Congestion Charge - Wondered how long this would take.

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/17473896?source=Evening Standard&ct=5

Scooters face C-charge
By Ross Lydall Local Government Correspondent, Evening Standard
24 March 2005
Motorcyclists and scooter riders could be forced to pay the congestion
charge in a U-turn by transport chiefs.



Also says about injuires and accidents.

What I have found is that the people who decided to ride scooters in town
went to get their CBTs.

Instructor: "Well done, you've passed your cbt, where will you be riding"

New Scooter rider: "In London mate"

Instructor: "Oh, you will need a pair of these then" handing over a pair of
blinkers

I find that red light jumpers[1] and scooter riders [2] are the main danger,
taxis and white vans dont bother me because you always expect the
unexpected.

[1] Always slow down and give a left and right before riding through.

[2] Not all of them, bust most of.

 

This is the norm though. The government makes a rule that looses it
revenue, then said government does a U turn to get lost revenue back. It
seems like the normal political weasel thing to do.

 

58 injuries below their target - call me cynical, but 58 doesn't seem a high
enough 'miss' to justify the change on the basis of 'safety'.

I'm far more inclined to think it's about the 30k riders they're not getting
revenue from.

I'm interested in seeing Blaney's take on this, as this doesn't seem to run
with the "cut congestion" aim of the charge in the slightest.

 

This paragraph :
"TfL may also lobby the Government to increase the minimum age for riders,
limiting the power of machines available to novices and fitting
speed-limiting devices to bikes"

Doesn't make a lot of sense considering the majority of London is <50mph.

How is speed limiting bikes going to lower the death toll in Greater London?

Sounds like those muppets at TfL are bored again to me.

 

Are those 30,000 riders 300,000 individual riders or just riders that
trip some counting camera thing.

Anyway, it's all bollocks and riding round with an unreadable plate is
going to work out cheaper in the long run if you're going into London
everyday.

 

The congestion charge was brought in to *reduce congestion*.
And it's worked.

In fact, it's worked "too well" in that there isn't as much revenue as
they had hoped thereby forcing them to increase the charge or find ways
of increasing the number of people that pay.

But that's the problem - they're now concentrating on revenue rather
than
the reduction of congestion.

 

Because all bikers are baby eating rapists. Surely you know that?

 

It does and given the Evening Standards record on reporting accuracy I'd
be very interested to read the report they've based their piece on.

....but I can't seem to find it on the TFL website and the Standard
doesn't reference it (surprise, surprise).

The piece they have written /seems/ to be a twist on some recent research
on reducing scooter accidents.

It's been a slow week for London news and I'd like to see the TFL
document and the context that's written in.

 

I doubt the story is true, but if it is, I'll definitely be using an
unreadable plate.

 

Well yes, but hang on, are you agreeing with me that it doesn't have a lot
to do with congestion, or are you saying it does?

 

I knew what I wanted to write but an attack of mongatica appears to have
changed "doesn't, does it" into "I'm a fucking flid".

 

Oops.
Sorry officer, I forgot to take the bag off it.
I put that on to keep it clean for the cameras.

 

Increase the ages? **** about with the bike licensing yet again, and
leave 98% of road users unchanged? Well, that's not fair.

Plus, bikes aren't cars. They've got totally different dynamics, a speed
limiter would not be a safety device, it would be an unsafely device imho.

Speed limiting devices on bikes would, apart from being danger to the
rider and other traffic, also instantly put riders at risk from tail
gating cars.. again creating more problems.

Putting a limiter on a bike, and making am MP ride it round a corner
when the limiter cuts in would be a nice way of getting rid of an MP.
Making an MP ride a restricted scooter in rush hour traffic would wake
them up a bit too.

Besides, who is going to police / pay for all this retro fitted technology?

 

As if you have to ask.

 

I know, it was more of a statement, than a question.

 

http://snipurl.com/dn0t

Oh no they don't ...

Transport for London has issued a statement from London Mayor Ken
Livingstone stating that bikes and scooters will remain exempt from
congestion charging in the capital, as a response to an Evening Standard
article.

<snip>

" The Mayor wishes to make it crystal clear that he has absolutely no
intention whatsoever of making scooters and motorcycles pay congestion
charge. Motorbikes and scooters will not be charged. "

 

Oh, it was just the paper being cunts then. Unless MCN have read that
info off a news group somewhere. <snigger>

 

elyob wrote

Rocking. Well done Ken.

 

IME a dirty plate is tolerated insomuch as you're told to clean it. I've
never been nicked for having an unreadable filthy plate; I have, otoh,
been issued several tickets for (genuinely) forgetting to remove the
bag.

 

So, for the second time, Ken has to refute a(n alleged) statement from this
own department.

First over bike taxis, now over bike CC charges.

If I were Ken, I'd be having 'a word' with those who keep putting him in the
shit.