| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Conservatives need strong pro-cycling measures | |
| Posted by: | Tom Pike | |
| Date/Time: | 29/05/21 07:02:00 |
| “We will never be dogmatically in favour of or against any cycleway or an LTN - we always assess them on their merits. For example, will they improve air quality and make all forms of traffic flow more freely, and will they make life easier for local businesses to succeed.” Fair enough, but that is not what you have done. For example, you have repeatedly stated that you object to CW9 because TfL modelling shows it would not reduce pollution. However, that modelling assumed no change in overall traffic levels, or modal shift, and hence gave no overall change in pollution. You mistake an assumption as a prediction, and repeat this misleading claim even after it has been pointed out several times. It is misleading claims such as this that have undermined the credibility of local Conservative transport policy for anyone who takes the environmental challenges that London faces seriously. It explains why Londoners who voted Green gave their second preference votes by a factor of more than 6:1 to Khan, not Bailey, and it would have contributed to Chiswick backing Khan over Bailey as well. At this point you have a choice. You can continue to erode your local support by making such misleading claims justifications for your group’s transport policy. Or you can live up to your own stated commitment to treat these traffic measures on their merits, including not prejudging outcomes of trials such as in Devonshire Road. But you can’t choose to do both. You fact that you have completely overlooked that this article makes exactly this point, and instead decided to quote the one misleading sentence in it unfortunately does not give much confidence that you will make the right choice. |