Forum Topic

New poll shows majority support for LTNs in London

From Dave Hill (long-term opponent of cycle lanes in London) for OnLondon. 
“One third of respondents to the Redfield & Wilton survey (33%) said they support the introduction of LTNs and a further 19% said they “strongly support” them, making 52% supportive as a whole. Only 9% said they oppose them and 10% said they strongly oppose them." https://www.onlondon.co.uk/new-polling-most-londoners-blame-covid-or-government-for-tfl-financial-woes-back-ltns-and-are-satisfied-with-sadiq-khan/

Paul Campbell ● 2203d110 Comments

Come on, please tell me I miss read the poll numbers 2000 Londoners?

Chris Johnson ● 2203d

A sample of 2000 has a sampling error of 2%. If a poll that size finds 52% support a particular measure while 19% oppose it, it's highly unlikely to have misrepresented such a large margin in favour.

Tom Pike ● 2203d

Not vey different to national polling for elections I should think.

Matthew Swain ● 2203d

Tom, please tell me. What percentage of Londoners does 2000 equate to?

Chris Johnson ● 2203d

"We can identify the wide range of potential supporters for any cause, and then find the best message for each aspect of that diverse and complex audience." Above is an extract from the pollsters website.Hmmmm! Out for a golden duck me thinks but what really wrankles is is these dangerous people can  knowingly massage results and present them as truths when the reality is quite different.STOP IT!

Adrian Irving ● 2203d

A poll is a representative sample. You don't need a large percentage of a population to ensure it's accurate, you need a decent sample size. 2000 is larger than most polls.

Tom Pike ● 2203d

Waste of a poll. As I said in my letter to Grant Shapps today, most want proper management of traffic. What we don’t need are fake “LTNs” that fail to meet local needs.Please make sure you write to him too, to make sure he applies the proper governance and we get a full consultation.shappsg@parliament.uk

Russell Pearson ● 2203d

Out of what 9 million? Yeah right Sell that to someone else, I’m not buying it for a minute

Chris Johnson ● 2203d

What a load of rubbishThe cycling activists The London Cycle Campaign and the Hounslow Cycle Club are very dangerous people.They are getting the local authority to panda to their own agenda, which is using the Covid 19 as an excuse for the so called safety measure being installed, aided and abetted by a very misguided government, who is slowly beginning to realise that local authority’s are miss using the the money.On the say so of the above people.Ladies and gentlemen who signed the famous letter to the government, stick to your day jobs, as you no nothing about health and safety and road design to keep our local businesses to open.You are also putting the Disable people of the borough at grater risk, they have a right to negotiate the pavements, cross roads and use public trans port,  but some of the measures you are gloating about are not safe for them to use.

Bernard Allen ● 2203d

Currently over 20,200 signatures https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/552306

Claire Moran ● 2203d

Maybe you'll have a better response than our local councillors, or even some response.Politicians have a pretty good understanding of how polling operates, and I would be very surprised if Grant Shapps hadn't already worked out what this one is saying. It's not likely to encourage him to intervene in London's LTN's.

Tom Pike ● 2203d

Indeed Tom, Shapps seems all talk and no trousers so far. But let’s see if he refutes that.

Russell Pearson ● 2203d

And were the respondents predominantly residents of areas in which LTNs are in operation? I well remember a poll conducted some years ago when Ken Livingstone was very keen on having a tram run along Uxbridge Road in Shepherd's Bush. This required closing a section of the road to all other traffic and locally it was pretty well totally opposed. To get the result he wanted Ken just asked his questions elsewhere - I believe Richmond was one such polling area. Faced with being asked if they thought a tram in Shepherds Bush was a good idea most residents of a far-off  and unaffected borough naturally tended to approve of the idea. It's not just what you ask, it's who you ask that matters.

Bruce Hammal ● 2203d

Tom Pike I see you are going to run to you mates in the council and the government.You don’t care about the local residents, there just in your way.You are a very dangerous man who just wants everyone to jump to your tune.

Bernard Allen ● 2203d

your trying to defend a poll that ltn’s are a good idea based on a sample of 0.02% of a populous?

Chris Johnson ● 2203d

Yep, needs a poll to ask If people are in favour of the road closures in place, in their neighbourhood, to have any meaning at all. It’s just abstract guff otherwise.

Russell Pearson ● 2203d

I think we can fairly safely assume that not many of the 2000 polled are resident in our neck of the woods given that asked about the closure of Hammersmith bridge "nearly two-thirds of respondents (64%) said they were unaware of the issue".

Bruce Hammal ● 2203d

A polling company that advertises they get the message you want says it all. A bit like all those Heathrow polls saying we want more runways. But as someone else said, these cycling lobbyists are really dangerous. They willfully misrepresent data, stoop to rigged polls and spread clear misinformation about the state of the local economy, all to favour their narrow agenda.Strange that Michael Robinson has said the local consultations are not referendums, so what exactly are they. 75% of LOCAL residents replied to a survey on Fishers Lane closure said they wanted it reversed.We are told we have a trail but no idea on what criteria it will be evaluated. There is no measurement of congestion or quality on surrounding roads so that clearly will not count. There is no engagement with local businesses. Given its a scheme designed to in the words of Tom Pike I think to connect with lots of cycle routes in central London, it rather begs the question what about local cycle routes? Of which there none.

Paul Green ● 2203d

If you looks at the mathematics underlying statistics and polling, you find that the percentage of a (large) population represented in a poll is not relevant.  The absolute size of the sample is the relevant factor - how big the sample needs to be depends on how big an effect you are trying to deteremine.  If the effect is that 0.1% of the population has a particular characteristic or opinion, then the sample size needs to be larger than if the effect applies to 20% of the population.  There is one major caveat to those statements and that is that the sample has to be representative (in a technical sense).  If the sample is not representative (or suitable corrections are not applied), then it doesn't matter how large the sample is (unless it's 100% obviously), it won't give a true answer.  The fact that the poll gives a particular result which one may or may not like is not in itself relevant to its defence.  As someone said earlier, 2000 people is more than large enough for a statistically valid sample

Andrzej Kowalski ● 2203d

“ They are getting the local authority to panda to their own agenda”Bernard, No need to be so grizzly and browned off. Things aren’t as black as you claim, they are the polar opposite.Maybe you’d better stop posting before you make another boo boo.

Michael Robinson ● 2203d

Your just a brick in the wall

Bernard Allen ● 2203d

You're ...

Anne England ● 2203d

It’s only Rock’n’Roll

Bernard Allen ● 2203d

Well, actually we do know the criteria on which the measures are supposed to be evaluated. What we don't know is what weight will be given to them in practice.  According to Tfl's LTN 'pledge':"We'll listen to you about which schemes should be made permanent, or be amended or removed. The other factors that we'll consider when making our decisions are the impact a scheme has had (and could continue to have) on:Safety - road safety and pedestrian overcrowding in the area.Congestion - traffic including the bus network.Equality - people protected under the Equality Act 2010.Opportunity - the number of cyclists and pedestrians who use it.Locality - the look and feel of the local area."We shall see.

Bruce Hammal ● 2203d

Absolutely Bruce, who you ask and how you frame the quesion.For example, 64% (from memory) of people asked by the pollsters who should pay for repairs to Hammersmith Bridge were unaware there was even a problem.

Adrian Irving ● 2203d

Dead right - see my previous post!

Bruce Hammal ● 2203d

Bruce, it is interesting to see the criteria. I note the one regarding congestion and the bus network. As there is no attempt to measure congestion in general, it will presumably simply look at the impact on bus speeds. hence the efforts to restrict as much traffic from the central area of the High Road so they can claim minimal impact on buses speeds, hence no congestion and so no problem. Then Tom Pike will tell us all what lovely clean air we all have. I think they might as well claim success now.

Paul Green ● 2203d

Sorry Bruce, I tend to read posts of folk I will disagree with first so skipped over yours.

Adrian Irving ● 2203d

Which they are doing, completely ignoring the horrendous pollution and traffic jams from streets a few yards away including South Parade, Chiswick Lane, Acton Lane etc etc

Claire Moran ● 2203d

I leave the detail of speeds, emissions etc to those better qualified to judge such matters. My concern is and always has been the honesty of the process by which these emergency measures will ultimately be judged. I am far from convinced about the accountability and commitment to  fairness of those making the decisions. Clearly certain opinions are held to be of higher worth than others and that can't be right. Organised cycling lobbyists will brook no compromise. They remind me of someone who has wrongly had money credited to his bank account and refuses to return it.Their glee at seeing a captive Labour Council gifted millions to use on their pet schemes by a Conservative government is plain to see.They know their chance may never come again and they are determined not to give an inch even over measures which are demonstrably harmful to their own interests. We desperately need some independent arbitration - I'm afraid I have little faith in the impartiality of the process as it is currently proposed.

Bruce Hammal ● 2203d

As Paul has demonstrated he is prone to using the words of others completely out of context and without their consent. Simply to further his agenda.

David Lesniak ● 2203d

Another example of polling to get the result you want concerns the amount cyclists spend compared with people who walk, take the bus, tube, train or drive - with the oft-repeated claim from people like the cycling commissioner that everyone knows cyclists spend more. TfL commissioned research (coincidentally by a Chiswick research company) that found drivers spend more. TfL does not acknowledge this this research on its website page about the economic benefits of walking and cycling. And traders who reported an immediate reduction in business when parking was removed were being factual - just as they had been when they reported an immediate lift in business after the free 30-minute stop and shop parking system started. http://turnhamgreen.yourcllr.com/2019/07/28/who-spends-most-train-tube-bus-walk-or-cycle/

Joanna Biddolph ● 2203d

So no comment on the topic by the OP then that LTN's are favoured by the majority of Londoners?

Matthew Swain ● 2202d

I'm not sure why Cllr Biddolph brings up spending patterns on a thread regarding creating more pleasant areas by reducing the volume of traffic driving through residential streets.Mind you, Cllr Biddolph thinks this create ghettos but there you go.  All of Chiswick must be a ghetto because there have been lots of road closures over the years to reduce the negative impact of motor traffic on residential streets,Thornton Avenue, Beverley Rd, Wellesley Rd, Chiswick Rd... all like living in South Central LA or Warsaw in WWII....Perhaps Cllr Biddolph could actually provide a link to the quotes she is claiming?  She could also get the job title correct as it is the Cycling and Walking Commissioner.  The figures she references show that people walking spend considerably more than people driving.  I assume she would have no problem with parking space converted into pavement on that basis.Given that 5 or more bikes could fit in one car parking space, converting car parking to bike parking would also provide a greater economic benefit.

Michael Robinson ● 2202d

WEll I'm living here in a London borough (Hounslow unfortunately) and I DO NOT WANT OR NEED ANY LTNs - Grove Park was a beautiful living neighbourhood for years before the greedy Hounslow decided to close roads - we just need some minor tweeks - better pavements, swept gutters etc stopping heavy good vehicles and better enforcement of road speeds in certain areas.  As for north of the A4 -what a pig's ear!  Utterly unsafe to attempt to go there by any means since Hounslow sent in the wrecking ball.

Jennifer Selig ● 2202d

When Nearly two-thirds of respondents (64%) said they were unaware of the issue with Hammersmith bridge,that tells you all you need to know about these polls. Who was asked,what they were exctly asked,where they live and are they car owners.

Julian Pavey ● 2202d

The shameless misinformation by the cycling lobbyists knows no limits. It could be funny if it wasn't for the very serious implications for business and the local community, especially the less able. Yet these lies will be seized on by Hounslow and others to justify these measures.

Paul Green ● 2202d

Michael, the relentless posting and obsessions of you and your chums is getting really tiresome. Why do you need to resort to lies and fabrications to make your points if it so strong?I note that today across London traffic and congestion is down sharply due to new restrictions and will likely stay like that until Xmas. So TFL, Tom Pike and others can say, oh look how clean the air is, oh look there is no congestion on the High Road or surrounding roads. All thanks to road closures... when in fact its down to COVID.Stop playing us all for fools, its really tedious and does you cause no good at all. The idea that cyclists spend more is as absolutely ludicrous as the idea that two thirds of Londoners support more LTNs.

Paul Green ● 2202d

Interesting that you mention Los Angeles Michael. Los Angeles Department of Transport (LADOT) realised some time back that what they call the “Waze Effect” - sat navs directing traffic into residential areas, was a key factor in traffic management and a primary cause of many issues, (certainly impacts Grove Park). They tried ‘road diets’ such as closing roads, or narrowing them, and found that didn’t work. Technology focused solutions now look like the best way forward.

Russell Pearson ● 2202d

Also Michael, if you are calling out a local councilor for links to their quotes, we all still await all the supporting information from yourself and others to support the High Road mini boom letter and the evidence that the flower market, new restaurants etc were all driven by the road closures. Because without that your letter is simply more grotesque misinformation

Paul Green ● 2202d

Another poll by them shows that 65% of 18-24 yr olds travel by bike. TFL report Says There is a very low proportion of young, 16-24 years old cyclists The pollsters allso say 35% of Londoners use bicycles to travel around London. That is 3.1437 million people from 8.982 million cycling

Julian Pavey ● 2202d

Michael, I'd be interested to know how you explain the rather counter-intuitive conclusion that some surveys have reached that shoppers tend to spend more when they are not in a car.I know you hate anecdotal evidence but I look at my own spending patterns and see that I mostly shop by foot or bike in terms of individual trips but about 80% of my retail spending by value would be made in trips done in the car. The percentage may vary depending on the individual but I find it hard to believe that anyone but a person who has the time to go to the shops every day would spend by value more when not driving.Similarly I have yet to speak to a retail business owner or manager who has said that they didn't believe that convenient parking was critical to their operation.When studies are quoted that 'show' people on bike or on foot spend more per trip than people in cars these tend to have been commissioned by authorities looking to justify a reduction in parking provision in their area. The more comphrensive study by TfL came up with the opposite conclusion.You have to understand that people may be sceptical when you make a claim that seems to directly contradict their lived experience. It might help your case if you could come up with an explanation as to why you believe people spend more when not in a car.

Francis Rowe ● 2202d

Large numbers of Londoners do cycle. They also walk, drive and use public transport (when safe to do so), These are normal human beings. There are also those - far fewer in number - for whom cycling is more than just a mode of transport, it's close to being a religion. They are zealots and therefore not open to rational discussion. For them the end really does justify the means, no ifs, no buts. I know quite a few what you might call dedicated cyclists (two of them regular participants in L'Etape). They even wear lycra - but none of them subscribe to the aggressive "with us or against us" stance of the pressure group I'm referring to.As to this opinion poll - well what can you say about a company whose mission statement boils down to "we give you polls that give you the result you want to see." This has become a very dirty game indeed.

Bruce Hammal ● 2202d

Francis,  I'd suggest you ask Cllr Biddolph about this given she referenced the survey in the first place.

Michael Robinson ● 2202d

Treat the poll with the contempt it deserves!

Steve Taylor ● 2202d

In another question in this poll 64% of those questions said they were unaware of the issue with Hammersmith Bridge so you do have to wonder how the respondents were selected.If you pick a group of people who aren't particularly well informed and ask them do you think Low Traffic Neighbourhoods are a good idea they are likely to say yes because they will reasonably but mistakenly believe that a Low Traffic Neighbourhood scheme means you get a low level of traffic in your neighbourhood.If majority support in the areas affected was a criteria for whether or not these schemes were implemented, I'd be quite happy to accept them.

Anita Blake ● 2202d

Allso Redfield & Wilton survey found Londoners (39%) support plans to build a third runway at Heathrow Well,well,well,who would of known that. Polls,ha

Julian Pavey ● 2202d

Paul,Self awareness doesn't appear to be one of your strengths given your accusation of "relentless posting".  I totted up the number of posts you made in 3 recent threads and reached the grand total of 19, while I made a mere 3 on this thread (excluding this one)I haven't actually read any of your posts on the other threads given it became apparent some time ago that you were just saying the same thing again and again and again...

Michael Robinson ● 2202d

See my earlier post about Ken Livingstone's Uxbridge Road tram!As far as I can make out the poll that Paul Campbell referenced was commissioned to bolster Sadiq Khan's position in his standoff with central government.

Bruce Hammal ● 2202d

I wouldn't be quoting that TfL report unless I wanted to remove a parking space and install 5 bike racks.Sure does support that.Thanks for posting Jo

Tony Smart ● 2202d

It is generally accepted that everything Campbell posts is total rubbish in his feeble attempts to try to push his own agenda. Unfortunately two or three of his loyal disciples lap it up and and suck up further without engaging their 'brains'. They just can't grasp the fact that the more they do it, the more the community turns against them and cause division and hatred towards all the rest of us decent and considerate cyclists who believe that our roads and paths could be shared by all if only some common sense and common decency could prevail. 

Steve Taylor ● 2202d

Matthew, how about a comment from you and the Mrs. on where you're headed with your dry cleaning seeing that your campaigning has led to the closure of your dry cleaner of choice.

David Lesniak ● 2202d

Steve, 100% agreed. They are really not helping themselves. At all.

Paul Green ● 2202d

A few salient points:Michael has yet to provide any evidence of the High Road boon. No surprise there. There is none.But more than a million hospitality and retail jobs may vanish by year end:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8853201/More-MILLION-hospitality-retail-jobs-vanish-end-year.htmlEnough sniping, Michael.Enough evasion.Enough dodging.Enough devaluing of all local businesses.Enough of your vain attempts at devaluing others. Try giving a damn about your community. Your neighbors. Those who trade to support your lifestyle.Sorry, we can't give you a paycheck for that part of your campaign.The traffic today is miserable. Took me 30 minutes to get from Stamford Brook station back to the shop. Lots of pollution thanks to you Michael. And all who lobby for these insane plans.

David Lesniak ● 2202d

Another Michael Robinson evasion.

David Lesniak ● 2202d

These High Street shopping figures you quote are just for 2015. In fact TfL ran surveys in 2009, 2011, 2013 and 2014 as well. In 2014, the survey showed those shopping by bike spent more.  There's  a lot of scatter in the data — see the plot below. Those walking to the shops spend significantly more, but otherwise there's no significant difference between those getting to the shops by bike, bus, car or train/tube.

Certainly the more high streets can do to attract pedestrians the better, but otherwise the spend  is pretty much the same whatever the transport mode.      

Tom Pike ● 2202d

"Certainly the more high streets can do to attract pedestrians the better, but otherwise the spend  is pretty much the same whatever the transport mode."Those TfL surveys are meaningless.

Steve Taylor ● 2202d

So Tom, as a scientist, do you normally use 5-year old data or are you more interested in current trends? Is there any data specific to 2020 and a pandemic for instance?Let me help you out.No.

David Lesniak ● 2202d

"In another question in this poll 64% of those questions said they were unaware of the issue with Hammersmith Bridge so you do have to wonder how the respondents were selected."yes indeed. That would certainly question the awareness or even integrity of the respondents.

Steve Taylor ● 2202d

MichaelThere you go again, evasion and manipulation, and you really should seek professional help about your OCD regarding Cllr Biddolph...

Loraine Pemberton ● 2202d

TomThose of us who walk are the highest spenders, but what have 5/6 year old statistics got to do with a 2020 Covid-19 decimated UK ? I'd also hazard a guess that cyclists make up a large percentage of on-line deliveries- think about it

Loraine Pemberton ● 2202d

Agree, Loraine

Claire Moran ● 2202d

ClaireThere's more than a touch of both irony and hypocrisy in the comments from Messrs Pike and Robinson, or am I being unkind ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 2202d

In theory LTN's are a great concept, except they just push the problem elsewhere so no joined up thinking from TfL, LB Hounslow, LCC/HCC and our very own Chiswick Cycling fanatics - but now't new there !

Loraine Pemberton ● 2202d

SteveYou're bang on !Wonder if there's any truth that Paul Cambell has been blocked from some FB pages due to his unpleasant and inaccurate  posts ?

Loraine Pemberton ● 2202d

The poll was commissioned by OnLondon, a news site run by Dave Hill who has not been a supporter of LTN’s. When the poll showed that in fact there was much greater support than opposition to these measures in London, he reported it without questioning the reliability of the poll.It was a poll of all Londoners. It’s not surprising a good proportion don’t know the details of the Hammersmith Bridge saga. Most of us probably haven’t been closely following the latest on the Silvertown Tunnel either, but that’s a big story in east London. But LTN’s have been put in by many London boroughs, so it’s unlikely the majority of those polled had no idea idea about them. I’m actually surprised at the level of support for LTN’s given the comments here. But then again this forum should not be taken as an unbiased sample, as polls like this demonstrate.

Tom Pike ● 2202d

No sorry but once again I have to disappoint you. I have never been banned from anywhere online or otherwise. Probably because of my patience and restraint when you all lose your tempers and manners when somebody posts something here or elsewhere that you disagree with on the topic of active travel.

Paul Campbell ● 2202d

Tut tut Mr Campbell Did I say you'd  been banned  ? I think not !Now don't get your lycra shorts in a knot 🤣 Oh hang on did you just say "my patience and restraint" ?  Anyone think Paul Campbell he's patient and restrained  ? I couldn't  possibly comment, despite his nasty and untruthful  Tweets about me...

Loraine Pemberton ● 2202d

Carry on.

Paul Campbell ● 2202d

Well it has been interesting to see so many highly predictable responses to this poll. The dedicated protestors against active travel schemes have not disappointed.Dave Hill has views on cycling that many of the most noisy anti-LTN and anti-cycle lane forum contributors would agree with. He believes in “vehicular cycling” which means that people who ride bikes should be in the main flow of traffic and should not be protected by cycle lanes. He has a loyal following of black cabbies due to his frequent commentary on the topic. On Twitter some of the cabbies have challenged him on the validity of this poll and he has defended it robustly. I can appreciate how disappointing and unsettling it is to have one’s certainties challenged and especially the righteousness of feeling that your views are backed by the majority of equally “right-thinking” people. I follow Dave Hill and OnLondon precisely because I disagree with him and I am interested in what he has to say. Life in the echo chamber is less stimulating. Now please feel free to continue to shoot the messenger.

Paul Campbell ● 2202d

I have never heard of Dave Hill or OnLondon. Do you defend the evidently biased and pointless nature of this poll?

Bruce Hammal ● 2202d

If you are that interested Bruce then take some time to read some of his articles on OnLondon and form your own view of how biased he is likely to have been in his reporting. I don’t have enough information about the commissioning or the selection or the questioning methodology used for the poll itself to defend it. But I found it interesting enough that somebody I consider to be opposed to most of my views on active travel scooped it and reported on it to post it on this forum anticipating the brick bats that would come with that. I wouldn’t have posted a poll like this if Peter Walker had the scoop because that would have made it too easy for the anti-LTN and anti-cycle lane forum contributors to angrily reject. I hadn’t anticipated how quick people would be to assume that there was an angle that meant they could just quickly dismiss it without engaging with it or researching a bit more. So I’ve learned more about the forum contributors from this experience.

Paul Campbell ● 2202d

I'm afraid this is too obtuse for me. I also have no idea who Peter Walker is, but let's not go there. I think you must have read too much Machiavelli in your youth and I'm a simple man. I prefer Cervantes.

Bruce Hammal ● 2202d

Indeed Bruce, me too. Reminds me more of Carroll.“And hast thou slain the Jabberwock?       Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!”       He chortled in his joy.”

Russell Pearson ● 2202d

Peter Walker is a pro-cycling Guardian journalist. Anybody with as strong an interest as yours in active travel should check him out. Also Carlton Reid for Forbes. It shouldn’t be too consuming considering how much time you and other protestors against these schemes are already spending on the topic. Never let your opponent be more informed!

Paul Campbell ● 2202d

Maybe you should vary your reading a bit. Dare I say it, you're in danger of becoming single-minded. I believe Jeremy Clarkson writes a column in the Sunday Times - you might give that a try for a change. There's more to life than bicycles.

Bruce Hammal ● 2202d

A strange response from somebody who spends so much time on the topic and is limiting his reading and comprehension to one side of the argument. The Sunday Times! No thanks my son has the Beano for me to dive into when I need to go higher brow.

Paul Campbell ● 2202d

Actually Paul I have limited interest in "the topic" per se. I am drawn to the debate because I have always resented abuse of power and position. I would be having the same argument if Hounslow Council were trying to destroy Chiswick as I know it in order to install lanes for a few Morris dancers up and down the high road. Yet again I have to remind you that it is the principal of the thing! However you are right to choose the Beano over the Sunday Times - for a while there I was worried that you were a Dandy man.Meanwhile I'm off to refresh my knowledge of "The Prince" better to know my enemy. You might want to dig out "Don Quixote" - there's a bit about "tilting at windmills".

Bruce Hammal ● 2202d

Self-correction: "principle".

Bruce Hammal ● 2202d

Haha, Bruce, brilliant!

Claire Moran ● 2202d

Why would you assume that I haven’t read Cervantes? All my friends would assume that I had.

Paul Campbell ● 2202d

Ooh touchy! Actually I said you should dig it out, assuming naturally that it is already on your bookshelf - in the original Spanish of course. In fact I no longer have a copy myself, but I do remember the  story."The Prince" on the other  hand is always on my bedside table.

Bruce Hammal ● 2202d

What evidence do you have that the poll was biased? Would the poll have been pointless if it had found a majority against LTN's?

Tom Pike ● 2202d

You really need to go back through earlier posts. However, to summarise.2000 people were asked for their opinion in a poll commissioned to beef up Sadiq Khan's position in his stand-off with the government over various matters including Tfl funding. The polling company used actually makes a selling point of the fact that it will make sure you get the result you want. In terms of relevance to our little issues here in W4 64% of the carefully selected respondents hadn't even heard  about the closure of Hammersmith bridge. Do you want any more? Personally that's enough for me to put as much credence in this as I do in the tooth fairy.You are obviously a believer!

Bruce Hammal ● 2202d

The guy who commissioned the poll is actually not a fan of LTN's.  If the polling company wanted to make him happy, they failed. Certainly the poll has nothing to do with Sadiq Khan.It was a poll of all London. Should anyone who doesn't know the current status of the Silvertown tunnel be excluded as well? While you don't like the result, you haven't offered any reasonable grounds for discounting it.

Tom Pike ● 2202d

Again you really should go back and read the thread before commiting words to screen. If by "the guy who commissioned the poll" you mean Dave Hill, then I fear that's your first error. According to Paul Campbell, Dave Hill "scooped" the poll for OnLondon (Paul's word). Paul goes on"I don't have enough information about the commissioning or the selection or the questioning methodology used for the poll itself to defend it". He makes the same point about Mr Hill being no fan of LTNs so there was no mystery about that. I probably could find out who did commission the poll but it wasn't him and to my eye Sadiq Khan was the principal focus of the survey if not himself its instigator. If you bother to look at the polling company's website you will see that they quite openly boast about their ability to pick the right demographic of respondents to engineer the desired result.I take your point about it being a poll of all London - though we have no evidence of that. All in all if that's not enough cause for concern to any fair-minded person then I don't know what is. Who says I didn't like the result? I didn't even concern myself with the numbers as the whole exercise  seemed so valueless. You might want to ask Paul why he posted the article in the first place as I couldn't make head nor tail of his reply - possibly you speak the same language.

Bruce Hammal ● 2202d

How a scientist has come to rely on polling is beyond me. Polls are completely subjective and can be constructed from the outset to pre-determine results. The cure for cancer does not lie in polling. When it comes to the public arena, objectivity would come in the form of engagement and debate as it would not filter out opinions nor would it omit any question.I made a poll.Would you prefer to be bitten by a tarantula or a python?Not being bitten is not an option. You must choose one.Results are in.People enjoy being bitten by venomous creatures.We all know that not to be true, but the results of the poll (which does not pass for data) indicate that it is.Welcome to TfL and cycle lobby polling strategies.

David Lesniak ● 2202d

Bruce, if politicians carry out polling, it's usually for their own information, not to give exclusively to a news website. In any case, a polling company will aim to provide the most accurate information, not a biased sample that just buttresses the client's opinion - there's just no business in that. You misread their prospectus if you think that's all they do. For example, the company's latest polling has Biden on 49% and Trump on 41%. Is that because the Democrats paid them off?This survey was of Londoners. There is absolutely no reason to believe it was of a particular area of London with no experience of LTN's, especially as many London boroughs were generally successful in getting government funding to implement them.  This survey, conducted a few days ago, found 52% supporting and 19% opposing LTN's, remarkably similar to TfL's September survey of 51% to 16%. Maybe in your eyes that suggests collusion, but it might just be that really is how Londoners feel about these measures. After all, half of London households don't have cars and yet suffer from the pollution, noise and safety hazard from too much through traffic. Many of those who do drive feel similarly.  It shouldn't be so much of a surprise that LTN's are popular. But I agree, this poll clearly caused you concern, and that's possibly why you claim it has no value.

Tom Pike ● 2202d

Come off it Tom. That's nonsense and no fair person (there I go again banging on about fairness) would give credence to a poll like that. If anyone is guilty of seeing what he wants to see I'm afraid it's you.I still can't work out who you are saying commissioned this poll. According to OnLondon these are "new opinion poll findings provided exclusively to On London." Note "provided to" not "commissioned by". Somebody paid for it - does OnLondon have that sort of spare cash because it can't have been cheap. I will guarantee that if I had the funds I could commission a polling company to ask the same questions of 2000 different people and come up with directly opposite findings.Anyway on this I fear the twain will never meet so I'll leave you to it as I have to get on my bike and cycle over to Hammersmith. I can tell you now I won't be going anywhere near Chiswick High Road.

Bruce Hammal ● 2202d

It's a classic logical fallacy to claim that as all fair people agree with you, you must be right. And it's a variant of the same fallacy to claim if you had a chance to prove you were right, you would most certainly prove you are right, so that proves it!It's clear you're convinced on these grounds, at least.

Tom Pike ● 2201d

" to claim that as all fair people agree with you, you must be right. "He is right. He is spot on. You may not like the fact that he is right and you have the right to to be upset that he is 100% correct.

Steve Taylor ● 2201d

Thanks, that's an excellent example of extending Bruce's logical fallacy to proof by assertion.

Tom Pike ● 2201d

I watched the Ealing cabinet meeting last night and was pleased to see this poll was cited in the debate on the motion proposed by the Conservatives to scrap all LTNs to illustrate the popularity of these schemes amongst Londoners. Also meanwhile Hounslow’s Cabinet approved the next phase of the Streetscape programme with its proposal to implement LTN schemes all over the Borough including Chiswick.

Paul Campbell ● 2201d

I think some councillors will have taken the view that if those LTN polling numbers translate to votes, then they could count on little support in future elections for rolling back these measures.

Tom Pike ● 2201d

Most people would agree with making an area safer, never like the cycle lanes at the start because cyclists were not using them and some lanes were to narrow to be used although some improvement there,  like the idea of giving shoppers more space if that was the reason for these changes however it has made life far more difficult for the elderly and disabled and the impact on some of the existing businesses are being overlook. Instead of arguing could the problems be addressed, also the problem of displaced traffic which affects the whole area.  If the idea behind this was pollutionshould EVs be allowed access everywhere as the attemp to give shoppers more space has prove not to work.  seems you are all going round in circles.

Janice Evans ● 2201d

Wouldn't surprise me if the poll did reflect what londoners (as a whole) feel about whatever the actual question that was asked.On the face of it, a LTN sounds like a desirable thing ... no through traffic that is merely using the roads in the neighbourhood to avoid delays on the more major roads that are in a better position to cope, so less pollution in the neighbourhood, quieter more peaceful streets etc. etc.What's not to like? And if you have no direct experience in a poll you're probably quite likely to support the idea of LTNs. The devil is in the detail and how to implement the concept.But unless you implement the LTN people will never know how things will work out. Of course they'll make predictions. We might find that if there is a wide spread roll out of LTNs people will still love them, or the opposite.Also, around 45% of households in London don't have a car. Perhaps if you are in this 45% you are more likely to support LTNs?

Andrew Jones ● 2201d

Polls don't work, we know that from elections.

Janice Evans ● 2200d

Andrew, I agree with all you say. We have an opportunity to try them out, and roll back if they don't deliver.I just posted separately just how large a cost Chiswick is paying for traffic pollution, but there are signs that levels are falling significantly in Chiswick, and not just what might be expected by any overall drop in traffic. Both Ealing and Hounslow have put out traffic monitors, so it should be possible to come to a conclusion based on hard evidence rather than predictions.

Tom Pike ● 2200d

Depends where they are placed Tom.

Janice Evans ● 2200d

It's a good opportunity to encourage the use of EVs. Looking at it from another angle.

Janice Evans ● 2200d

Polls don't always predict the outcome correctly, but the more one sided the poll result is (in a simple YES/NO scenario) the more confidence I'd have that the poll prediction would reflect the majority view.On the other hand, if opinion is split 50:50 and the pollsters make a prediction, then they'll probably get it wrong around 50% of the time!

Andrew Jones ● 2200d

Agree Andrew.

Janice Evans ● 2200d

Agreed. I've seen Ealing have put new ones on South Parade and Fishers Lane. Hounslow have put down many more.

Tom Pike ● 2200d

Hard data will be a lot more revealing than anecdotal evidence. I've seen the approach to Acton Lane along South Parade backed up past the Fishers Lane roundabout on about two occasions, and on other occasions very little traffic along that route. The only conclusion I have is that I can't really draw any conclusions from my experience in this case.

Andrew Jones ● 2200d

To be clear, both Paul and Tom support a Labour leader lying to his constituents about having consulted with the ambulance service when, in fact, no such consultation took place.Global health panedemic.Ambulance service never consulted.Response time prolonged.Lives threatened.And for the dermatologist in the mix: first do no harm.

David Lesniak ● 2200d

Hard "data" collected during a global pandemic and lockdown, does not an accurate trend make.Any scientist will tell you.

David Lesniak ● 2200d

Wow Paul this one has really fired up the Chiswick Tea Party!

John Stroud ● 2200d

Still more useful than anecdotal evidence though?I drive into work on the days I work, and while the streets were deserted for the first few weeks after the lockdown came in, in March, the traffic volumes (and delays) don't seem to me to be significantly down compared to pre-lock down, in the morning.There's probably some hard "data" out there that shows how traffic on the A40 into London has varied other the last 12 months that either supports or disproves what I feel is the case.Unfortunately, there hasn't been traffic counters on South Parade, Goldhawk Road etc. so I agree with the general gist of your post.

Andrew Jones ● 2200d

Tell us, John, did you serve in the military so elected officials can lie to their constituents and jeopardize lives?That's what you risked your life for???

David Lesniak ● 2200d

"To be clear, both Paul and Tom support a Labour leader lying to his constituents about having consulted with the ambulance service when, in fact, no such consultation took place."Can't speak for Paul, but of course I don't! I guess you have a vote in the upcoming US elections. Are you going to refuse to back Biden because he's admitted lying?

Tom Pike ● 2200d