Forum Topic

I wasn’t going to post again on this subject but feel I can’t let GL’s further dishonesty on his blog go unchallenged. If anyone joined one of LBH’s “engagement meetings” back in 2021, you will have heard me ask whether residents’ views on road closures would be considered, only to be told that this was “council policy” and no, there would not be any notice taken to the massive amount of negative feedback to this plan. I was naïve at the time and was a bit surprised that the council would be so cavalier in ignoring the views of those affected – I now understand a bit better how these things work. GL was in the meeting, so clearly was part of the decision process that made this a fait accompli. I would respect him more if he was honest about his and the council’s position, as opposed to the surprisingly honest comments from the other council person, whose name I’ve forgotten but was otherwise fairly unpleasant. So, when GL states in his blog that he isn’t lying and is not riding over democracy, he is clearly (still) lying. Does he think he is performing a Jedi mind trick and we will all start believing this dishonesty if he repeats it often enough? The truth is that the majority of people rejected these road closures, and our views were ignored, as they were always planned to be. I know that some people are not particularly bothered about this issue, but there will be other contentious decisions around the corner, and we know that our views again will not be considered. It’s time people considered voted out this one-party mini state who believe that a big majority allows them to do whatever they like.

Graham Thorpe ● 445d

“I know some people are against traffic calming measures, others are just as strongly in favour.”Well we can all speculate as to how many people are in favour of traffic calming and we all have our own view, but the only definitive measure is the survey which Robert referred to at the start of this thread – this showed that the proposals were overwhelmingly opposed. So the simple fact is that LBH went against the clear wishes of its constituents in implementing these measures – this is the unavoidable truth and will remain so unless and until there is another survey. The opinion put out by councillors that these changes have made our streets safer or cleaner are demonstrably false, but are constantly repeated in the hope that they get accepted as fact. An example – the closure of Occupation Lane, on which no-one lives, was closed, with the result that all traffic going to and from Clayponds Hospital is now funnelled through Chestnut Avenue – a residential street and a route used by our children to get to Lionel Primary School. Safer and cleaner – clearly not. But that was never the reason for these measures – it was to unlock government money to build more cycle lanes – at the expense of pedestrians as well as motorists. A point I’ve made several times, but never had a response to, is why we no longer have school crossing patrols on Windmill and Ealing Roads – these are now much busier because of the traffic calming measures and yet our children have scant protection to cross them. Is the safety of cyclists being prioritised over that of our children?Councillor Lambert’s attempt to make this a party issue by bringing in the Conservative’s views seems irrelevant – it is the people’s views they should be listening to, not other parties. I do agree that the next election is the only opportunity we are going to get to get proper representation – I just hope voters forget party loyalty and elect people of integrity that will genuinely support their views.

Graham Thorpe ● 450d

You're wrong. no evasion or bullshit. I answered honestly - I didn't hire anybody but I mentioned that the traffic team use specialised consultants (https://uk.steergroup.com/) I believe - i'm not sure what exactly but I know they analysed a lot of data that came from traffic counters.I don't know the 'views of my constituents' other than the three or four who come on here and call me names and rather more than that who write to me or talked to me off line, sometimes when I was knocking doors, sometimes at other times.If I'm following any party line, then it's my own party line. There was plenty of discussion but a strong consensus that this was the right thing to do amongst the Labour Group. The work on this across the borough was led by Hanif Khan, Katherine Dunne and me.I believe the Conservatives were split but they thought they developed a party line and used it to chase some votes (something that failed spectacularly with them using a seat in Chiswick Riverside where the LTNs are most prominent for the first time in decades!)I know some people are against traffic calming measures, others are just as strongly in favour. Under our democratic system I was voted back. You'll get another chance in 2026.The University of Westminster did some analysis on the impact of LTNs on pedestrian accident statistics https://www.westminster.ac.uk/news/university-of-westminster-researchers-find-low-traffic-areas-have-major-pedestrian-safety-benefits. They find that the was a reduction in injuries for pedestrians, with an 85% decrease in pedestrian injuries compared to other areas.I have said what I will on this topic. The decision was taken many months ago and the barriers will be made permanent. I will continue to work for them better looking and better environmentally.

Guy Lambert ● 450d

Perhaps they are in a report from ‘Dr’ Rachel Aldred? The fact is figures are manipulated, exaggerated or simply made up to suit a narrative. Percentages are the default stat of the cycling zealots, as 80 percent ofnot very many looks better than, say, five more people were seen on bikes this week.What Lambert and his chums always ignore is what constitutes the traffic in and around Brentford. A vast amount travelling through on the A4, and it stays on the A4 if it’s not snarled up with yet more roadworks. Most of it is people going to or from employment, thus keeping the economy of London going (including curry houses no doubt).Locally there has been a massive increase in service vehicles, including delivery vans from the likes of Amazon and supermarkets, as well as Ubers. Even TfL admitted this in its reports over the years. Car ownership has remained relatively static, despite the big increases in population densities in Hounslow, Ealing and elsewhere. More people equals more demand for things to be delivered, and it ain’t all coming by bike.Air quality is affected by many things. The latest TfL Travel in London report showed that NOx levels in outer London were well below the recommended limit, apart from on major arterial routes and, of course, Heathrow. Those limits aren’t going to increase by private car ownership since diesel and petrol vehicles are on the way out.What Lambert always ignores is the impact of development on air quality. Dust from demolition, emissions from plant and HGVs. He’s in cloud cuckoo land or just another big fat liar.

Simon Hayes ● 459d