| Topic: | Re:Bad Manners | |
| Posted by: | Francis Rowe | |
| Date/Time: | 10/01/12 10:07:00 |
| Thomas, when I said that we should be grateful that Chris has chosen to comment I was not meaning to be sarcastic. Given that he used to be a much more regular, popular and valued contributor to this forum the presumption is that the Council's policy is not one that has been determined by him. The Council has introduced a series of measures which will have a significant impact on many people's lives and has done so without any consultation which under the circumstance is understandable. However, they do have an obligation to explain and justify the measures they have taken. In particularly I think people would like an explanation as to why, if TfL are still indicating there is a chance that the flyover could be open this month, if only to limited traffic, are these measures being rushed through. This forum provides a perfect medium for them to argue the case for their measures. Of course people will be upset and unhappy but in the past Chris has argued with force for schemes which initially the majority of people were hostile to and he has managed to make people better understand why he thinks they are necessary. At the moment the consensus appears to be that Hounslow Council have introduced these measures primarily for the purpose of raising revenue from an area which doesn't vote for them. If 24 hour bus lanes are a good thing in themselve why not introduce them across the whole borough? Your patrician attitude in dismissing those that get tickets after the changes as 'Those who can't read roadsigns' is pretty shabby. People who haven't benefitted from your education or have come to this country for work probably also don't enjoy the level of income that you do and the fines they receive will be a significant part of their disposable income. Also to expect people to recheck roadsigns everytime they park in a place where they have parked many times before is daft. I was surprised to hear there is no statutory obligation on Council's to publicise such changes. It was clear from last Sunday that there were a significant number of people who were unaware of the changes as numerous cars were parked in newly restricted areas. Net result is no benefit to reducing congestion and a fine bonanza for the Council which adds weight to belief that this is the true purpose of these measures. I have never claimed to be an expert in this area but you don't appear to one either. Even the most hawkish anti-car transport experts will acknowledge that the initial impact of reducing road capacity is to increase congestion. They argue that in the long term modal shift and traffic 'evaporation' will eventually reduce congestion. As the hope is that at this stage Hammersmith flyover will be reopened at the latest by June the short term impact is all that matters. |