To Mark Julian Raymond: If you really want to get anything done about pavement cycling you will have to work a lot harder than condemning it on this Forum which, as you have discovered, simply attracts hostile comments from self-appointed ‘opinion formers’ – over 100 comments in a couple of days from just 11 people! In December 2013 I began what developed into a concerted attempt on this Forum under the heading PAVEMENTS ARE FOR PEDESTRIANS to promote a popular wave among pedestrians to rebel against pavement cyclists - the only way to stop them since the 'Responsible Authorities' conspire to ignore their behaviour. In response to the comments each ‘post ‘ attracted I ended up making 15 factual 'posts' on the topic over the following 6 months which attracted a plethora of hostile, mostly RED HERRING, comments from a core of self-appointed ‘opinion formers’ designed to divert attention from the simple fact that pavement cycling is a criminal offence that is legally and socially inexcusable. 38 people registered 294 comments, many of them included vitriolic personal insults. Among the current commentators, three names are familiar from that time: Paul James who made 67 comments, Ben Owen with 40, Keith Iddon with 22. I note that Paul James scores highest in the current comments.Commenting on social media is a waste of time - I simply persisted in it then to wind up the opposition - and boy did they react! In parallel I tackled the 'Responsible Authorities' - all of them. In May 2014 I submitted the paper that follows to the London Assembly's Transport Committee, to get pavement cycling included in Mayor Johnson's 'action plans' TfL PEDESTRIAN-SAFETY-ACTION-PLAN and TfL SAFE-STREETS-FOR-LONDON. I followed up that paper by writing to Ministers through my MP and by corresponding with and challenging in public the Met Police Commissioner, Ealing's Borough Met Police Commander, Mayor Johnson's deputy in charge of the Mayor's Office of Policing and Crime (MOPAC) and local councilors, all to no avail. Pavement cycling continues and continues to be ignored.If you really want to get anything done, you could start where I left off! At age 83 I have lost patience with the negligent attitude of the 'Authorities' and I despair of the pedestrian public's apathy towards their own safety interests. Whilst I challenge every pavement cyclist I meet, I prefer to get on to enjoy what remains of my already long life, exercising my Private Pilot's licence to fly a four-seat single-engined aircraft anywhere in Europe, when the weather permits, while I can still pass the yearly medicals and the regular skill tests. At least in the aviation environment the rules are clear, internationally understood, and most of the people obey them - or they risk a sticky end for themselves and their passengers. And I have given my bike away because at my age the density of road traffic, the intolerance of motorists and the indiscipline of those cyclists who do ride on them makes the roads too dangerous for an elderly cyclist. Walking and using public transport (now free for me) is safer and more convenient.And to anticipate a repeat of earlier insults, I'VE GOT A LIFE, AND I INTEND TO KEEP IT, AND I INTEND TO ENJOY IT WHILE IT LASTS! Dennis Bailey’s last comment sums it up very well:Get off, off, off, off, off, off - Posted by Dennis Bailey Date/Time: 23/11/18 22:19:00“Everyone get off my pavement, the bloody lot of you. It was designed for feet, not wheels. You have no right to be there, i do. It's a designated pedestrian walkway for a reason, it seperates wheels from pedestrians. Push off.”Good luck whatever you decide to do Mark! MY PAPER TO THE LONDON ASSEMBLY TRANSPORT COMMITTEEADDRESSED TO: To the London Assembly Transport Committee: Valerie Shawcross (Chair), Caroline Pidgeon (Deputy Chair), Tom Copley, Onkar Sahota, Murad Qureshi, Roger Evans, Richard Tracey, Victoria Borwick, Darren Johnson.COPIED TO: Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe MET POLICE COMMISSIONER; Sir Hugh Orde PRESIDENT ASSOCIATION OF CHIEF POLICE OFFICERS; Tom Winsor HM CHIEF INSPECTOR OF CONSTABULARY; Stephen Greenhaigh DEPUTY MAYOR OF LONDON FOR POLICING AND CRIME =============================A PAPER TO THE LONDON ASSEMBLY TRANSPORT COMMITTEEby Tony Purton, resident London Borough of Ealing 27 May 2014PROPOSING - A PUBLIC AWARENESS POSTER CAMPAIGN BY LONDON’S LOCAL AUTHORITIES ‘PAVEMENT CYCLING IS ILLEGAL’TO HELP THE MET POLICE ENFORCE SECTION 72 OF THE 1835 HIGHWAYS ACT BY THE EXERCISE OF THEIR POWERS UNDER THE ROAD TRAFFIC OFFENDERS ACT 1988 GRANTED BY STATUTORY INSTRUMENT (SI 1999/1851)INTRODUCTIONNeither the Committee’s report “Feet First – Improving pedestrian safety in London” nor TfL’s “Pedestrian Action Safety Plan”, both aimed at reducing pedestrian deaths/injuries on London’s roads, contain any reference to pavement cycling, a growing threat to pedestrian safety in the very area intended by law as a safe haven for pedestrians free from road vehicles. The object of this paper is to ask the Committee to add the enforcement of the law against pavement cycling to TfL’s Action Safety Plan.BACKGROUNDPavement cycling is a criminal offence under the 1835 Highways Act punishable by a £50 fixed penalty fine or a £500 fine in court under the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988. Both Acts are part of criminal law which can only be enforced by the police. Section 72 of the 1835 Highways Act protecting the pedestrian footpaths alongside public highways against incursion by road vehicles (‘carriages’ including bicycles) is as valid today as it has been for the last 179 years. It was reinforced by Parliament in 1999 when, at the suggestion of the Association of Chief Police Officers, pavement cycling was made a fixed penalty offence under the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 - Statutory Instruments 1999 No. 1851 to enable the police to enforce the 1835 Act by fining rather than prosecuting offenders. DfT guidance issued to police forces in 2009 [following the PAC’s October 2009 report on ‘Improving road safety for pedestrians and cyclists in Great Britain’ see Q.42-47] confirmed that there are no exceptions for small wheeled or children’s cycles, but any rider under the age of criminal responsibility (10) will not be guilty of the offence.THE PROPOSALTo increase public awareness of the illegal (criminal) nature of pavement cycling by widely displaying small (75MM/3INCH) universally understandable stickers on street lamp posts based on the ISO 3864-1 prohibition sign; similar to the common NO SMOKING sign. .Given such a measure, pavement cycling would in time attract the same social stigma as smoking in public places and become as self-policing as the anti-smoking laws introduced by the Health Act 2006. POSSIBLE SIGNS AND WORDING – BICYCLE IN A RED CIRCLE WITH DIAGONAL RED CROSS [Not reproduceable on this Forum]POLICE FOLLOW-UPOnce the police are able to take for granted that anyone cycling on the pavement is doing so deliberately (willingly) in defiance of the law, they can deploy the full range of sanctions at their disposal to deal with serial offenders:1. A ‘verbal’ warning with advice that the offender should take a ‘Bikeability’ course2. A ‘formal’ (written/recorded?) warning with advice that the offender should take a ‘Bikeability’ course 3. A £50 fixed penalty notice, waived if the offender presents proof of having taken a ‘Bikeability’ course within the 28 day appeal period4. Prosecution and £500 fine with a court order that the offender MUST take a ‘Bikeability’ course before cycling on the road again5. Apply the Fixed Penalty system to children above the age of criminal responsibility (10 years of age at present)PUBLIC ENCOURAGEMENT Pedestrians should be encouraged to challenge pavement cyclists and report incidents of pavement cycling to their local community police team – with photographic evidence where possible.FUNDING In London, the Mayor’s Policing and Crime Office (MOPAC) could allocate just 1% of the promised £100M funding to local authorities for road cycling safety measures, to be devoted to such a publicity campaign. Further funds could be made available from the surplus income on the ‘Parking Funds’ of many London boroughs which are ring-fenced to be spent only on transport-related projects, including funding London’s transport ‘Freedom Passes’.VALUE FOR MONEY If pavement cycling is popularly discouraged as an anti-social activity and becomes self-policing, the cost and effort of policing the offence would be greatly reduced.PAVEMENT CYCLING IS A SEPARATE ISSUE FROM ROAD CYCLING SAFETY Safety for cyclists on the roads is a separate objective in its own right. As Home Office minister Paul Boateng wrote in the last paragraph of his guidelines letter of 9 July 1999 to Ben Bradshaw MP regarding the introduction of fixed penalties for pavement cycling - “I note your particular concerns about other offences which pose a threat to cyclists and I am very willing to discuss and consider those problems with you. But I do not see that issue as affecting the case for having a fixed penalty offence for cycling on the pavement” =======================THE RESULTTfL PEDESTRIAN-SAFETY-ACTION-PLANPage 37 Action 23 Raising awareness of behaviour among other road users, including cyclists and drivers that pose a safety risk to pedestrians. For example, pavement cycling and failing to give priority to pedestrians at side roads.TfL SAFE-STREETS-FOR-LONDONPage 68 Para 36 TfL will fund an increase in the activities of the MPS’s Cycle Task Force and its Motorcycle Tasking Team to improve enforcement against anti-social road use behaviour by all road user groups including: speeding, careless driving, red light jumping, cycling on the pavement, encroachment into the advance stop lines and mandatory cycle lanes, and general traffic violations
Tony Purton ● 2347d