Forum Topic

Hammersmith Bridge reopening or government playing games?

Some of the press coverage of the government's funding announcement for Hammersmith Bridge seems to assume it means that it will be reopening to pedestrians and cyclists pretty soon. However, offering to pay for a third of the costs doesn't seem to make a quick solution any more likely and looks like a PR gambit by the government.H&F Council's financial resources are limited so they can't make much of a contribution to the cost the total of which will be above £150million. That leaves the best part of £100million for TfL to find at a time when the government are forcing them to make huge budget cuts in order to qualify for the extra funding. As Hammersmith Bridge doesn't even belong to them - this seems ridiculous.The rhetoric from the government is that taxpayers in the rest of the country shouldn't have to pay for London's transport and infrastructure although this doesn't seem to work in reverse. The concern must be that they see Hammersmith Bridge not being built as a symbolic way to shore up their support in the north and Midlands.

Mark Evans ● 1972d112 Comments

Am I right in thinking the proposed ferry service is largely a private enterprise?If so they must be concerned that their investment is at risk if there is a prospect of the bridge reopening soon.

Adrian Irving ● 1972d

"H&F Council's financial resources are limited so they can't make much of a contribution to the cost the total of which will be above £150million. That leaves the best part of £100million for TfL to find at a time when the government are forcing them to make huge budget cuts in order to qualify for the extra funding. As Hammersmith Bridge doesn't even belong to them - this seems ridiculous."Would you be so kind as to tell me exactly how limited H&Fresources are?Additionally your final argument about non-ownership could be extended - the government also does not own the bridge why then should the government pay?

Jeffrey Cope ● 1972d

'Would you be so kind as to tell me exactly how limited H&Fresources are?'I don't have the numbers off the top of my head but a third of the cost of the bridge would be over half of their annual budget."the government also does not own the bridge why then should the government pay?"Because ultimately the government paying for it is the only way the repair will be completed.

Mark Evans ● 1972d

Correct me if I'm wrong, but does the government own the M4?Because it would seem to me when a major artery fails, it wouldn't be down to the local jurisdiction alone to resolve the fix.

David Lesniak ● 1972d

"Off the top of my head but a third of the cost of the bridge would be over half of their annual budget."Mark - you do understand the difference between revenue and capital spending? Local Authorities are able to borrow funds at extremely preferential rates particularly for large infrastructure projects. Hammersmith and Fulham have always know about their responsibilities and along with their partners in crime TfL have consistently kicked the can down the road by appointing new consultants and commissioning fresh surveys.

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 1972d

Bottom line the tax payer funds everything and the way Hounslow/Richmond councils and TFL have handled Hammersmith bridge over the years is shocking. The government doesn’t fund anything tax payers do and I for one would be happy to see the bridge sorted out it has created terrible traffic issues for west London.

Jayne Thorburn ● 1972d

Jayne, what has Hounslow Council got to do with HAMMERSMITH bridge?

John Connelly ● 1972d

In yesterday's ES Steven Cowan leader of LBHF claimed that it "would cost each taxpayer an additional £800 a year."I don't know if he meant taxpayer or households for council tax.  If the latter, a quick google says there are 80k households in LBHF so an extra £800 would be £64M, which is about a third of the bill mentioned.Clearly they wouldn't need to pay it all in a year and as Sam mentions, could borrow against an income stream.I don't know if the government will seriously expect LBHF to pay one third but it does look like they expect them to put some funding in place, such as a toll, workplace parking levy or increased council tax.

Michael Robinson ● 1972d

I think I can guess where this is going to end up.A 'cheap' fix to allow pedestrians and cyclists to cross on the back of a report commissioned to 'prove' that most people what it closed to motor vehicles, the traffic has evoprated, and overall pollution levels are down.

Adrian Irving ● 1972d

The bridge is owned by Hammersmith and Fulham and they are therefore technically responsible for its care and upkeep. However H&F in their 2021/22 budget document argue that TfL and government have traditionally paid for the majority of structural work on London’s bridges and should do so in this case. By the end of 2021 H&F will have spent £8.6m identifying specific problems, devising solutions and maintaining the safety of the bridge.H&F has no earmarked reserves for the bridge project.H&F could borrow funds from the Public Works Loan Board at 0.8% to finance its share of the capital cost. 

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 1972d

What Sam says is correct, although I thought PWLB rates were lower than that at the moment.This is entirely about politicking. Hammersmith bridge has been in a disgraceful state for years - walking, cycling or driving across it hasn't been pleasant for at least 15 years as the road surface is routinely in a state of disrepair.Proper routine maintenance would have detected some of the issues much earlier, but doesn't appear to have been done.The net result of LBHF's complaining will be a temporary rise in their borrowing cap to allow them to borrow the additional funds required. This will have a virtually non-existent effect on most Council Tax payers, as the annual cost, assuming the 0.8%pa borrowing rate & quoted £64m required, will be £512k per annum, very far from the knowingly dishonest statements made by LBHF's leader.LBHF's position appears to be one of "we haven't maintained the bridge, now it will cost a load to fix & despite owning it and it being our legal requirement to fix, we don't want to pay for it"

Mark Warburton ● 1971d

Toll Bridges were the best way for upkeep and everyone who use it pay towards it.

Janice Evans ● 1971d

Tolls are a great way to fund the upkeep of all bridges across the country, many other countries do it very successfully so why not the UK?Apologies earlier post a typo meant Hammersmith not Hounslow ha!

Jayne Thorburn ● 1971d

If the cost is reasonable , sounds like something they should have thought of years ago! Not a lot of joined up thinking going on

Maggie Dodge ● 1971d

I believe tolls are generally unpopular with motorists and unless all London bridges were tolled then locals and users of this bridge might feel discriminated against.

Alastair Banton ● 1971d

I'm sure they would rather have a .bridge they can use and many outsiders use it, as you say they should all possibly be toll bridges, makes sense.

Janice Evans ● 1971d

Janice, the Bridge should be reopened for pedestrians and cyclists only; and keep it permanently closed to all motor vehicles.

Chris Vessey ● 1971d

Chris, if there is a toll imposed would you agree with me that it would be only fair for cyclists and pedestrians to pay for exclusive use?If so how much would you think fair?

Adrian Irving ● 1971d

Free to pedestrians and cyclists and a toll for motor vehicles if they are ever to be allowed.  There are far too many motor vehicles in London and they need to be discouraged rather than encouraged.  Of course just instigating a toll system costs money in itself and there will always be those who will drive further than pay directly for anything (even if it actually costs them more).

Philippa Bond ● 1971d

Good question Adrian.Road wear and damage is approximately the 4th power of vehicle weight so taking a bike and rider at 100kg and a Range Rover and passenger at 2000kg as examples, the car driver should pay 8000 times more than the cyclist.So as an example, the cyclist could get to use the bridge for a year for £1 and the Range Rover driver needs to pay £8000.  Fair enough?

Michael Robinson ● 1971d

Sorry, my fault as I have muddled my question.If only cyclists and pedestrians are allowed to cross(motor vehicles barred) do you think it fair for cyclists and pedestrians to pay a toll to help pay for repair and maintenance?In those circumstances how much would be fair?

Adrian Irving ● 1971d

Bring back the rickshaws.

Philippa Bond ● 1971d

The cyclists and pedestrians aren't the people who broke it so why should they pay?It was opened before Daimler Benz's first car and never designed for the weight and volume of motor traffic that went over it.

Michael Robinson ● 1971d

I see your point Michael.I would be against a toll anyway but I do think simply barring  motor vehicles is not  the short or long term answer to reducing traffic and pollution in West London.

Adrian Irving ● 1971d

Many cyclists were drivers who ruin the bridge, nothing to do with weather and wear.

Janice Evans ● 1971d

Chris, what about all your deliveries.

Janice Evans ● 1971d

There were 22,000 daily vehicle crossings on average over the bridge - along with 16,000 cyclists and pedestrians.The highest UK toll is £5.60 on the M6. Dartford is £2.50 and other UK tolls are 70p to £2.When you charge a toll, you want to maximise revenue but you might want to balance that with the goal of reducing vehicle crossings to improve air quality and prioritising non-vehicle crossings.  You could charge a per crossing fee of:£3 for cars / vans£10 for heavy vehiclesFree for pedestrians and cyclists.I'm assuming that would bring crossings down by 20% (just finger in the air!).  You could also build in discounts for local residents, buses, electric cars etc., but you'd end up with revenue of circa £20m per year.That should be enough to pay the running costs, pay back some of the building costs, maintain the bridge and to set-up a futures fund to build a new one in 100 years (helped by compound interest) so it doesn't fall on our great grandkids to pay for it.And there's nothing to stop future governments charging pedestrians and cyclists for crossing the bridge if their numbers grow so high that they're causing significant congestion and/or wear and tear.

Ed Saper ● 1971d

Adrian, yes to keep the bridge open I would say a fair toll price for crossing is £100 a go. Surprised ? However I wouldn't be using it.

Chris Vessey ● 1971d

Philippa, you're a good woman, got the right idea !

Chris Vessey ● 1971d

Philippa, now that's a brilliant idea !

Chris Vessey ● 1971d

Michael, good thinking Batman, the buses wrecked it over the course of time. Just not suitable for motor traffic.

Chris Vessey ● 1971d

Adrian, I disagree. Close a few bridges and you stop car use. That's what we need !

Chris Vessey ● 1971d

Janice . I've never driven a car across the H Bridge. It's very peaceful on the H'smith side of the bridge so just leave it as a monument.

Chris Vessey ● 1971d

Janice, I don't have any deliveries. Not quite sure what you mean Janice.

Chris Vessey ● 1971d

Chris - would you perhaps accept that you are quite an unusual person? This is not meant as a criticism after all it takes all sorts to make a forum. But what I do find really disturbing is that you expect the rest of us to go along with your dystopian views. In a big twenty first century city divided by a large river your obsession with shutting down bridges except for pedestrians and pedal powered vehicles is luddite in the extreme. Why stop at bridges - what about flyovers such as the Hammersmith and Chiswick flyovers? What about the tunnels under the Thames? Are these to be flooded in Chris-World?As I have said on another thread if a bunch of well meaning Italians had not spanned the river for us we might well still be paddling around in our coracles fishing for salmon, shooting arrows at wild fowl and throwing the heads of our enemies into the dark waters of the Thames. I think I will go and lie down now.

Cllr Sam Hearn ● 1971d

Sam. It's all too much for you is it , then have a lie down You know there is far too much traffic on our roads. The solution is not to build more roads. Stop people using their cars as much is paramount. Cyclists do not get held up in traffic queues and congestion. A huge queue on Twickenham Road today (Isleworth), nothing moving, what is the point being out there going nowhere. I had no problem moving around and across this queue. Car ownership is a massive problem here and other UK cities . I do not have obsessions with closing bridges just ideas to reach a means to an end which is reducing car usage. Makes sense ! We live surrounded by metal boxes, all roads (bar a few) are lined both sides by them, an almighty huge carpark ! A little creative thinking might just begin to sort it all, maybe. You may think I am an unusual person, however it just might take an unusual person to make some changes in the way traffic circulates in this part of London. Whoever that maybe it most certainly will not be you Sir.

Chris Vessey ● 1971d

Or you. Chris, preaching is not the answer.

Janice Evans ● 1971d

"Adrian, yes to keep the bridge open I would say a fair toll price for crossing is £100 a go. Surprised ? However I wouldn't be using it." "Surprised" is not the first word that sprung to mind. ;)

Adrian Irving ● 1970d

Phillipa, you realize this would eventually trigger an increase in your beloved deliveries, yes? You also realize this would have a severe impact on all businesses, but in particular SMEs. I'd call it punitive. If all London crossings had tolls, what happens to black cab drivers and other PCH drivers? They get charged all day long, everyday?

David Lesniak ● 1970d

No doubt Michael got a delivery or two over that bridge. Or his plumber came from that direction to help him pull his finger out. Not to mention he drove over it countless times when it was still possible.Please forward the bill to him.

David Lesniak ● 1970d

"Janice, I don't have any deliveries. Not quite sure what you mean Janice"Holy Bunions!How on earth could Chris never have gotten any deliveries? How is that even possible? No new TV from John Lewis? No groceries? No new rug? No garden supplies? No new furniture? What happened when the dishwasher died?  Or maybe that's his Mrs. in a pinny, as it should be...

David Lesniak ● 1970d

Sam, worth noting that Paris will have all 19 bridges in its centre closed to through traffic next year under its current plans. The earlier closure of the road along the right bank was hardly the dystopian vision its opponents predicted. It's now permanent.

Tom Pike ● 1970d

Road pricing will come in for all roads eventually.  With all the development work going on, there will be more demand for transport, and the roads won't be able to cope.It will be worse when driverless cars come along, as people will start to use cars for journeys where the cost of parking or a taxi would currently put them off.  The drivers wages are the biggest part of the cost of any taxi.  A driverless Uber will be a lot cheaper than one with a driver.  Use will go up.If we carry on as we are, then people will be forced out of their cars either way.  There will either be road pricing (effectively tolls) for all roads, or there will be gridlock.As for black cab drivers, their jobs will disappear when driverless cars arrive on the scene.  That might be 4 or 5 years, or it might be 12 or 15 years, but any cabbie under 50 would be better off getting out now.

Al Webber ● 1970d

Leaving it as a monument probably isn't an option.  It will fall down eventually without money being spent.

Al Webber ● 1970d

H&F Council engineers are convinced that the damage was one by buses and the failure of TfL to properly enforce the 'one bus at a time' restriction on the bridge. TfL are already on the hook for a third of the cost at least.Tolls are probably unworkable because the government would insist on their share which the council is unlikely to agree to.

Paul Corcoran ● 1970d

Hi Janice. My ideas are just that, my ideas. However please note Tom Pikes post, in Paris all bridges have been closed to traffic; so perhaps my ideas are not so far fetched ? Also please I am not "preaching", simply expressing my views in simple English without any "fancy" words. I do not miss my car and can reach wherever I wish quickly and efficiently by cycling in all weather. Take care and Best Wishes.

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

David see here Mr Bunions , no deliveries means no deliveries! Hammersmith Bridge surplus to requirements and we should allow Paris to set the example and close more bridges permanently !

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

Al, total and utter gridlock, we are slowly getting there !

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

Adrian, what about "shocked" then ? I don't like the idea of the bridge reopening to motor traffic; pedestrians and cyclists only please with zero toll for them.

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

Chris, as much as I love my bike, it's not the answer to the problem and to slow down buses and then have the cheek to say get out of your cars isMadness.  we need something to replace the cars and the bikes and untilThat happens nothing will change.  Bridges were for everyone and if thatIs no longer the case it will be another issue to divide the community.

Janice Evans ● 1970d

Chris you said you don't go out as a couple so how does your wife travel.

Janice Evans ● 1970d

Chris, you don't travel far then.

Janice Evans ● 1970d

Chris, it's impossible not to have deliveries of some sort unless you live the life of a monk.

Janice Evans ● 1970d

Chris, I can see that you would like to revive the Middlesex militia and arm them with pikes and muskets to keep those troublesome Surrey residents out of our fair county, although we might have to make an exception when Crystal Palace come to play at Lionel Road.

Richard Greenhough ● 1970d

Chris, you can't ban cars entirely.  I make the vast majority of my local journeys by bike, and have cycled over 30k miles in London over the years.At the same time, there are times I need my car.  I can't carry a guitar, an amp, mic stands, cables etc on my bike.  If we go to Ikea, I can't carry flatpack furniture back on my bike.  If we go to see my family outside of London, the public transport is non-existent, so we need a car for that.60% of journeys under 2.5 miles in London are made by car, which is dreadful, and we need to do something about it, but banning cars completely and closing off all the bridges is not the answer.

Al Webber ● 1970d

Wasn't shocked either.

Adrian Irving ● 1970d

Tom, can you provide a link to this story - I can't find it on Google.

Richard Greenhough ● 1970d

RG > "Tom, can you provide a link to this story - I can't find it on Google.""Paris seeks to ban through traffic in city centre by 2022"https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-57109733Looking at the map on that page, it appears that 19 bridges will be included.

John Whitworth ● 1970d

Bike ownership is 42%, 5 to 10 years olds 83% and over 60 24% buthow can they possibly know that this percentage have access to their own bike if there are no records kept.

Janice Evans ● 1970d

Info from Google.

Janice Evans ● 1970d

"Residents and businesses would still be allowed to drive in the central area, but through traffic would be banned."That suggests that the bridges will not be closed to motor vehicles. Central Paris has a host of bridges across the Seine all close together, and some of the nineteen quoted are counting bridges both on and off the islands in the river. There are many more bridges both upstream and downstream of the proposed traffic-free zone. I suppose the London equivalent might be the eleven bridges from Tower to Battersea, but that still takes in a much larger area than central Paris. It certainly wouldn't apply to a bridge as far upriver as Hammersmith.

Richard Greenhough ● 1970d

Chris, and you never cross a bridge ?

Janice Evans ● 1970d

Al it's not the intention to ban cars, only to reduce use of them in particular as you say the short trips locally. However it could well be in future restrictions on car usage will be legally mandatory. That time approaches.

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

Janice only little rural ones.

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

Janice, if the French can do it in Paris then the English can do it in London. The bridges (19) in Paris will be closed by 2022 only allowing pedestrians and cyclists to cross, thus preventing through motorised traffic through the city.

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

The Paris plan would restrict traffic across the bridges in its centre to residents and services to businesses. The equivalent length in London would be between Tower and Westminster Bridges, which corresponds to our congestion zone. Paris would be effectively placing a restriction on a similar extent rather than allowing through passage for a charge as in London.

Tom Pike ● 1970d

Janice, sorry to say Hammersmith Bridge was not for everybody particularly motorcars and very heavy buses. Also when this area reaches gridlock your car will be of no use and that time is approaching very quickly, so it rather suggests some forward planning is necessary don't you ?

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

The Paris proposal seems to only affect through traffic, meaning that local residents can still drive cars across some of the 19 bridges in a very small area of the city centre. Also, some of those 19 are actually the same river crossing, split into two by the islands. There are far more bridges across the Seine in central Paris than there are over the Thames in central London, and closing the 19 to through traffic still leaves many alternative bridges available.

Richard Greenhough ● 1970d

Janice, my wife travels on foot, bus and train and is exceedingly fit and happy. Why do you ask ? Or are you trying to catch me out ? We are both very unusual as Sam Hearn would say, cheeky sod ! We are both very Green you may say ! Since lockdown in March 2020 we have not been able to go out as a couple but I fail to see what that has to do with Hammersmith Bridge closure. Can you please explain this to me Janice.

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

Janice I totally disagree with you re deliveries specially over the bridges.

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

Richard, you may think it's busy now but wait until Brentford entertain the Big Boys at home in the Premier League with a full house at Lionel Road. Will traffic be moving at Kew Bridge ?

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

Janice, where do those figures come from ?

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

Chris, and so close to Heathrow, we need as many places open as possible.

Janice Evans ● 1970d

Said Google, how is it possible to know exact figures of those who own bikes.

Janice Evans ● 1970d

Indeed, Janice. Chris has said he has lived in Chiswick for 30 odd years. The average lifespan of home appliances is approximately ten years. Just one example of something he would have collected rather it would have to be delivered, installed and removed. Any construction work or garden work, deliveries. Even if he went to the garden center for bags of mulch, deliveries. New windows? Deliveries. The Mrs. doing a bit of Christmas shopping or maybe a new pinny from Amazon? Delivery. It is statistically impossible not to have had a single delivery in the time he has lived here. But let him believe what he wants. It's fun to watch.

David Lesniak ● 1970d

Anyone with any sense going to Lionel Road would use public transport.

Richard Greenhough ● 1970d

We have a postman who does fairly regular deliveries down our road.

Ed Saper ● 1970d

Richard, you know and I know people do not have sense otherwise they would not drive their cars headlong into a jam. They would not be on their smartphones whilst driving. They wouldn't drive recklessly. So watch out Kew bridge Rd area once the football season restarts in August.

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

Ed, maybe so but he doesn't traverse Hammersmith Bridge.

Chris Vessey ● 1970d

Have... have you ever been to a football match?

Mark Warburton ● 1970d

Janice, what are the figures for those age groups which actually use bikes ?

Chris Vessey ● 1969d

Well then, even knowing that you're the board's resident troll who enjoys winding people up, I do find it astonishing that you ignore the fact that the single major cause of congestion, etc around football matches is the crowd arriving on foot.The notion that opposing fans will drive the length of the country to a ground well served by public transport is as hilarious as your grip on reality is loose.

Mark Warburton ● 1969d

Chris, it's impossible to know, they will know how many sold etc but they are the new bikes, how many use rental etc., it's impossible to get anexact figure.  I have a bike but don't use it on the roads and know of manypeople who do the same and only cycle in the parks.

Janice Evans ● 1969d

Well then, you are entitled to your opinion. We shall see ! You do appear to have some strange ideas. There isn't much space between the Stadium, Lionel Rd, CHR, Kew Br Rail Stn and Express Tavern when a full stadium spills out. I regularly cycle this route and easily anticipate future events. Thank you for regarding me as resident troll, there are many more on this forum who come out with crap. My aim is solely to try and reduce use of cars and persuade people to use pedal bikes. I get lots of flak and often wonder if it's worth the trouble. I personally find two wheels a great improvement over four wheels, quick efficient no queues, good for personal fitness etc etc. I see a lot of obese people driving cars around and they'll all finish up with Diabetes and die

Chris Vessey ● 1969d

The thought Chris, that you can label anyone as having strange ideas with the constant drivel that you pour onto these pages is amazing.There are others who articulate odd positions, on both sides of the argument, few though go out of their way to wind people up.You don't articulate persuasion to get people to cycle, you drone on about 4 wheels bad, 2 wheels good & people rightfully tune you out.I find it interesting that you're happy to castigate car owners as a homogenous group, when so many cycle as well - where do they fit into your one-eyed view of the world?I'm well aware that there isn't much space between the stadium, stations and other onwards means of public transport. It's a very well trodden path - people disgorge from a stadium, the majority get to their means of transport and leave. Some stay and add economically to the area.That it might inconvenience a cyclist is just tough. The majority of crowds arrive via sustainable methods, so you just have to take this one on the chin.I'm sure you, in your own mind, see a lot of obese people driving around, because of course you would, all car owners are bad in your mind. That a miniscule percentage of them might end up with diabetes and an even more miniscule percentage may die from related complications is irrelevant & far removed from your nonsense hyperbole.Ultimately every single thread you post on, your comments boil down to "my opinion is right, yours is wrong, you should all change to my way of thinking". Change the record.

Mark Warburton ● 1969d

Oh dear oh dear ; I rest my case you sound very self opinionated. Get a life ! You haven't got a bloody clue !

Chris Vessey ● 1969d

The thought that Chris’s annoying posts will persuade anyone to become a cyclist made me roll up. I now wait for Chris’s vile response that I’ve decided I won’t read. Sad man . Good night all

Maggie Dodge ● 1969d

Mark, although I don't disagree that much of what Chris Vessey writes is incoherent there was car based congestion around Griffin Park spreading down Ealing Road and onto Brentford High Street on most match days. Maybe that was partly due to fans crossing the road rather than people driving to the match but it was always impossible to get a parking space in the area on a Saturday afternoon including in the Watermans car park.You may be right that most people will not drive the length of the country to go to a match but remember when the Bees host Man Utd most of their fans will only be travelling from Surrey.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1968d

Cue the new 8-storey car park on Brentford High Street.If you build it, they will come.

David Lesniak ● 1968d

I never said that no-one drives to the match, some do & they will be the ones who take up additional parking, however the vast majority of almost every football crowd arrives by a different form of travel.Having been part of hundreds of crowds, at dozens of grounds, and part of crowds exiting convert venues, I can promise you that the primary cause of congestion around football grounds, is a large number of people exiting a relatively small space in a very short time, causing pavement space to be overloaded and people to spill into the road, disrupting normal traffic flow, as it's somewhat frowned upon to mow pedestrians down.I'd also argue that the economic benefit to the area of thousands of extra people visiting the area outweighs inconvenience for a couple of hours on a Saturday afternoon.

Mark Warburton ● 1967d

Go on troll, I'll bite, what don't I have a clue about?

Mark Warburton ● 1967d

Get stuffed !

Chris Vessey ● 1967d

I'm sorry, is that troll, for "I've been caught waffling nonsense and I have no way out of it?"

Mark Warburton ● 1966d

Poor old Chris, is that the best you can do ? Hilarious !

Richard Greenhough ● 1966d

Get stuffed Richard, you really are moronic with your behaviour !

Chris Vessey ● 1966d

Warburton you are a small minded git ! Grow up.

Chris Vessey ● 1966d

Who doesn't love a bit of "I know you are but what am I" with their morning coffee?

David Lesniak ● 1965d

David, now that's a good idea. I shall pop into your cafe or is it restaurant for a Tart with my coffee sometime .

Chris Vessey ● 1965d

Chris, are you going for the world record in most ironic comments ever? If you're not, I'd get onto Norris McWhirter quick smart, because I think you've just set an unbreakable record.If you could answer the question I asked, that would be just capital.

Mark Warburton ● 1965d

"...you really are moronic with your behaviour"Ah well, takes one to know one ;-)

Richard Greenhough ● 1965d

Ready  and in service by the end of September?That's only three and a half months away which is good work if realistic. The question is, is this realistic?

Adrian Irving ● 1965d

Diabetes apparently costs our NHS £1.5 million per hour.  Keep cycling Chris!  Active travel is the thing.

Philippa Bond ● 1964d

The evidence suggests that's not the case, Philippa. Just look at overweight cyclists of which many are local advocates.

David Lesniak ● 1964d

You could go to a gym and see fat people on the running machines and deduce that working out doesn't promote weight loss.One of the reasons people may take up cycling is because they are overweight and want to lose a few pounds.From a quick Google, you might find this one interesting:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2937005/"we found statistically significant negative relationships* between active travel and self-reported obesity. At the state and city levels, we found statistically significant positive relationships between active travel and physical activity and statistically significant negative relationships between active travel and diabetes."*negative relationship: as one variable goes up, the other comes down.

Ed Saper ● 1964d

David. If you cycle often enough and far enough you should be protected from diabetes. My distance is 4600 miles from a Moon landing since records began, which hopefully will be ok, no sign of obesity. For those rather overweight individuals riding bikes I salute you all and don't stop, it's really well worth the effort, in all ways.

Chris Vessey ● 1964d

Indeed, Ed. It's all about balance.Cycling has nothing to do with it. That is but one choice among many.

David Lesniak ● 1964d

Philippa. That is a huge amount of lolly. I believe some medications dealt out induce diabetes as a side effect ? The snowball effect of medications is quite frightening to be honest and at a great cost to NHS. Keep active and stay active  whatever you do, and do not relent. Best wishes.

Chris Vessey ● 1964d

Are we looking at the same study?Where there is more active travel - the two choices being cycling and walking - there is less obesity and less diabetes.Where travel is largely by car, there is more obesity and more diabetes. "European countries with high rates of walking and cycling have less obesity than do Australia and countries in North America that are highly car dependent."Assuming the government is looking at similar studies, that would help to explain why they're so keen on providing infrastructure to encourage walking and cycling - and don't mind if that discourages car use.

Ed Saper ● 1964d

I think if more people realised all the problems eg the amputations and blindness they might be more careful but many learn about it too late.  Don't sit still and keep moving!!

Philippa Bond ● 1964d

Philippa. see Statins and Diabetes. I do not know your age and neither do I want you to tell me however statins are doled out to us older ones, it seems they are not the only dread being doled out. Personally I refuse to take them, amongst others. Some one is making loads of money from medications I reckon.

Chris Vessey ● 1964d

Philippa, and it's not just the drug companies.

Chris Vessey ● 1964d

If what happens at most grounds pre and after the game happens, the police will close part of the road in front of the mainline station as crowds will spill out onto the road otherwise. Fortunately we are only talking about 17,500 at most so it shouldn't hold up traffic for too long. I daresay the best way of coping with the crowds will be to direct people to Gunnersbury so they can at least join up with other underground lines instead of having to go all the way to Waterloo.

peter king ● 1964d

Threads on this forum often meander off-topic, but going from Hammersmith Bridge to diabetes is one of the more drastic changes.

Richard Greenhough ● 1963d

Richard. yes it's weird how threads meander. But that literally is the nature of threads. Interesting or not it happens, and often !

Chris Vessey ● 1963d