Responses to 10 by 2020 ~ Cycling Safety Challenge

Some of the responses to the Stop Killing Cyclists “10 by 2020” London Mayoral Cycling Safety Challenge

For most up-to-date set of responses, please refer to: Facebook cyber-event

Short-cut to this page:



Diane Abbott (Reply received)
Christian Wolmar (Reply received)
Tessa Jowell
David Lammy (Reply received)
Sadiq Khan (Reply received)
Gareth Thomas


Stephen Greenhalgh
Zac Goldsmith (Reply received)
Syed Kamall (Reply received)
Andrew Boff

Liberal Democrats:

Caroline Pidgeon (Reply received)
Teena Lashmore
Brian Haley
Marisha Ray
Paul Reynolds


Caroline Russell (Reply received)
Sian Berry (Reply received)
Tom Chance (Reply received)
Benali Hamdache
Rashid Nix (Reply received)
Jonathan Bartley

Something New Party:

Lindsey Garrett

Respect Party:

George Galloway


Rosaline Readhead (Reply Received)
Siobhan Benita


No Declared Candidates


Diane Abbott, Labour:

1. 10% BY 2020
Moving forward it is essential that we see a dramatic rise in the proportion of the TFL budget allocated for cycling infrastructure across London. Not only is the aim to improve safety and efficiency for existing cyclists, more investment will encourage increasing numbers of Londoners to get on their bikes.

Yes, we must work on ways to reduce HGV and bus blind spots which are a key cause of accidents. I will work to ensure the adequate safety equipment is installed on all existing and new buses, HGVs, and Tipper trucks throughout London.

Yes, with the additional TFL funds for cycling I will look to roll out a Mini-Holland programme across all London boroughs.

Yes, improving the physical safety of cyclists is paramount. If this is the most effective method of separating cyclists and traffic then I will support the implementation of a comprehensive system of physically protected cycle routes throughout London’s road network.

Yes, we must put the safety of cyclists and pedestrians firsts and lowering speed limits is a key method of achieving this.

Yes, we must work to ensure we place cyclist’s safety first at junctions. I am very keen to consult with cycling groups to determine the best way to do this and if the Idaho Law is the most effective method then I shall definitely support its implementation.

Yes- every year there are tragic deaths caused by tipper trucks, these are preventable. We must put cyclist’s safety first and end both the timed delivery systems for HGVs in the construction industry and the system of paying for bus performance by contracted Excess Waiting Time Targets.

Oxford Street was recently found to register the highest levels of nitrogen dioxide in the world caused by exhaust fumes, yet it is still the street in London with the highest footfall. The damaging health implications are plain to see, we must work towards pedestrianizing key areas throughout central London.

Yes I will create roles in City Hall for cycling representatives to ensure that cyclist’s voices are heard and that they have the opportunity to shape policy direction. Walking and cycling are key methods of transport throughout the city so yes they should be incorporated into the name.

I have already highlighted the importance of introducing last mile delivery hubs to reduce the amount of HGVs in central London. Further to this we must look at methods to reduce tipper trucks in the rush hour as they are a major cause of accidents, so I will look at implementing a ban during peak times but there would need to be exemptions.

(Return to list of candidates)

David Lammy, Labour:

(see posting on Facebook HERE)

1. 10% BY 2020
I have already pledged to double the cycling budget and to work to double the number of journeys in London made by bike by 2020. The TfL budget is planned years in advance to fund many different and necessary infrastructure projects; it would be irresponsible for any candidate to promise to take the cycling budget to 10% without due consideration for other projects, many of which will help reduce vehicle traffic, but I can promise that I will always prioritise the expansion of cycling in London and significantly increase the cycling budget year-on-year.

Yes absolutely, but I’m worried that this doesn’t go far enough. That’s why I’ve said I will ban HGVs in rush hour, in order to protect cyclists and pedestrians and reduce pollution and congestion.

I have been very impressed by what I’ve seen of the new Mini Holland programme in the borough of Waltham Forest and I think that these are great projects. I would support any borough who decided to implement a Mini Holland programme and use the powers of the Mayor’s office to help borough councils see it through.

Yes, this is already an important part of my transport policy. We will know that London has become a true cycle-friendly city when we see more parents dropping their kids off at school by bike – I would like to be able to do this myself – and cycling is as safe, accessible and commonplace as walking down the pavement. Segregated cycle lanes and cycle superhighways are key to making London cycle friendly.

Yes, a 20mph speed limit on significantly more roads in London would not only make the roads safer for cyclists and pedestrians, it would also help reduce air pollution and fuel consumption. But changing the speed limit to 20mph, as has already happened in some boroughs such as Islington, is not enough without adequate enforcement.

London’s pedestrians and cyclists need to be given priority when it comes to road planning. As Mayor, I would change the planning regulations to reflect this. Most junctions in London are set up to make things easy for cars when actually it’s people who should be given precedence. I can promise that I will act from day one to make junctions safe for cyclists as swiftly as possible.

Sadly it isn’t within the Mayor’s powers to end this. However, the Mayor’s office is a great bully pulpit: I can promise to campaign for an end to contract rules that put pressure on drivers to ignore safe driving practices. This is another area where enforcement is key. No one should be putting speed and cash ahead of lives and while taking away timed delivery regimes would help put a stop to this, making sure drivers obey the law before anything else would also help.

As Mayor I would change the planning law to make pedestrians and cyclists the first priority in all future road planning. Pedestrianising more of the city is a key part of my vision for London – I’ve already said I want to see 1000 residential streets closed to traffic and I would also seek to extend that to many busy parts of Central London. We have to stop making private cars the priority, and instead create streets and public spaces for Londoners to enjoy. As Mayor I would want to make this happen not just in central London but across all 32 boroughs – I believe residents in Outer London need more pedestrian- and cycle- friendly streets and public spaces, too.

Yes, I’ve already said that we need a permanent cycling representative on the TFL board. All other forms of transport are represented and it is completely wrong that there is no one to represent cyclists. I am not convinced changing the name of TFL would have any tangible benefit – what does need to change is the lack of both representation and funding that currently goes to cyclists.

I have already called for a ban on HGVs and tipper trucks during rush hour and as Mayor this would be one of the first things I would seek to introduce. I have also been vocal about the need to promote the use of electric vehicles in London. We need to consider how to handle commercial and residential deliveries differently and I see electric and other no-emissions vehicles having a large role in any new delivery infrastructure. The German model of deliveries being made to large out-of-town depots and then transported into the city using smaller vehicles is one which seems to me to have many benefits and something I am looking at in detail.

(Return to list of candidates)

Christian Wolmar, Labour:

(see posting on Facebook HERE)

1. 10% BY 2020
ANS: – I will certainly increase budget for cycling dramatically and begin a programme of dutch style segregated lanes
(Clarified he would at least double current budget ie he would go from 1.4 to 2.8%)

ANS: Yes

ANS: Much of the added money from above will be directed at local schemes which are important – I would like to see a mini holland in every borough but it does require borough cooperation

ANS: yes

ANS: yes and a few other dual carriageways and major roads – a default enforced 20 mph

ANS: The Junctions programme will be accelerated.

ANS: Not within the mayor’s remit,but I will expose the risks and campaign very hard for this. I think it is a key issue behind the large number of deaths caused by tipper lorries. My partner was actually hit by one 8 years ago, so I aANS: m well aware of the dangers
(Later clarified he would do what was asked within the Mayor’s remit) – therefore is a Yes.

ANS: Yes – though I would start with Oxford St, the northbound lane of Park Lane, and the section of Strand outside Somerset House – the ultimate goal would be an area of central London where cars were the exception rather than the rule

ANS: One representative is part of my policy – I would like to see a walking one, too

ANS: yes though I would introduce a licensing system for exceptions/urgent deliveries

(Return to list of candidates)

Sadiq Khan, Labour:

(see posting on Facebook HERE which includes extrapolation to each point)

It is clear that far too many cyclists are dying on London’s roads at present and that urgent action needs to be taken to make getting around our city safer for those on two wheels. Tackling this issue isn’t simply a matter of policy, it’s a matter of life and death and so I applaud the work being done by the campaigners behind this initiative. It is crucially important that we all, cyclists, campaigners and politicians alike, continue to raise the profile of this issue and work together to devise practical solutions to some of the dangers being posed to London’s cyclists. Along with tackling our city’s polluted air and encouraging more Londoners to take up cycling as a healthy alternative to driving, making the capital’s roads safer is one of my top priorities.

To that end, I am happy to pledge a significant increase in investment for cycling infrastructure, as well as promise to look carefully at taking tipper trucks and HGV’s off London’s roads during rush hour. In order to keep large lorries off the roads during the day time, rules restricting deliveries at night may need to be relaxed so as Mayor I would enter into discussions with local authorities to identify where this might be possible. I will also examine the case for equipping all TfL vehicles with blind-spot safety equipment and support a Mini-Holland Programme for all London Boroughs within my first term.

I am committed to continuing the investment in the Cycle Superhighways programme and upgrading existing segregated cycle ways to a higher standard. I also want to roll out more 20mph zones in residential areas, having long campaigned for their introduction in my own constituency of Tooting. Moreover, I would be strongly in favour of adopting a variant of the Idaho Law and I have pledged to revise the list of junctions in need of immediate attention, prioritising improving those where the most deaths and accidents have occurred. Doing this is absolutely essential because Londoners must be able to move around their city with confidence and as safely and efficiently as possible. That is why I have also committed to pedestrianising Oxford Street and expanding the number of car-free areas across the city. I would also be happy to appoint a representative, nominated by cycling groups, to the board of TfL to ensure that the views and experiences of cyclists are heard at the highest levels within City Hall and acted upon. Furthermore, I will use planning laws to deliver more cycle storage provision in new office and housing developments and I will work with the boroughs to deliver more secure on-street cycle parking in residential areas.

(Return to list of candidates)

Syed Kamall, Conservatives:

(see posting on Facebook HERE)

Thank you for this opportunity to explain my position to other cyclists. I should explain that I am a cyclist myself, pedestrian and an occasional driver.
Cycling will be an important part of my transport policy for London in order to reduce congestion, by taking traffic off the roads, improve the environment as well as improving public health.
I can’t give an unqualified yes to all the ts – however, I hope that my responses below will encourage you to help make me the cyclist’s choice for London mayor.

1. 10% BY 2020
While I understand the sentiment behind this, I’m not sure that simply allocating an amount of money will achieve the results we are all looking for. If I was to set a target, it would be to reduce the number of accidents by a certain amount. The problem is if you allocate a large sum of money like this officials will simply find ways to spend it on projects which don’t necessarily make a difference. We’ve all seen too many poorly designed junctions. Personally, I want to see the best idea coming forward. Every junction is different. Cyclists know what is needed. If they can show that a scheme is worth the money then lets get them in to city hall to help us design it and lets fund it.

I agree that blind spots are a massive problem for cyclists and for the lorry drivers who are caught up in incidents. There are calls in the European Parliament for lorry cabs to be designed to eliminate blind spots and I support that whole heartedly. I think we need to consult with the haulage industry too though on what they can do. Drivers are seeing it from the other point of view and when I speak to them I hear good ideas too. If we can find solutions which work for everyone then I would certainly be willing to look into the feasibility of retro fitting existing vehicles with that idea.

When I visited Amsterdam In 2013, I discussed how to make cycling more attractive while considering pedestrians and drivers too. I came away with a strong belief that the best solution was segregated cycle lanes, keeping cyclists away from pedestrians and other road users. So, yes, I support the extension of the Mini-Holland Programme and will champion it.

Yes. I believe we need to establish as many segregated cycle lanes as feasible.

I recently did some research on this and took a speed gun out to many parts of London and in many cases the 20mph speed limit simply didn’t work as people ignored it. Only where physical obstructions were installed such as road humps, was it effective. However, I don’t believe that a blanket 20mph speed limit across London is practical, especially on motorways, and if our aim is to protect cyclists then segregated cycle lanes and speed limits in the right places are I think the best solution.

While I understand the wish for cyclists to keep moving in London, my concern is that too many cyclists are unfortunately not obeying existing laws such as red lights and so I am concerned as to whether priority would be given to pedestrians. The current situation is putting a lot of stress on pedestrians trying to cross roads and making our roads more hazardous at the same time. If people can suggest a way to enforce rules then I would be very much open to look at the possibilities. Until then, I believe the best way forward is a comprehensive network of dedicated cycle lanes and other pro-cycling measures that will improve safety for all road users.

What I can’t do is add layers of bureaucracy onto industries that are already running on very thin profit margins. The best way to improve safety for cyclists is by enabling TfL to improve London’s road network for those on two wheels.

I’m certainly ready to look at this. Years ago ago, people scoffed at the idea of pedestrianising Trafalgar Square – and now look at what was achieved. I like the idea in general – however, we need to be sure that we can find other routes for the traffic, and particularly the buses, that would be affected. For example, if we closed Oxford Street to motor cars, would it be best to be fully pedestrianised ie no cyclists or to include dedicated cycle lanes? How do we enforce cyclists at 10mph or 20mph? Where would the buses and cars be diverted? How would residents react to more traffic in Wigmore Street and Grosvenor Street.

I will certainly have cycling champions on my TfL board but would not change the name. As far as I concerned, we need to make the case that cycling and waking are equally valid forms of “transport” and not a separate concept.

I would look at and discuss with businesses how we can encourage or “nudge” tipper trucks to not use roads during rush hours and how we increase deliveries using electric or cargo cycle fleets.

Again, I think the solution to the problem lies in improving the safety of London’s roads for cyclists. This is best achieved with projects such as mini-Hollands and dedicated cycle lanes.
I hope you have found my answers useful and if indeed you feel that offer an opportunity for cyclists then I hope you will do all you can to bring them to the attention of other road users.

A clarification was requested about some of his commitments and this response was received from his campaign team:

Sadiq’s position is that he will commit to investing significantly more on cycling infrastructure than is currently spent. We are unable to put an exact figure on it in terms of percentage increase because we feel it would be imprudent to do so until Sadiq has had an opportunity to closely scrutinise TfL’s books. However, it’s worth pointing out that as Transport Minister Sadiq increased spending on cycling initiatives in the past so he has a record of delivering in this area.

(Return to list of candidates)


Zac Goldsmith, Conservatives :

(see posting on Facebook HERE)

Thank you for your recent letter. As Mayor, I would build on the current Mayor’s emphasis on cycling. London’s population is likely to hit 10m within 15 years. If many of those new people choose to drive cars, our city will grind to a standstill, our air will be more polluted and people will less healthy.
I know from packed public meetings and surveys in my constituency as a London MP that safety is the number one barrier for cyclists. Alongside expanding our public transport system, I would do everything necessary to make cycling a safer and easier choice. Above all that involves improving technology for HGVs, which cause a disproportionate number of deaths; improving the most dangerous junctions; and providing safe cycle ways wherever possible and practical.
On improving technology for HGVs, TFL has made a good start with the new Safer Lorry Scheme, with Class V and VI mirrors (which eliminate some blind spots) now compulsory for all lorries in Greater London. I’m told TfL are planning to consult in January on further measures, such as requiring all lorries to retrofit windows on their cab doors to eliminate another blind spot. In the longer term, new lorries should have lower wheelbases and full-length glass doors – like dustcarts do now.
TFL is also trialling CCTV and alarm systems – which have great promise. However there are concerns that, once fitted, drivers may have an unrealistic sense of security and actually cause more accidents. So I will await the trial results but, if they are successful, I would require them to be fitted to lorries.
I support restrictions on the use of HGVs during rush hour, but I need to be confident that the consequent concentration of HGVs after 9:30am wouldn’t create additional risks. I support the idea of consolidated “last-mile” delivery services with electric vehicles.
In addition to action on lorries, we need to ensure cycle lanes are as safe as possible against all forms of traffic. I want to see more segregated cycle highways on TfL roads, and will work with willing Boroughs to ensure they are in the right place. I support the “Mini Holland” scheme – I campaigned for the one in Kingston – and would like to see more.
About 25% of all the roads in London currently have 20MPH. I will support local boroughs who choose to limit speeds and will look at the TfL Road Network to see where further 20 mph limits could be possible on red routes – balancing the need to keep traffic moving across the wider road network.
I’m interested in the idea of allowing cyclists to turn left when traffic is free at junctions. This seems to work well in New York, for example, and is worth exploring. I will push for greater pedestrianisation of major squares and shopping streets, in particular Oxford Street. But clearly whatever changes are brought in need to take account of local businesses and the bus network.
Finally, you ask two questions about cycling’s overall budget and whether I could nominate 2 board TfL members for cycling.
On board members, I have looked at this. I’m told the board’s rules on interests mean that anyone nominated on behalf of a particular interest group can’t speak in favour of that interest. So, for example, the two cab representatives cannot take any part in a discussion on taxi policy. However, one way or another, I will ensure cyclists voices are heard.
You also asked for a commitment that 10% of all TfL funding should go to cycling by 2020. As long as we have large infrastructure projects like Crossrail, the cycling budget will always be a smaller percentage for obvious reasons. In addition, unlike other forms of transport, cycling incurs very little operational expenditure, which is one of the many reasons it needs to be promoted. We need to invest properly in cycling, but the 10% commitment is not, in my view, realistic.
If I am selected as the Conservative Mayoral candidate, I will provide a full manifesto and I look forward to engaging fully with the cycling community when writing this.
Yours sincerely,
Zac Goldsmith.

(Return to list of candidates)

Caroline Pidgeon, Liberal Democrats:

(see posting on Facebook HERE)

Thank for your questions from Stop Killing Cyclists.
I have set out my views on each point below. I have explained my views at some length on the points as I cannot fully support each of your requests at this stage.
As each issue is so significant I do hope you can also clarify how replies from Mayoral candidates will be published. As you state no word limit I hope you will be able to publish my full response.

1. 10% BY 2020
As Chair of the London Assembly’s Transport Committee I was proud to publish the report Gearing Up in 2012, which highlighted that TfL’s expenditure on cycling was a pitiful 1 per cent of its budget, despite cycling being 2 per cent of journeys in London. It was an important achievement by the London Assembly and London’s cyclists to get the Mayor and TfL to quickly sign up to this commitment although it is obviously a disgrace that for the last few years TfL continues to underspend the budget allocated to cycling. This is an issue I have continually raised and challenged the Mayor over. If the Mayor and TfL had actually implemented this recommendation over the last two years London would now have safer cycling infrastructure in many more places.
I support TfL spending immediately 2 per cent of its budget on cycling – with literally every penny being spent and also being spent well. (We should never forget that some cycling expenditure has actually been poorly spent, such as the initial Cycle Superhighway 2).
I believe in the principle that the overall cycling budget should also reflect the growth in cycle journeys. At this stage I would commit to the cycling budget increasing to at least 3 per cent of TfL’s budget by 2020 as I would hope that by 2020 at least 3 per cent of journeys were by bike. If cycling journeys increase at a faster rate I would of course revise the budget up further.
Finally, I would add the importance of TfL’s cycling investment being supported by other sources of income, including from London Boroughs, major employers in London (especially in relation to bike parking) and also from section 106 development deals for new buildings.

I support all these safety measures and others being adopted, such as the Confidential Safety Reporting system being extended to cover all these vehicles.

I certainly want to see real action on cycling taken in every borough, however the needs of each London Borough does vary and this should be recognised.
I also believe London Boroughs should be incentivised to take action. One of the beneficial effects of the mini-Holland programme being limited in its first stage to three boroughs was that London Boroughs had to prepare and raise their game over their cycling plans to receive TfL funding. Whilst I do support the mini Holland programme being rolled out to all Boroughs, key to its success is that it must deliver the best possible cycling infrastructure.

Yes, this is absolutely essential.

I support the greater adoption of 20 mph speed limits and I believe it should be the default speed limit in all London Boroughs. I am proud that Liberal Democrats have campaigned on this issue in so many London Boroughs over a number of years.
I also support the full enforcement of the speed limit by the police.
However, the adoption of default 20 mph speed limits across a whole London Borough is an issue (other than on TfL roads) that ultimately can only be decided by the London Boroughs.

For this to happen it would need agreement by Government. I would be willing to permit a trial allowing cyclists to turn left when traffic is free at junctions, however I am reluctant to advocate its comprehensive adoption until I receive clear evidence that pedestrians and especially vulnerable pedestrians (children and blind and partially sighted people) would not be adversely affected.
In relation to the provision of safe left-hand turns I certainly support a far higher adoption and adoption at 500 junctions would seem appropriate.

I would above all else like to see fewer HGVs on London’s roads, especially by making far greater use of the Thames. I would push for as many developments as possible to have tighter conditions to ensure the river is used more and vehicle movements are minimised. I also believe we could reduce the number of HGVs on our roads during the day by relaxing the night time restrictions on lorries in some parts of London. A relaxation occurred during the 2012 Games and seemed to work reasonably well.
In relation to all contracts that the Mayor can influence through contractual means I believe the highest standards must be set in terms of both the design of the vehicles and the behaviour of drivers.
In relation to bus performance targets set for bus companies I would be reluctant to remove all performance targets, but it is obviously vital that they do not have adverse effects on drivers’ behaviour. I support a full investigation into this issue to ensure robust policies are in place. In the meantime I welcome the recent publication of bus collision data. I have supported the adoption of the Confidential Safety Reporting system for London’s bus fleet for some time, which thankfully is now taking place.

Since the 2004 Mayor and London Assembly elections the Liberal Democrats have supported the full pedestrianisation of Oxford Street and last year my colleague published a further report setting out how this could be achieved. Further information can be seen at this website.
Following the 2008 Mayor and London Assembly elections Boris Johnson made the foolish decision to cancel the existing TfL programmed scheme to partially pedestrianise Parliament Square. I would support this policy now being implemented. I would also support a series of Summer Streets traffic free days all over the capital so that people can take ownership of their streets and look to pedestrianise more streets across the capital where appropriate. This could include more streets in Soho for example.

While I can understand the attraction of having two specific cycling representatives on TfL’s Board I believe the policy could potentially be counterproductive. Cycling issues must be seen as a significant issue by every TfL Board member. The policy could even lead to cycling issues being marginalised. I think many in the taxi and private hire industries believe this has been the case with their appointments who have not been able to speak in public on their issues!
Overall I believe the TfL Board needs a big shake up. Its composition is quite frankly very male and pale. A lot of fresh new members are needed.
I would also advocate every TfL Board member having to undertake, before their adoption, a formal comprehensive induction programme to ensure a full understanding of the needs of the widest range of road users, including cyclists. An understanding of the needs of vulnerable groups, such as children and disabled people with mobility needs should also be part of their induction.
I also believe the whole TfL Board should operate in a far more transparent manner. For example I believe full transcripts (as opposed to sanitised minutes) should be available for all their meetings.
In relation to the name of Transport for London I see no need for a change. I would like to see the needs of a whole range of people, such as disabled people and children, given a far higher priority, however adopting all these groups, as well as cyclists and pedestrians into the title of the organisation would make it rather unwieldy!

I support a trial of all HGVs being prohibited from central London at rush hour. It is vital to ensure that the policy actually works and does not just redistribute collisions during the day.
More widely I would like to see a reduction in HGVs on London’s roads through greater use being made of the Thames, especially by the construction industry. I also believe some relaxation of the night time ban on lorries could help reduce the number of HGVs on London’s roads during the day.
I believe cargo bikes have an important role in all parts of London and I would promote their greater use.
And finally
In addition to answering the above questions I would like to stress my support for the following policies which I believe will make London safer for cycling.
• I strongly support a pedestrian and cycling bridge linking Rotherhithe to Canary Wharf as proposed by Sustrans. A safe crossing for cyclists is desperately needed. Consideration should also be given for a further pedestrian and cycle bridge further down the Thames towards the Greenwich peninsular.
• I do not support the Silvertown road tunnel. I believe that the current Mayor’s proposals for road bridges and tunnels in east London will actually generate more traffic, creating harmful air pollution, more road collisions and deter many people from cycling. The funds proposed for road bridges must be allocated to public transport based river crossings and pedestrian and cycle bridges.
• I believe workplace parking charges should be introduced for all major employers in central London. Such a levy would provide a useful source of funding for TfL, but most importantly discourage many motorists from regularly driving into central London every day.

For further information about my views on cycling please see an article I recently provided to the London Cycling Campaign.

With best wishes
Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM

(Return to list of candidates)

Caroline Russell, Green Party:

Note: copied from her blog dated 3 August 2015: 10 by 2020 will help all Londoners

The Ten Point Mayoral Safer Cycling Challenge, launched today by campaign group Stop Killing Cyclists is a blueprint for making London a better city for all residents not just those who get about on a bike.

I think it’s great and here are my responses to the ten points in the plan:

10% by 2020
10% of the TfL budget on making streets more people friendly yes. Cycle infrastructure can make streets better for all residents and any cycle infrastructure improvements must include measures to make life better for people walking too.

End HGV/bus blind spot
Technology is changing fast. If elected Mayor I would ensure that all high cab vehicles were fitted with the latest safety equipment to minimise blind spots and enable drivers to see people on bikes and on foot. I’d also insist on all TfL procured projects specifying low cab (like dustbin lorry) vehicles.

Mini Hollands for all
I would want every borough to benefit from more people friendly streets. Enabling all boroughs to bring in Mini-Holland thinking and principles would be an absolute priority. It’s not just about mini holland schemes, all road spending should ensure active travel is the most safe and convenient means to get around.

Physically protected cycle lanes
Visiting cities like Copenhagen, it is striking how people on bikes are not just the fit and the young. London needs to make cycling normal for everyone from 3 – 103 years old. And that means radically changing the way we use our street space, providing protected cycle routes that make journeys by bike easy, safe and a pleasure.

London 20MPH zone
I was part of the Living Streets London Action Group team that came up with the case for #Cityof20 – 20mph on main roads where people live, work and shop. I was proud to have influenced the decision to bring in 20mph on all main roads in Islington. 20mph is not going to redesign our streets but it will reduce danger and make our streets less traffic dominated. So, yes.

Safer left hand turns: emergency programme + Idaho law
Allowing people on bikes to turn left turn against a red light at junctions (Idaho law) when there are no pedestrians crossing would help cyclists to get away from the lights (and danger from other vehicles). However it relies on people being considerate to pedestrians. I’d prefer to prioritise the redesign of junctions to design out left hook danger, but recognise that we may need an Idaho law solution as an interim measure as TfL are working through the list of junctions quite slowly.

End lethal time pressures on buses/tipper trucks.
No vehicle driven commercially in London should have a time penalty built in to the driver’s pay or the performance monitoring of the company that owns the vehicle. Further, all drivers should have access to Confidential Incident Reporting and Analysis System (CIRAS) which is standard across the railways and has been introduced to the London bus network today. This will help identify and eliminate systemic risk on our roads as has been done so effectively on the rail network.

Squares and streets fit for humans
Removing traffic from some of London’s streets is essential to make London a great city to live in, to work in and to visit. I still remember the excitement of the major West End street closures for the art event the Sultan’s Elephant nine years ago. We can do street closures and the world doesn’t stop turning. Imagine Parliament Square with less traffic. Of course the Mayor of London should enable the creative use of streets with closures on both a temporary and a permanent basis. I would support traffic removal on the full list of streets: Oxford St, Trafalgar Sq, Piccadilly, Parliament Sq, and Bank Junction.

Two TfL board places for cyclists
I’d want to see people representing all transport areas on the TfL board. So advocates for walking and cycling should definitely by represented. I would not change the name of TfL to the “London Cycling, Walking and Transport Authority”. I might however change it to “Transport for Londoners” – but to be honest that would not be a priority, I’d prefer to get the wider representation on the board rather than spending money on changing the stationery.

Tipper truck ban
I fully support a rush hour ban on tipper trucks and HGVs. It is extraordinary that we allow massive delivery lorries in to central London on streets crowded with people making their way to work, school or the shops. I would definitely support freight consolidation, electric delivery trucks and cargo bike deliveries as these would reduce road danger and clean up our air making London a better place to live.

This ambitious plan is just what is needed to tackle some of the big issues facing our city. Congestion, pollution, road death, serious injury, obesity, lung and heart health problems, struggling high streets and lack of capacity on public transport are all issues that the Mayor of London can address effectively using mayoral power to set the strategic direction for transport planning through Transport for London. This plan will make London a better place to live whether we travel on foot, by bike, by public transport or in a car or van.

If selected as the Green’s Mayoral candidate or as a candidate for the London Assembly list, I will champion the points in this plan as a way to make London’s streets fit for all Londoners.

Note 1. Title updated to “10 by 2020” from “10 for 2020” which was taken from a Stop Killing Cyclists Facebook post this morning.

Note 2. Item 8 updated as it was apparently unclear that I fully support it. 4/8/15

(Return to list of candidates)

Rashid Nix, Green Party:

(see Facebook posting HERE)

I use my bicycle for my daily travel needs and take my young son with me on the attached child’s saddle. Having experienced a direct hit from a truck on Denmark Hill, I fully appreciate the need for protected cycling infrastructure.”

1. 10% BY 2020
Will you commit to investing 10% of TfL budget on cycling infrastructure by 2020, building up each year from current minuscule 1.4%?

I will commit 5%

Will you require full blind-spot safety equipment (Left Hand Side CCTV and alarms) to be installed in all existing and new HGVs, buses, coaches and Tipper Trucks entering London?


Will you fund a Mini-Holland Programme for all London Boroughs within your first term?


Will you support a comprehensive grid of Go-Dutch standard physically protected cycle-routes across the TfL road network to enable people of all ages and abilities to cycle safely?


Will you support a 20mph speed limit across London (excluding motorways)?


Will you support the introduction of the Idaho law, allowing cyclists to turn left when traffic is free at junctions, with full legal priority for pedestrians, when doing so and support an emergency programme of installing safe protected left-hand turns at a minimum of the 500 junctions that were originally promised to be reviewed by Boris Johnson by the end of your first term? (NB These were subsequently cut to 33!)

Yes and Yes.

Will you end the lethal paid by timed delivery regimes for HGVs in the construction industry and end dangerous system of paying for bus performance by contracted Excess Waiting Time Targets?”


Will you support a programme of making our beautiful major squares and shopping streets fit for humans, by closing them to motorised transport, including:
Oxford Street,
Trafalgar Square,
Parliament Square,
Bank Junction, etc ?


Will you appoint two cycling representatives to the TfL Board, nominated by cycling groups and change its name to the London Cycling, Walking and Transport Authority?

Yes to board reps but no to name change – too long.

Will you ban tipper trucks at rush hour and introduce a scheme whereby electric delivery trucks to bring in goods from HGVs parked in outer London, into central London and promote cargo bikes for last mile


(Return to list of candidates)

Rosaline Readhead, Independent:

Hi Donnachadh,
Thanks for your message. It’s great that you have laid down these challenges. Good to debate a much needed revolution in transport on the streets of London. I support all these challenges and more. I believe that it will not only need to be financial but political as well. The Mayor will need to use powers to take over non TFL roads unless there is a sea change in the way boroughs are interacting with TFL, demanding other changes in exchange for protected lanes. Negotiations are far too slow for the urgent needs of Londoners to cut pollution, road casualties, inactivity, obesity and congestion.
I also believe that whole Active Travel Corridors, whole roads free of motorised vehicles will be required for the numbers of cyclists who will want to take to the roads, to be inclusive of larger bikes like tricycles and cargo bikes and the need for overtaking safely. Levels of 40% cycling will be attained rapidly if diesel and other highly polluting private cars are banned across London.
Of course I want to see all private cars banned from zones 1&2 and motorised traffic free roads where there are high levels of pedestrians, for example Camden High Street. This will require some re routing of current bus routes. But I feel it is imperative to prioritise Active travel ie walking and cycling and then buses and sharing taxis. Commercial motorised vehicles must be cleaned up, rationalised and fit in with the new layout. And I fully support incentives for cargo bikes.
I support a ban on private cars in Central London and a ULEZ for licensing system for commercial vehicles. I believe a ban is better for social cohesion, congestion charging has already created a system where statistically it is the wealthy that can afford to drive a private car in Central London, an additional chage will exacerbate this. I would not feel comfortable with just the very wealthy driving and parking around Central London.
If you would like any more information, or details please let me know. I’m happy to be challenged!
Best wishes

(Return to list of candidates)

Tom Chance, Green Party:

(Note: copied from his blog dated 4 August 2015: MY PLEDGE TO CYCLISTS ON ’10 BY 2020′)

By tomchance on 4th August 2015

I’m pleased to back most of the ‘10 by 2020‘ Mayoral Safer Cycling Challenge, published yesterday by Stop Killing Cyclists.

I’ve cycled all my life, I’ve commuted to work by bike all my adult life, and I’ve been active on and off in cycling campaigning locally for many years, including attending several of the Stop Killing Cyclists die-ins and various LCC bike protests. [picture space4cyclingdemo]

Cycling policy isn’t just about safety, or healthy exercise. Yes, we need to reduce the thousands killed and seriously injured on our roads, and the 9,500 people who die prematurely because if air pollution, and cycling can play a really big part in that. But cycling is also about coping with a growing population without our roads grinding to a halt, and our public transport system becoming hopelessly overcrowded. Perhaps more importantly, cycling is about making London a more civilised city, one in which our communities are no longer cut up by noisy polluting roads.

So I completely support Donnachadh’s call “to speed up the pace of transforming London into a safer, healthier and more beautiful city, fit for humans aged from 5 to 105 to cycle, walk and do business in safely.”

The ten point plan drawn up by Stop Killing Cyclists is a brilliant start on getting there. Here’s my response:

1. 10% BY 2020
I would aim for this, but I will not guarantee it. It’s such an important issue that I’m going to explain why in quite some detail.

First, I should say that I in my day job I have led on the Green Party Group’s budget work for the past four years, developing detailed proposals to get cross-party support for spending at least 2% of TfL’s budget to match the proportion of trips taken by bike. We’ve shown that this money can be found, and have worked with cycling groups to demonstrate it can be usefully spent. We’ve made this position credible and widely accepted.

I like the chutzpah and ambition of 10%, but don’t think it’s a credible policy to commit to.

Lifting it to 10% by 2020 would mean spending something close to £0.9bn in that year on cycling, which is around £0.8bn more than is currently planned by TfL (my best guess, they won’t publish these figures). That is equivalent to half the capital budget for the tube that year, and twenty times the bus capital budget. If we raised cycle investment by that much, what gives?

I have thought a lot about this, and have three suggestions as to how we could get cycling spending up well beyond 2%:

Scrap damaging plans to build motorway bridges and expand road capacity, and raise the congestion charge, which together could bring in perhaps £0.1-0.2bn a year.
Urgently review the capital investment plans for public transport. Some tube and train upgrade programmes could be slowed down, giving more money to cycling. This could be justified if cycling could be shown to get more benefits in terms of public safety and facilitating people’s journeys in a rapidly growing city. But I wouldn’t want to leave TfL without enough money to upgrade its dirty old bus fleet, for example.
Try to introduce a pay-as-you-drive charging system across London. This is Green Party policy and could raise the money required, but it may need extra powers from government so I couldn’t guarantee it would be in place raising enough money by 2020.
There’s a further issue. Greens have led a cross-party coalition to increase the cycling budget to something nearer 2% each year since 2011, but TfL has then underspent by a huge margin. They claim they can’t develop the plans quickly enough, and can’t recruit the staff. I’ve worked with cycle campaigners to counter those claims, and show 2% is doable. But 10% would be an incredible stretch. I’d love it to be possible, but I’m not convinced it is. As Mayor I could allocate £1bn, but I doubt much would get spent.

I don’t want to make easy promises that I cannot guarantee keeping on such an important issue. So I am happy to commit to spending more than 2% each year up to 2020, and to aim for 5% of journeys to be taken by bike by 2020, with a target of 10% by 2025.

Yes, absolutely. No vehicle should be allowed on the road if the driver cannot always see vulnerable road users next to or in front of them. It’s particularly galling to know that many drivers can’t see you sitting in an ASL box at traffic lights – talk about designing in danger!

I’d also specify low cab vehicles in all procurement for GLA, TfL, Met Police and Fire brigade contracts, and encourage major construction firms to follow suit.

Yes. The interest shown in the first round of applications shows that most boroughs want to do this, if given the money and technical support. We could turn two million journeys a day from car to bike trips in outer London alone if we really want for this.

One lesson I’d learn from the current programme is that resident engagement is key. I’d want local cycling and walking groups involved from the start, winning resident and business groups round to a vision of safer streets and experimenting with temporary layouts.

Yes. I was appalled when I saw the not-so-superhighway going through Peckham last year with almost no segregation at all, and in some cases cycle lanes being removed, and blogged about it here. This wouldn’t happen under my watch.

On many roads this should be a simple matter of reallocating excessive space from vehicles to cyclists, and having the budget and staff to get it done. On others it’s more difficult, and needs a city-wide strategy to reduce traffic levels so that road space can be shifted to cyclists without causing gridlock. We’re finally seeing that now on stretches of Cycle Superhighway, and I want them everywhere.

Yes, I’ve long supported 20mph speed limits. Here I was in the red coat in 2011 organising a campaign for a 20mph limit throughout Camberwell: [picture 20splenty]

We also need better enforcement to go with it. I live in Bromley and notice the increase in speeds as I leave Southwark on my commute home. But I also notice plenty of speeding and aggressive behaviour in 20mph areas. The Met Police should be told to enforce 20mph, and we need to employ a network of average speed cameras.

I’m very reluctant to support this one, because I see so much antisocial behaviour by all road users including cyclists and don’t want to create more opportunities for conflict. Vulnerable pedestrians should be able to cross the road without fear of some boy racer cutting them up. Legal niceties don’t cut it, as plenty of cyclists know at great personal cost!

So I would want to urgently review all junctions in London where there have been a significant number of KSIs in recent years and come up with a plan for each and every one within a few months of taking office, including emergency measures such as the ‘Idaho law’ if it’s appropriate, and plans to permanently fix the junctions so that rule can be revoked.

I would do everything in my power to pursue this.

My first step would be to ensure no GLA, TfL, Met Police or fire brigade contract ever specifies this, and to ask all subcontractors to follow suit. I would also work with the construction industry, as mentioned under question 2, to try and get broad agreement to avoid these.

Ultimately, I believe this issue needs to be taken up by Parliament, banning the practice across the country.

Yes, and we have great examples from London and other world cities like New York of public spaces thriving once this happens. Your list is a good starting point, but I would want to extend this beyond central London. We could be really radical in re-imagining town centres across the capital only having access by foot, bus and bike (plus tubes, trams and trains, of course).

I would definitely want to shake up the TfL Board, making a number of changes:

One representative apiece for walking and cycling
Getting rid of Peter Anderson due to his company’s role in lobbying against Cycle Superhighways
A representative for the major trade unions, to help improve industrial relations
Fewer big business representatives, and more representing networks of smaller firms
Bring more women and BME people onto the board, to make it more representative of London
On the second point, no I wouldn’t rename TfL. Walking and cycling are forms of transport just like trams, buses, tube trains and all the rest. It would be expensive and wasteful, and I’d much rather focus on transforming our streets rather than the name of our transport authority!

Yes, I would ban tipper trucks and HGVs at rush hour. Where Boris has focussed on delivery teams and narrow business interests, I want to focus on lives cut short by dangerous roads. People should come before profit.

I think we urgently need a comprehensive plan for commercial vehicles of all kinds, from the big lorries to the half-empty delivery vans racing around our streets. We need to look at the whole of London as well, reducing the number of unnecessary HGV and van journeys in outer London as much as inner London. We have to reduce traffic across London, and this must include commercial vehicles.

My pledge to cyclists

In answering these questions, I have to make clear that policy isn’t in the gift of Green Party politicians. It is decided by our members. So my first pledge is to champion this list in our policy debates, whether or not I am selected by party members.

My second is to take this list into City Hall if I’m elected to the London Assembly.

It was Greens in City Hall, working with campaigners, that got us where we are today. Our London Assembly Members stopped TfL cutting the miserly £5m cycling budget in 2002, and who consistently raised cycling when nobody else saw it as a serious transport issue. Since then, TfL has spent almost half a billion pounds on cycling. For years, cycling wouldn’t get a look in without Jenny and Darren in the room.

I’ve helped Jenny and Darren develop a cross-party consensus in favour of cycling. We still need Greens in there pushing this case.

Whether I am Mayor of London, or a London Assembly Member, I pledge to keep up this record and ensure that cycling (and walking) are championed in City Hall.

(Return to list of candidates)

Sian Berry, Green Party:

(Initial response taken from her tweet on 5 August 2015 at 10:19am)

@DonnachadhMc I’m writing a reply to yesterday’s message today – it absolutely has my support!

(full response, see posting on Facebook HERE)

I’m very happy to support Stop Killing Cyclists. Their events and campaigning are a vital part of keeping cycling – particularly safety – high on the political agenda. I cycle to work myself, and know that there are many more journeys I would make by bike (notably from Hackney to Westminster for meetings) much more often if there were safe, segregated routes that were easy to navigate and didn’t mean risking being dumped onto a dangerous, unfamiliar junction if I lost my way.
Making cycling an easier and safer way to travel would make our city better in so many ways: reducing traffic and congestion, cutting the pollution that causes nearly 10,000 early deaths every year, reducing noise, allowing more space to be given to pedestrians, play and life on the streets, and helping citizens stay fit and healthy too.

I welcome the 10 by 2020 Mayoral Safer Cycling Challenge, and my responses to the questions are below. I’m standing for Mayor and for the Assembly, and while the detail of London Green Party policy is decided collectively, as a transport campaigner in my current job I’d be a real champion for these issues as Mayoral candidate or as an Assembly Member if I were selected by the Greens.

1. 10% BY 2020
Investment is a really important measure to put at the top of the list. Providing ten per cent of the current budget would be a real challenge – as Mayor I’d be responsible for making sure bus and tube services didn’t suffer as a result – but I think that putting ten per cent of the capital budget into cycle infrastructure would be an ambitious and realistic plan if additional funds could be pulled in from elsewhere.
With me as Mayor or on the Assembly, you’d have someone with the political will to pull every lever possible to get to this figure, and a track record of finding creative ways to get good transport policies enacted. Some ways to get to the level of investment needed could include:
Shifting funds from the planned new motorway bridges and tunnels in East London. [] These should be replaced by new cycling, walking and public transport links across the river, which would cost much less, releasing funds for elsewhere in the cycling plan.
Introducing a Workplace Parking Levy. Powers exist for this to be done at a GLA or local council level anywhere in the city. In my role as a Councillor in Camden, I’ve already put this proposal forward as a way of reducing traffic and raising money for transport plans.[] If done London-wide, any funds raised should be shared with the boroughs, but could add significantly to both TfL and local cycling investment.
Replacing the creaking Congestion Charge, which first started 12 years ago, with something much more sophisticated, covering all of London not just a small central zone. A replacement scheme should start consultation as soon as the next mayor takes over, with a set of fair new charges based on three principles: how far you drive, how polluting your vehicle is, and the time of day. The law says additional funds should be spent on giving drivers better and cheaper alternatives, and cycling investment qualifies roundly for this.
Negotiating increased grants from central Government, justified by the savings in healthcare, access to jobs, reduced pollution, and other benefits of increasing cycling. These could come partly via the planned Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy, an historic commitment to funding that was passed into law last week, and which ought to include helping London develop its policies in these areas. []
Talking to Highways England about using some of their £250 million cycling, safety and integration fund over the next five years to improve cycling around the parts of the strategic road network in London (e.g. around junctions with the M1, M4 and M13). These funds were introduced as part of a ‘green retrofit’ programme in the new Road Investment Strategy, which I helped push for in my job at Campaign for Better Transport []

I completely agree with this. A heartbreaking number of deaths and injuries are being caused by the inability of drivers in large vehicles to see cyclists and pedestrians around them. All public vehicles should be replaced with low cab designs as quickly as possible, along with retrofitted safety measures on all vehicles entering the city. Conditions on safe construction vehicles should be put into all new planning agreements, and an ambitious scheme of incentives and regulations created for the freight industry, including freight consolidation and switching to smaller vehicles as well as new designs for HGVs.

I’ve seen enough ‘pilots’ of these kinds of measures over the years, and the value for money is unarguable, so yes this would be a big priority for me, particularly as car dependency in outer London has been neglected so much. Boroughs have a lot to gain from being involved, and many have shown an interest so there is no need to wait before rolling out Mini-Hollands everywhere.
It’s important that evaluation and evidence from the initial schemes is collected and published in good time too. For example on the gains to local businesses from friendlier streets, as I know that many small businesses still believe they depend on drivers for their custom, and don’t appreciate how many more customers have the potential to reach them on foot and by bike.

This is a clear priority for me, and (along with Mini-Hollands) I’d put new segregated cycling infrastructure top of the list for new investment plans. For me it’s the number one measure that would get a wider range of people cycling, and get current cyclists using their bikes for more journeys.
I’ve written here about how Transport for London’s traffic models overestimate the potential impact on car journey times and how these need to be changed to reflect the real impact of shifting road space to more efficient modes of travel.[] If New York can do it, we’re well overdue this kind of road space revolution in London!

Absolutely! The exclusion of many red routes in boroughs that have brought in a 20mph speed limit feels completely wrong now that so many roads are calmer. I regularly cycle along and across Camden Road, for example, and the extra speed (and speeding) I encounter is a real shock after spending the rest of my journey on 20mph streets in Camden and Islington. In practice – on roads like this that pass through residential areas – the extra speed only serves to get vehicles more quickly to the next traffic light or crossing and is a needless danger.
A comprehensive speed limit of 20 across London would help make the city consistent for drivers and foster a real sense of a city that was moving away from dominance by the car and giving priority to other ways of getting around.

These two measures I think are complementary – the Idaho law is essentially an emergency measure to make up for danger inherent in current junctions, and would need introducing with great care and lots of communication if we’re not to leave the impression that all London’s cyclists have started to defy traffic lights. Very strong messages would need to be sent out about the hierarchy and the need to give way to pedestrians too. The review of junctions to make them safe for all the people using them needs to be done urgently, and I’d make this an important priority for new investment funds if elected.

This is a very important root cause of a lot of poor driving and congratulations for highlighting and identifying it. Within the GLA, we can make sure that no contract we procure ever specifies this, and we can also work with boroughs and other public authorities to reduce the practice there too. The construction and freight industries needs to be engaged as well – on this and other issues in this plan – and forging an agreement to stop these contracts altogether would be something I’d aim to push through. See also my reply to question 10.

This list is a bare minimum of the streets that could be closed to traffic in central London. I’ve written here about how there’s virtually a consensus among businesses and mayoral candidates that Oxford Street needs clearing of traffic altogether and how we can follow the lead of New York’s public space programme to seriously boost business as well as safety and pollution. []
As a councillor I’ve supported Camden Council’s plans for Tottenham Court Road [], which cuts down on road capacity into the West End (which should help with making more schemes possible there) while helping buses and cyclists and pedestrians in another key shopping area.
We shouldn’t ignore outer London in this, and within the Mini-Holland programme we can be more ambitious about closing roads and creating new public spaces there too.

The board of TfL needs a proper shake-up, and representatives of many more groups added, while business representatives need to be reduced. I would definitely support two places for cycling representatives – one for inner and one for outer London would be my preference – as well as unions, public health specialists and the full range of pedestrians.
I am not sure about the new name proposed above – as a transport campaigner for many years I’ve always considered ‘transport’ to include walking and cycling and have campaigned on both of these under that heading, as well as for local communities affected by the impact of roads and other transport while not going anywhere.

Tipper trucks and other construction lorries desperately need keeping off the streets at the busiest times and I am strongly in favour of a simple ban on these, as well as strong conditions added to future planning agreements, which are fully justified and don’t risk any kind of challenge.
For other large vehicles, freight, shop deliveries and vans, London needs a real plan, and we must work with the freight industry to do this as they are not against avoiding rush hour (this after all is the time they have the least reliable deliveries and most delays) and don’t see it as a simple cost to them.
However, there are complications due to the delivery time restrictions built into literally thousands of planning agreements for shops and businesses, and a clear need to engage with local residents if vehicles are to arrive earlier in the morning. The need for a comprehensive plan that also involves switching to smaller vehicles – including bikes – and co-operation and consolidation to avoid empty loads, is absolutely vital to solving this problem once and for all.

(Return to list of candidates)

4 thoughts on “Responses to 10 by 2020 ~ Cycling Safety Challenge”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.