  Because she's a woman?  There are far far better examples staring you slap in the face...

Stuart Kerr ● 2367d

Julian Pavey ● 2366d

I like your post Julian.  However, shouldn't a line be drawn between an ill-formed  view from a local pundit with too much time on his hands - and genuine expert opinion?  Don't get much of that on this forum.  No caveats.  Hardly any modest health warnings that the author probably doesn't know what the ef he's talking about.Instead, what we tend to get is piles of  fake gravitas as posters release their half-baked views (press releases) to us innocents, as if they were coming from a world authority on the subject..makes for a funny read though...

Stuart Kerr ● 2366d

Agreed.  Lorraine's post simply pointed out a few obvious facts and didn't venture into the 'expert' opinion arena.  Lorraine I think is one of the most sensible and fair minded posters on here and, importantly, one who does not  enter into personal abuse.  Many other posters would do well to follow her example even if you don't agree with some of her specific points.

J. F. Bingham ● 2366d

Are you an expert

Julian Pavey ● 2366d

"What I'm against is non-experts thinking there are simple answers to very complex questions."But you give your views readily on most matters, are you an expert on everything you post about ?Perhaps rearrange these words to a well known saying "own, petard, by, ones, hoisted"I don't have to be an expert to know that Crossrail was grossly underestimated in terms of cost and time by TfL and they need even more money to complete it, where do you think that's going to come from ? Yet another increase from businesses on their Business Rates ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 2366d

Julian, Stuart and JF Bingham.I'm not an expert but do have an opinion regarding TfL, specifically regarding Crossrail, as I was involved in the early talks as a Surveyor representing a group of Park Royal businesses about the additional Levy on their UBR imposed on them by TfL due to the Crossrail project.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2366d

"redrawing employment contracts under a new body with tube drivers in particular having to accept less generous terms."And about time too!!

Steve Taylor ● 2366d

Go ahead. Shoot the messenger.

Ken Munn ● 2366d

Ah yes... So, "the vast majority of the network’s income – some 80 per cent – is from ticket fares."  Yet these morons have been wasting millions on cycle lanes to encourage people to NOT use public transport. Duh!

Steve Taylor ● 2366d

Quite so Steve ! Talk about shooting themselves in their feet, but they're the 'experts' aren't they ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 2366d

Whats with all the bikes turning up opposite the tube station this morning.Are the police doing security markings today

Julian Pavey ● 2366d

Ken, You really believe anyone is going to buy into your "shooting the messenger" conspiracy theory ? 🤣🤣🤣

Loraine Pemberton ● 2366d

I can't claim to be an expert on this but I don't think anyone should express any sort of opinion on this matter without first reading the excellent analysis on the link posted earlier by Michael Robinson.Like any large organisation TfL may have had some bloat and a measure of institutional arrogance but no matter how efficiently run it was it could only have delayed rather than prevented this current predicament.It did hold an adequate reserve and its financial management was very good although its debt levels were high. Obviously Crossrail was a major failure and ultimately Sadiq Khan must bear responsibility for that but it isn't the reason for the current predicament.Under most governments you would assume that a rescue programme is just about to be announced but the culture of this administration appears to be to distrust the advice they are given by civil servants. It can't be total discounted that they don't fully understand why putting TfL in the position of having to issue a Section 114 notice would be a really bad idea. The political reality is that London didn't vote for them and, as with Hammersmith Bridge, that means that requests for financial support could fall on deaf ears.

Paul Corcoran ● 2366d

According to the front page item, today is the day TfL could go bust. How's it going?

Jeffrey Cope ● 2366d

That is according to Jessie Mathewson a Local democracy reporter. https://www.enfieldindependent.co.uk/news/18444125.coronavirus-tfl-now-two-days-away-going-bust/https://www.thisislocallondon.co.uk/news/18444125.coronavirus-tfl-now-two-days-away-going-bust/https://www.guardian-series.co.uk/news/18444125.coronavirus-tfl-now-two-days-away-going-bust/

Julian Pavey ● 2366d

It's Heidi Alexander the Deputy Mayor for Transport who said it. As she is so specific on the timing it is likely there is a significant capital or interest repayment due on debt today which they didn't have the funds to cover. The government could give them a short term credit facility just to tide them over or there might be other pots of government money that could stave off TfL going bust but it would be a temporary reprieve without a proper funding package.

Paul Corcoran ● 2365d

The TfL board papers (which are referenced by the London Reconnections article) spell out the situation.http://content.tfl.gov.uk/fincom-20200512-agenda-and-papers-public.pdfKey points are, the majority of bus and train services continue to run, this is still costing £600M a month, they have a cash reserve of £1.2B which they are not meant to dip into.If funding isn't provided then one option is to issue a section 114 notice which means they would re-state the budget to only provide services they are statutorily obliged to provide.This is the Woolwich ferry, some buses for schoolchildren, taxi licensing and some road maintenance.  In other words, the underground, overground, TfL rail and the vast majority of bus services would be shut down as there isn't a statutory requirement to provide these."A meeting of the Board is being considered for week commencing 18 May 2020, to review progress in these discussions and the matters described in this paper."

Michael Robinson ● 2365d

"Tfl confirms that Crossrail will NOT open in 2020 and will cost a further £400 to £650million - with total cost now more than 18billion. This is outrageous. The spiralling costs will cause significant difficulties for TfL's finances and delay other important projects.8 Nov 2019"Just imagine if TfL had cost efficiently estimated the Crossrail project perhaps they wouldn't be in such dire straits even with Coronavirus- just posing a question as a non expert.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2365d

This makes interesting reading:-http://www.globalconstructionreview.com/news/bad-decisions-and-poor-planning-why-crossrail-went/

Loraine Pemberton ● 2365d

That interesting reading does not place the blame for problems in the Crossrail project on TfL. So perhaps this is a red herring.Also I note that London tube drivers do not earn much more than national train drivers (£55k basic as opposed to about £50k basic). So the opportunity some are taking to bash tube drivers seems wrongly targeted.Obviously I'm no expert but I understood that TfL was suffering from two things before this pandemic - the year on year cuts to government funding combined with a year on year reduction in passenger numbers (albeit slight) with an onus on TfL to increase walking/cycling journeys. The current reduction in all travel would certainly impact their finances.

Alan Clark ● 2365d

"Crossrail Limited, established in 2001, is the company that has been set up to build the new railway that will become known as the Elizabeth line when it opens through central London. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of Transport for London (TfL) and is jointly sponsored by TfL and the Department for Transport (DfT)."As the article says Crossrail Limited is a wholly owned subsidiary of TfL, therefore the buck stops with them.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2365d

"Just imagine if TfL had cost efficiently estimated the Crossrail project perhaps they wouldn't be in such dire straits even with Coronavirus- just posing a question as a non expert."It wouldn't have made much difference.  According to London Reconnections article, TfL borrowed an additional £750M this year to cover Crossrail budget overrun. That's about 5 weeks costs to run the tube and bus network and nowhere near the money required to keep the network running.When you hear figures for budget overruns, that doesn't mean the money is owed now, it is a predicted increased spend at sometime in the future.

Michael Robinson ● 2365d

You left out the "im no expert" Michael Its obligatory under the new W4 forum rules

Julian Pavey ● 2365d

I provided the link to the LR article which IS written by experts!

Michael Robinson ● 2365d

🤣🤣🤣👏👏👏

Loraine Pemberton ● 2365d

Ah,everyone is an expert but not allways correct.PS. Im no expert either just for the record

Julian Pavey ● 2365d

I am an expert.On everything.You're all wrong.So there.

Richard Cathcart ● 2365d

While it is no surprise that TFL is in difficulty, this parochial and part-political thread appears to ignore a number of points:-1) Abolishing the over-60 free pass and limiting free travel to who have reached the current retirement age would generate income in the future.2) Limiting free travel to buses off-peak and half fare on the tube/tram would generate income.3) Abolishing free travel for under-18's and introducing half fare travel for under-16's would generate income.The above measures would bring London travel concessions in line with the rest of the England and Wales, possibly with the exception of certain concessions in Greater Manchester. It would surprise me if Treasury negotiators were not instructed to bring these points to any negotiating table over a TFL rescue plan.

John Connelly ● 2365d

The government bailout comes with conditions - the mayor is expected to restore a 100% Tube service as soon as possible.He is also expected to carry Stay Alert advertising on the transport network, report staff absenteeism rates to civil servants and allow government officials to attend TfL board meetings.There will also be a longer-term review of TfL finances.Sadiq Khan is understood to have offered to raise fares by one percent above inflation in future - a pledge he had made for the Tube during the campaign for this year's mayoral election which has now been deferred by a year.

Mark Perry ● 2365d

"Section 114  means that no new expenditure is permitted, with the exception of safeguarding vulnerable people and statutory services. ..."I guess that means that Cycle Highways like CS9  won't go ahead!

Steve Taylor ● 2365d

According to the front page, HMG's bailout comes to £1.6m.Is Diane Abbott editing this forum now?Guess she needs something to do now that Corbyn's defenestration has left her completely irrelevant...

Richard Cathcart ● 2365d

John Connolly is both an expert and has a broader world view than the rest of us apparently.I don't think he is wrong about Freedom Passes. For all sorts of reasons it makes sense including health, financial and reducing overcrowding.Either he hasn't thought through his notion of increasing fares for children or he is a free marketeer of the most hard-hearted variety. Even at half price London travel costs are expensive compared to most of the rest of the country and disposable incomes here are often lower because of high housing costs. A family on a below average income with a number of children who needed to take public transport to school would be severely disadvantaged by such fare increases.On CS9 it may largely depend on how much it would take TfL to renege on any contracts it had signed with the firms who are constructing the route. It might just work out to be cheaper to go ahead. On the other hand if more people are driving because they are being encouraged not to use public transport, digging up the roads for a year is not likely to be seen as sensible.

Francis Rowe ● 2365d

There is no Section 114 because there is a bailout from the government. I am not an expert but you don’t need to be to understand this point. I wonder if Mr Gilligan will be one of the government officials that attends TfL’s Board meetings ....I trust you have all seen the footage of the full lane width one way cycle path that cropped up overnight on Park Lane? It’s the hope that gets you in the end.

Paul Campbell ● 2365d

Oh and they are not going to dig up the road because they have already announced that they are installing Cycleway 9 as a temporary path during the Pandemic. Great news because it means we will have a fully segregated path on Chiswick High Road very soon.

Paul Campbell ● 2365d

I think everyone has caught up with the fact that the Section 114 notice is not going to be posted but you need to understand that TfL has a chronically negative cash flow and the funding announced today buys them a few months only.I hadn't seen the announcement from TfL that they would be installing CW9 as a temporary path and struggle to see how it could be both temporary and 'fully segregated' - do you have any more details?

Francis Rowe ● 2365d

There may have been a subsequent announcement that I missed but I don't think there are any plans for a temporary full-segregated CW9.TfL made an announcement earlier this month about accelerating delivery of parts of CW9 but this looks like spin. What they seem to be referring to is the belated completion of the access restrictions at Wellesley Road.It is hard to see how any temporary cycle lanes could be introduced along the route. Even if it was decided the sections that go a long pavements could be put in despite social distancing concerns it would be lunacy to do so. Without the signage and other visual signals to drivers the sections that cross emerging traffic from side roads would be incredibly dangerous for cyclists.For much of the rest of the route there are either bus lanes or insufficient road space to the best of my recollection. There may be short sections that could be temporarily coned off but this would have to be done under powers relating to the coronavirus outbreak which will lapse once traffic starts to pick up as the lockdown continues to ease so it would really be just a gesture.

Paul Corcoran ● 2365d

“There may be short sections that could be temporarily coned off but this would have to be done under powers relating to the coronavirus outbreak”Two mistakes in one sentence here. That’s some going even for you, Paul.1. Traffic orders aren’t needed to cone off or even install kerbing on a roadway to create a cycleway.  A highway authority can just do it, as TfL did yesterday on Park Lane. Bicycles are traffic so sectioning off roadway for a certain type of traffic is immaterial as far as the regulations are concerned.The people who paid lawyers to challenge the works to build the cycleway at Kew Bridge last year wasted their money because neither they or their lawyers knew this...2. There aren’t “powers relating to the coronavirus outbreak”. There are only existing powers (specifically experimental and emergency traffic orders) as well as the standard process. These are used if a road is actually closed off. For example, it looks like the closure of the road under the railway bridge in Dukes Meadows is being done under an experimental traffic order. This gives the highways authority up to 18 months to decide if it will be made permanent or not.

Michael Robinson ● 2365d

Michael, is there any reason your default attitude in making a response is obnoxious?As far as I am aware a council can cone off any road they want whenever they want if the believe there is a danger to public safety. This presumably is what was done to widen the pavement in TGT. I may have been mistaken in suggesting there was a specific coronavirus emergency power but it is something the council were able to do because of the specific circumstances of the outbreak.I would be surprised if a significant section of Chiswick High Road could be cordoned off without issuing a temporary traffic management order but I really don't know for sure. However, as you often do, you are quibbling on a technicality and ignoring the bigger issue.If Hounslow had any plan to do this and did not need to issue a TMO to do so then why didn't they act weeks ago? The answer is probably that the emerging strategy to deal with the huge challenges that this pandemic presents to transport in London would not allow it. A significant increase in road traffic is seen as inevitable and the response is to try and make sure that as much of that traffic remains on main thoroughfares and doesn't overwhelm residential streets hence that most measures so far have been to restrict access to local streets but not to impede flow in any way on main roads.

Paul Corcoran ● 2365d

So according to the experts and the additional statement released to the stock exchange, Mr. Khan and TFL are no longer running TFL, the whole package. The failings are noted but not by himself yesterday on JOB. And most likely not today or tomorrow. It is said that the met police and the commissioner are not in good relations with the mayor and city hall either. I wonder how this will now put his position as next mayor which he was a hot fav to win again. Its like he has gone from top to bottom overnight and becoming rather irrelevant in the job,especially if his position as Mayor  for setting the strategic direction of policing in London starts to stutter further. Thed relation between the two heads is pretty sour. Saying that,its going to be hard for anyone coming in.

Julian Pavey ● 2365d

Paul, if you didn't consistently post incorrect information then I wouldn't say anything.  Everyone makes mistakes but you seem to do it again and again and again when it comes to transport.Maybe you could do a bit of research and reading before posting rather than starting with your biases and then work backwards inventing information to support them?"I may have been mistaken in suggesting there was a specific coronavirus emergency power "You are mistaken and you didn't "suggest" it, you stated it as fact.Your last paragraph is yet another example of you constructing an entire position based upon nothing more than a flimsy "if", no evidence "probably" and unspecified "most"...

Michael Robinson ● 2365d

Some of the points mentioned by John Connolly appear to be happening.https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/sadiq-khan-congestion-charge-tfl-bailout-government-a4441361.html

Michael Robinson ● 2365d

That really was prescient from John. There is somebody worth listening to in future. Every day it becomes clearer that the government and the mayor are going to close roads to cars, take space away from them and give it to cyclists and walkers and make it more expensive to drive in the city. Waterloo and London Bridges closed to cars! Who would have thought that could even be mentioned a few momths ago.Hiking the congestion charge and extending it to weekends is also great news. I hope that they extend the limits of the zone as well so that it captures Westfield. That will help with traffic reduction and better air quality in Chiswick.When will the penny drop for some people that the tide has turned and the objective is now quite clearly to reduce the volume of cars in London not maximise road space to increase their flow as used to be the case?

Paul Campbell ● 2364d

£1.6b.

Colin Jordan ● 2364d

Michael, you are going to have to come round to the fact eventually that anyone who doesn't unequivocally agree with everything you say isn't your mortal enemy.Cutting through your nitpicking on semantics which only serves to obfuscate the issue, I am still none the wiser as to what exactly is being planned on the High Road. Thus far Paul's contention that it is hard to see exactly where temporary cycle lanes could go seems difficult to argue against. Rather than churlish responses to people trying to debate the issue perhaps you could tell us where you think they could and should go? As a leading light in the Hounslow Cycling Campaign you must be well placed to know what plans are currently being considered, and indeed, I presume you are personally putting forward these ideas to the council.

Francis Rowe ● 2364d

'When will the penny drop for some people that the tide has turned and the objective is now quite clearly to reduce the volume of cars in London not maximise road space to increase their flow as used to be the case?' Whatever the policy might be the number of cars on London's road is likely to increase significantly as lockdown eases. The government advice is now to avoid public transport if possible which most people are going to adhere to because they prefer not to increase the risk of death for their families and their loved ones. This includes taking a car if necessary so quite explicitly government policy at the moment is not primarily to reduce the number of cars. Obviously every journey that could be done by foot or by bike should be, but the reality you seem unwilling to face is that most journeys to work currently done on public transport will switch to cars. It would be madness for the government to restrict roadspace to traffic in these circumstances — the result would be a transfer of pressure back onto the public transport system and an increased risk of a second wave of infections. They are not mad. You seem to be getting confused by the restriction of access to local roads that some councils have implemented. This is an attempt to ensure that the inevitable surge in traffic doesn't spill over into residential streets — the last thing that the government or the Mayor will be doing now is restricting the flow of traffic on main road in anyway. 

Kevin Howard ● 2364d

Mayor what mayor haven’t heard a thing from him, given London was the epicentre you would have thought he would have relished the chance to prove his worth ha! When the going gets tough and all that watch the public services run to the hills on full pay 😂😂😂😂😂

Jayne Thorburn ● 2364d

Have you seen the lane that they have taken out on Park Lane in the past two days? Overnight they just installed a line of wands the length of Park Lane and halved the road space available for cars. I am not imagining that the plan is to remove road space from major roads. It is actually happening and the government is now forcing more radical measures as a result of yesterday's deal.The ES is reporting planned closure of many major roads in the city and Waterloo and London bridges. Their rationale is one that I understand. It is two-pronged: 1) they do not want the city gridlocked by cars in the short-term and 2) policy is now being determined by people who want to use this opporutnity to completely reimagine how people move around the city for publick health and evironmental improvements.This is all out there in the public domain. It's not my story. But I do welcome it.

Paul Campbell ● 2364d

Francis,  if Paul would simply say "in my opinion" then I would have no issue with this.However he doesn't, he states things as fact which simply aren't true.  Two factual inaccuracies in a short sentence was a classic.I know that you and Paul like to dismiss this as nitpicking but if he can't get facts right, why should his grand theories concocted using misinformation as foundations be treated seriously?I'm afraid to disappoint, but when it comes to council and TfL plans for cycleway 9 or other changes in the area, I only know what has been said publicly.So, - Stile Hall Gardens and Wellesley Rd will be closed (this was planned anyway...)- TfL has said "The Cycleway 9 scheme between Kensington Olympia and Brentford, and the Cycleway 4 scheme between Tower Hill and Greenwich will be accelerated with temporary measures so the Londoners can benefit from them more quickly"As to what those temporary measures may be, I am none the wiser either.However I do know that traffic orders aren't needed just to section off a section of roadway for cycles and there aren't any special traffic powers created for corona virus.- Hounslow has said they will be bringing forward plans for the "South Chiswick liveable neighbourhood" later in May.  Again, I don't know what these will  but based upon the feedback received from residents last year, I will guess that they will contain plans that will address traffic on Staveley Rd, Harvard Hill Rd and some other streets in the area identified as rat-rans.See, I've said what I do know, said what I don't know and said what I'm guessing at.  Not hard, is it?As to putting forward ideas to the council, yes, I've put forward ideas using this website the council has launched for people to put forward ideas on.https://hounslowstreetspace.commonplace.is

Michael Robinson ● 2364d

Yep,well JOB seems not to want to talk about the issue today either.Had plenty to say over months when it came to Boris and the garden bridge. But then JOB has made fatal errors in the past when picking,choosing and believeing before going quite and it is said blocking those who mention.

Julian Pavey ● 2364d

What nonsense. You don't like the guy and therefore if he told you the sky was blue you'd ask for a peer reviewed analysis to prove it. He may not always be right but neither are you and he has the virtue of being undogmatic and willing to change his mind.Getting back to the original point, is it fair to say at this stage the 'acceleration' of CS9 is just the Wellesley Road access restriction and there is nothing else being considered? Can we then assume that whether or not the project will be resumed depends on the cost of cancellation being so high it would not save any money to scrap it? In my opinion, it would seem unlikely that any break clauses would be so punitive that they would make the finances of continuing stack up.

Francis Rowe ● 2364d

Yes I've seen it but we are still in lockdown so the temporary nature of the measures suggest it is designed to encourage more people to take advantage of the relatively empty roads at the moment and cycle. This may persuade more people to make the switch when lockdown ends but I very much doubt they'll make the change permanent. Once traffic jams return to the area the risk would be that some people who could drive will start using public transport again which is not what we want.

Kevin Howard ● 2364d

Francis, I've never met Paul and for all I know he may be a great person to have a beer with.  All I'm doing is pointing out when he is stating things as fact which aren't true or are pure speculation on his part.  When it comes to transport, this happens quite a lot, I'm afraid."if he told you the sky was blue you'd ask for a peer reviewed analysis to prove it"That's just being silly."is it fair to say at this stage the 'acceleration' of CS9 is just the Wellesley Road access restriction and there is nothing else being considered?"You can speculate if you want to, I don't see the point.  The TfL announcement last week listed these items separately."Can we then assume that whether or not the project will be resumed depends on the cost of cancellation being so high it would not save any money to scrap it? In my opinion, it would seem unlikely that any break clauses would be so punitive that they would make the finances of continuing stack up."Again, you can speculate upon contractual arrangements to your heart's content. You don't know, I don't know so I don't see the point either.

Michael Robinson ● 2364d

In English please?

Steve Taylor ● 2364d

If you had seen it then why did you suggest that I am getting confused by measures councils are taking on minor roads then? Hopefully by now you have also seen the Mayor's statement today and the announcement of plans to transform parts of central London into "one of the largest car-free zones in any capital city in the world". Streets between London Bridge and Shoreditch, Euston and Waterloo and Old Street and Holborn limited to pedestrians, cyclists and buses. Congestion zone charging to discourage car use to enable plans to be implemented. They are creating big walking and cycling corridors to move people around without cars. The measures are to give people space to safely walk and cycle not for them to take advantage of the relatively empty roads. They can stay in place for 18 months and then be reviewed. You can doubt as much as you like but the numerous statements of long-term intent to transform the city from both parties suggest that your misgivings may be misdirected. Wouldn't it seem a little profligate to make all of these major changes over the coming weeks as lockdown restrictions are loosening if they intended to just remove them all once "lockdown ends" whatever that means? Francis started this thread off by saying that it was hard to see what the government hoped to achieve with this brinkmanship. It is not so hard to see now. Somehow we have found ourselves with a government that is radically progressive on sustainable transport. I didn't see that one coming.

Paul Campbell ● 2364d

TfL has updated the text on Cycleway 9 in its Streetspace for London guidance: "Work on Cyclway 9 between Kensington Olympia and Brentford, and Cycleway 4 between Tower Hill and Greenwich will speed up with temporary measures".The Streetspace for London plan for cycle routes has Cycleway 9 in its full length. The closure of Wellesley and Stile Hall are not temporary. Let's just say that the weight of evidence right now is towards a temporary Cycleway 9 being installed along the full route.Excitingly the cycle route plan has some other major updates including the length of Chelsea Embankment all the way to Westminster. It is all going to kick off in RBKC.

Paul Campbell ● 2364d

...intriguingly the Streetspace for London map (dated today, 15 May) also shows the A40.There were originally plans for a cycleway along the A40 but these were shelved.Personally I'm sceptical about the A40 as a route that many will use but interesting that it has re-appeared on the map. If capacity restrictions on the A40 meant more traffic along Holland Park Avenue, that seems like pure spite towards K&C... ;)

Michael Robinson ● 2364d

The cycleway along the A40 has been under construction for quite some time now.

Dan Evans ● 2364d

One tiny bit - this new route goes all the way from Acton to Kings Cross via Paddington!

Paul Campbell ● 2364d

Dan, that may be your opinion but what proof do you have? :)Francis, cheers pal but in my opinion I am never wrong therefore necessarily would never need to change my mind. Once again :)For anyone else, maybe I am being too cynical about all this but I find it hard to be optimistic right now. A lot of the progress made in transport in the capital looks set to be unwound and planners are going to be faced with a long series of difficult choices and hard decisions. The tone of press releases coming out of TfL at the moment point to an organisation in denial. For now policy needs to be driven not primarily by sustainability but what puts the fewest lives at risk.

Paul Corcoran ● 2364d

"The cycleway along the A40 has been under construction for quite some time now."Yes, that's the bit on Western Avenue.  However previous plans were to take a lane out of the Westway and have a route all the way to Paddington.This was because K&C blocked routes along Holland Park Avenue and High St Kensington.As I mentioned, I remain to be convinced how many people would use a Westway route as there are limited places to get on and off.

Michael Robinson ● 2364d

"Somehow we have found ourselves with a government that is radically progressive on sustainable transport. I didn't see that one coming"I'd imagine the next thing coming down the pike is putting in place a revenue stream derived from all this cycling. Bankruptcy and bail outs always sharpen the pencil and missed opportunities are always captured with laser-like focus. How else to keep TfL afloat and keep staff paid and the system operational?People like Paul will be forced to pay just as mere mortals who build houses and deliver food (amongst others) will be forced to pay the increase in congestion charges and fares. Or Paul would you rather just have the working class do all the heavy lifting for you as has been your position all along? Before you get your claws out, consider how the increase in travel costs will impact the cost of goods and services leading to inflation. Then consider if there was another revenue stream to help minimize or eradicate those increases, would that have the same impact on inflation? Business 101. Could have been avoided had Sadiq operated TfL efficiently.

David Lesniak ● 2364d

The following is all entirely pointless as the penny will never drop with some people but anyway.Can you think of any ways in which businesses that deliver food might be able to avoid the congestion charge? You see what happens when costs are deliberately structured by intervention of regulatory authority to disincentivise unwanted behaviour is that good problem-solvers find opportunities to take competitive advantage while people railing against change and progress simply get left behind. It's our Anglo Saxon blend of good ol' American capitalism with a big dose of European socialism. The government has decided that driving in London is an unwanted behaviour, it is intervening to reduce it and hallelujah say the opportunists and many more besides.I can absolutely guarantee you that there will not be a charging mechanism for people riding bikes. That is the wanted behaviour that the government is now incentivising. People determined to continue with unwanted behaviours will help to subsidise it.Where is the money coming from to recover and build a more sustainable economy and future? The taxpayer. What should happen post-crisis? Taxes should go up. We should tax high earners more to pay for this and to create a more egalitarian society. So I have been paying for it and I will continue to pay for it and, as I have said before, I am happy to pay more for it. So you should be very happy with that. We should also target tax havens, ultra-rich non-doms and the companies that avoid tax.So we will probably have a Conservative government leading a revolution in sustainable transport, expanding the state to make it more resilient to future crises, increasing taxes to pay for all of that and possibly even betraying the people who have funded and backed them over the past 30+ years. Never would I have expected to see that but if they cancel Brexit too then they've got my vote.All imho of course before anybody accuses me of not being an expert.

Paul Campbell ● 2364d

'Before you get your claws out, consider how the increase in travel costs will impact the cost of goods and services leading to inflation.'Human-powered delivery vehicles, anyone? They're a serious option elsewhere in the world, most especially in congested city centres.Come to think of it - Deliveroo.

Ken Munn ● 2364d

Well done Paul,The IMHO is, of course, the recommended forum get-out-of-jail-free card, guaranteed to stop anyone accusing of having any qualification or expertise whatsoever. I also admired your starter for ten....“The following is all entirely pointless..”an excellent line...  Others should follow your example...

Stuart Kerr ● 2364d

Thank you Stuart. I think ...

Paul Campbell ● 2364d

Hi KenMany thanks for providing a really good laugh 🤣Even you and your chums would agree that Tesco, Sainsbury's, Morrisons, Aldi, Lidl, Waitrose and M&S to name but a few, use 40ft Artics to deliver from their Distribution Centres to their Retail Outlets. Since 2009 vehicles are limited to a maximum of 6 axles, and limited to an overall maximum weight of 44 tonnes (43.3 long tons; 48.5 short tons) and 16.5 m (54 ft 2 in) in length for articulated lorries, and 44 tonnes (43.3 long tons; 48.5 short tons) and 18.75 m (61 ft 6 in) for drawbar lorries.44 tonnes equals over 97,000 lbs. Do you think Deliveroo, or any other company, could deliver those vast multiples of stock on a daily basis on bikes / scooters on time to meet demand, from their Distribution Centres to their  Retail Outlets even in the most clement of weather ? Btw I know where both the DC's and RO's are located for all the major supermarkets are, and did lettings for many of the big names.Then factor in HGV Drivers losing their jobs as they're unlikely to switch from being skilled HGV drivers to pedal pushers  - how much do you think that would cost the UK economy ? Cycling etc is not always the answer, don't throw Baby out with the Bathwater- only an idiot would do that !

Loraine Pemberton ● 2364d

... also the H&F section of the Wood Lane - Notting Hill route consulted upon last year.https://www.lbhf.gov.uk/articles/news/2020/05/adapting-public-spaces-make-travel-safer-and-support-hf-businessesNew cycle lanesSegregated cycle lanes will be created by using temporary bollards, then rubber kerbing or planters where possible, in:King Street, HammersmithHammersmith Road, HammersmithUxbridge Road, Shepherds BushShepherds Bush GreenWood Lane, White City.The lanes will begin to be installed from Monday (18 May).From next week, the council will also be introducing partial road closures to allow more pedestrians and cyclists to travel safely on some routes that join with the Thames Path. This includes Black Lion Lane and Rivercourt Road in Hammersmith, and Stevenage Road in Fulham. These closures will be marked with barriers and will be clearly signposted.Plans to create wider footways in Lillie Road and Fulham Palace Road in Fulham are also being investigated.

Michael Robinson ● 2364d

Maybe this will help Paul to embrace his natural optimism and stop being so cynical. He can finally stop trying to argue against his own natural inclination towards cycling infrastructure taking priority over cars in London.

Paul Campbell ● 2364d

Scale. Tesco might need big trucks, but a cafe doesn't.

Ken Munn ● 2364d

You're a clever man Ken, but perhaps you should've made that point in your post of 15.18 yesterday instead of making it sound as if Deliveroo et al could satisfy all Logistical demands 😉

Loraine Pemberton ● 2364d

"Come to think of it - Deliveroo"How quaint, Ken. You and Paul are only thinking of local delivery.I'm talking about food suppliers, you know, the ones with the big lorries that make multiple stops along a route before heading back to the depot. The ones that carry shiny new bikes to bike shops. Uber drivers. Those in construction. Teachers also come to mind. Among many others.Very quick math for your average decorator doing a job in town would mean an additional £17.50/week getting you roughly to £800 per annum at a minimum. Yet you and wealthy Paul can't see your way to paying anything. Not one red cent.That van is their office on wheels and, no, it cannot be converted to people-power. Unless you want to peddle it around and then do a full day of manual labour but why not just save that for the little people whom you want to foot your bill because you're just to entitled not to.

David Lesniak ● 2363d

"Scale. Tesco might need big trucks, but a cafe doesn't"Uh...who said anything about needing a big truck? But sadly, Ken, you have know idea what a cafe needs because you can't be bothered to find out, only to assume.Tell me, would you rather see multiple deliveries from a variety of vehicles making stops at a single venue, or would it make more sense for one vehicle to collect goods and bring them home, so to speak, to get the job done? Fun fact: I do the latter.Would you like to assume the weight of what's needed in terms of food and equipment to get our Kings Cross market up and running? Maybe you think that proposed flower market will arrive by bike. It won't. You can't possibly be so dim to think it's only food being delivered. It's all the ingredients and kit required to get the job done which come from multiple sources. Or in our latest example, getting all those 25kg bags of flour in so people can keep baking at home. Believe me I wish the flour came from the same place as the milk, butter, eggs and sugar, but it does not. Disposables, as they are called, come from yet another place. Proteins whatever their from will come from any number of places. Same with fruit and veg and any beverages. Some suppliers have minimums which can't always be met in a timely manner forcing a pivot in a different direction at a moment's notice. But silly me, those facts will only be seen as anecdote to you who trades only on assumption. In this case the assumption being I'm doing nothing more than delivering a cupcake.Just ask your buddies at Potli how many suppliers they have and what they do to get their goods in. I can't begin to imagine how many bags of rice they go through in a week. Maybe you can assume that. Then ask them if they cycle it in or do they weight for the HGV to offload it. Perhaps they are immune to your assumption and rhetoric because you like them.

David Lesniak ● 2363d

Exactly David and you speak from years of experience!

Loraine Pemberton ● 2363d

Why are you wailing at me and Ken? If the government’s policies are so distasteful and poorly considered to you then why don’t you moan at the politicians making the decisions? Isn’t your friend Joanna Biddolph a channel straight through to the big shots in the Cabinet? It is going be very interesting to see how the traditional Conservative voter reacts to all of this at the next local elections.

Paul Campbell ● 2363d