Highway Code amendments

In message <[email hidden]>, Tim
Woodall <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:25:23 +0000 (UTC),

Tim Woodall said:

Letter sent to my MP, both constituency office and HoC. Copy to
Secretary of state for Transport and Ken Livingstone (with a handwritten
comment that I'm a daily commuter in central London)

And just had a reply from my MP - very quick!

Dear Mr Woodall

Thankyou for your letter of 21st April

I was surprised to learn that there is a school of thought amongst
cyclists that believes that cycle lanes are more dangerous for them than
the main road network.

I have asked Tom Harris MP, the relevant minister at the Department for
Transport for his comments in response and will report back to you as
soon as I have his response.

Don't expect a timely reply. The said Tom Harris is my MP and my only
response from him so far (after 1 week) is a post card indicating that
my communication will receive attention. As the clock is ticking on this
one, I could have hoped for something more positive.
--
Bob Downie
Devotee of the wheel
please remove #n0spam# to reply directly

Bob Downie BobMail@downie-geo#n0spam#.co.uk said:

Don't expect a timely reply. The said Tom Harris is my MP and my only
response from him so far (after 1 week) is a post card indicating that
my communication will receive attention. As the clock is ticking on this
one, I could have hoped for something more positive.

You're lucky. My MP never responds. In the past I've written on
paper to HoP and to the constituency, emailed both, and never once got
so much as an acknowledgement of the letter. Complete, utter,
monumental waste-of-space in a cushy sinecure. I don't know what
services he rendered to who, but it must have been good...

Anyway, I emailed on the topic of the HC laid before parliament a
little while ago. No response (again) yet.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Ian Smith said:

You're lucky. My MP never responds.

Go to one of his surgeries and *demand* an answer!

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Martin Dann said:

Sigs have got to 1003

UR Leporello AICMFP.

--
Dave...

"fred2" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My letter to Parliament today!

Fred

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Mr. Jones,

MP Clwyd West

After reading the draft copy of the new Highway Code, I noticed changes
which appear to endanger cyclists.

Namely rule 61 which states: "Use cycle routes and cycle facilities …
wherever possible, as they can make your journey safer."

This rule seems to replace rule 47: "Use cycle routes when practicable.
They can make your journey safer".

This wording appears to force cyclists to use cycle path irrespective of
suitability and deny cyclists an optional, rightful place on the road.

This rule would encourage motorists to adopt an even more aggressive
attitude towards cyclists then is already the case and in case of an
accident a court might support an insurers claim of contributory
negligence if a cyclist suffers injury or damage, even when riding
responsibly and correctly on the road.

There are many cycle paths around the Colwyn Bay area totally unsuitable
for "Utility cyclists" some of which, in my opinion, are even dangerous to
cyclists and pedestrians ie. Colwyn Bay Promenade from Rhos to Old Colwyn
and shared use foot path facilities (Penrhyn Bay).

No doubt many facilities have been provided with the best of intentions,
but if cycling is to be encouraged a more inclusive road sharing should be
encouraged.

Perhaps you are already aware of this controversy which has aroused the
cycling fraternity, but if not, may I request that you might give this
matter some serious consideration.

Yours sincerely

Herewith reply from my MP David Jones Shadow Minister for Wales

........ I note the points made in your letter and am glad to have them drawn
to my attention. I was not aware of the issue previously and am writing to
the Secretary of State for Transport on the issue.
I shall write to you further when I have his response.
Kind regards
David Jones

Quoted message said:

Ian Smith said:

You're lucky. My MP never responds. In the past I've written on
paper to HoP and to the constituency, emailed both, and never once got
so much as an acknowledgement of the letter.

Mine responds even to letters I haven't written! While the anti-hunting
legislation was being campaigned for and going through parliament I
received a couple of letters from him about it, even though it was a
subject that I had very little interest in and hadn't written to him about.

Anyway, I received a reply this morning to my HC letter, telling me that
he's written to the DfT about it and will let me know when he gets a reply.

--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"Daddy, put that down. Daddy, put that down. Daddy, put that down.
Daddy, why did you put that down?" - Charlie Colyer, age 2

On Sat, 28 Apr 2007 11:12:25 +0100 someone who may be Danny Colyer
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Mine responds even to letters I haven't written!

My MP has only done so once. He sent an e-mail to me thanking me for
my efforts in getting him elected and hoping I would help his
political party in the forthcoming elections. The only problem was
that I hadn't helped him get elected and have no intention if
helping his political party.

The next day I got another e-mail, in which he apologised for the
earlier e-mail. He had sent it to the wrong e-mail list.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Danny Colyer said:

Ian Smith said:

You're lucky. My MP never responds. In the past I've written on
paper to HoP and to the constituency, emailed both, and never once got
so much as an acknowledgement of the letter.

Mine responds even to letters I haven't written!

Maybe you're getting my quota of letters?

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Simon Brooke

(') said:

The problem with this is that if it doesn't get 'prayed against' in 28
days after it was laid - which is already three weeks ago - we've lost
the battle, so we have literally one week left to persuade MPs to take
action.

Errr... sorry... in case anyone's panicking, it's 40 'parliamentary days'
from when it's laid to when it is set in stone, so I think there are
probably still five weeks to lobby your MP. But that still isn't long,
considering how persuasive we need to be.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldhansrd/text/70328-wms0003.htm

28 Mar 2007 : Column WS143

have today laid before both Houses of Parliament a draft revised
edition of the Highway Code containing alterations proposed to be made
by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State pursuant to
Section 38 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. In accordance with Section 38
of the 1988 Act, the proposed revision will not be made until after
the end of a period of 40 days beginning with the day on which the
alterations were laid.

****

According to my calculations, if it's 40 parliamentary days (and 7th
May doesn't count as a Parliamentary day) then the 40th day is
Wednesday 23rd May.

If it's just 40 days then the 40th day is Sunday 6th May.

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&title=road+traffic+act&Year=1988&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=2276534&ActiveTextDocId=2276593&filesize=6820

(4) If within the period mentioned in subsection (3) above either
House resolves that the proposed alterations be not made, the
Secretary of State must not make the proposed revision (but without
prejudice to the laying before Parliament of further proposals for
alteration in accordance with that subsection).

I've got this horrible feeling that we've been done over by the DfT.
The wording is exactly the wording they wanted but they deliberately
didn't put it into the original draft. They're now relying on inertia
to get this through parliament, especially with the local elections
coming up.

Can someone confirm how this daycount works. It isn't obvious to me. I
intend to follow up with my MP but I was going to leave it another
week but that could be too late.

Tim.

in message <[email hidden]>,

(') said:

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Simon
Brooke

(') said:

The problem with this is that if it doesn't get 'prayed against' in 28
days after it was laid - which is already three weeks ago - we've lost
the battle, so we have literally one week left to persuade MPs to take
action.

Errr... sorry... in case anyone's panicking, it's 40 'parliamentary
days' from when it's laid to when it is set in stone, so I think there
are probably still five weeks to lobby your MP. But that still isn't
long, considering how persuasive we need to be.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200607/ldhansrd/text/70328-wms0003.htm

Quoted message said:

28 Mar 2007 : Column WS143

have today laid before both Houses of Parliament a draft revised
edition of the Highway Code containing alterations proposed to be made
by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State pursuant to
Section 38 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. In accordance with Section 38
of the 1988 Act, the proposed revision will not be made until after
the end of a period of 40 days beginning with the day on which the
alterations were laid.

****

According to my calculations, if it's 40 parliamentary days (and 7th
May doesn't count as a Parliamentary day) then the 40th day is
Wednesday 23rd May.

If it's just 40 days then the 40th day is Sunday 6th May.

So get your letter to your MP in TODAY, guys and girls. Do not wait! My
briefing document is still here:
http://www.jasmine.org.uk/highwaycodebriefing/

and you are welcome - nay, invited - to make any use of it that seems
appropriate to you.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; I'd rather live in sybar-space

On Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:40:32 +0100 someone who may be Simon Brooke
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

So get your letter to your MP in TODAY, guys and girls. Do not wait!

Not just that. Telephone their office and get the matter raised
verbally.

Point out that trying to sneak things like this through during the
middle of an election is the sort of thing "worthy" of the likes of
Jo Moore. Not only do party politicians of other parties claim to be
averse to this sort of spin, the Labour Party claims to be averse to
it now.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Just sent the following to the BBC have your say team.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/4784595.stm Why is the box to
type your comments in so small. I'm supposed to be working so this was
dashed off in a few minutes. But perhaps we could start lobbying the
BBC to pick this issue up as well ;-)

Tim.

On 28th March a new Draft Highway code was laid before parliament.

The old rule 47: Use cycle routes when practicable. They can make your
journey safer. was changed to 58: Use cycle routes when practicable,
and cycle facilities such as advanced stop lines, cycle boxes and
toucan crossings where they are provided, as they can make your
journey safer. for the consultation and then, after responses (mainly
from cyclists) changed to 61: Use cycle routes and cycle facilities
such as advanced stop lines, cycle boxes and toucan crossings wherever
possible, as they can make your journey safer.

This change to "wherever possible" has the following rationale in the
response to the consultation:

"It was felt that other road users needed to be made aware that the
choice
to use these facilities remains with the cyclist, and there is no law
forcing their use. The phrasing of the rule has therefore been amended
to take this into account."

This appears to be a coup d'etat by the DfT. The original draft
wording was already contentious. The majority of the responses (70%)
were from cyclists who also lobbied their MPs. The new wording (even
worse) will now take effect automatically unless Parliament objects
within 40 days of it having been laid before Parliament.

There is a petition on http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/roads4bikes/ which
has got over 1600 signatures within 12 days.

This is probably the single most serious issue affecting cyclists
today. There has recently been a report done for TfL where 18 of 21
women cyclists having been killed by HGVs in London. This new wording
will REQUIRE cyclists to cycle up the LH side of HGVs if there is a
dangerous cycle lane painted there.

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden]
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Just sent the following to the BBC have your say team.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/4784595.stm Why is the box to
type your comments in so small.

Because you don't need to type anything in it? Just compose your
message in notepad and copy&paste it into the box.

On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 19:44:24 +0000 (UTC),

Tim Woodall said:

On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:25:23 +0000 (UTC),

Tim Woodall said:

Letter sent to my MP, both constituency office and HoC. Copy to
Secretary of state for Transport and Ken Livingstone (with a handwritten
comment that I'm a daily commuter in central London)

And just had a reply from my MP - very quick!

And now a reply from Transport for London. Although it's taken a week I
sent it to Ken Livingstone so it's probably taken some time to find the
right department - which appears to be "Street Management, ST Customer
Services, 84 Eccleston Square, London SW1V 1PX". (I think the ST is
Surface Transport)

Thankyou for your letter about the highway code, which has been passed
to me by Transport for London. We will look into all of the points you
have raised and get back to you as soon as possible.

The remainder of the letter is about their customer services policy -
they aim to give a reply within 10 days but if it's going to take longer
than 15 days then they will write with a status update and a timescale.

Just the Secretary of State for Transport to go now.

Tim.

--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t,"
and there was light.

http://tjw.hn.org/ http://www.locofungus.btinternet.co.uk/

On Apr 30, 3:24 pm, "[email hidden]" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Just sent the following to the BBC have your say team.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/4784595.stmWhy is the box to
type your comments in so small. I'm supposed to be working so this was
dashed off in a few minutes. But perhaps we could start lobbying the
BBC to pick this issue up as well ;-)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6610623.stm

Now there's no chance of getting parliament or journalists to take any
notice at all of this issue. :-(

Tim.

Quoted message said:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6610623.stm

Now there's no chance of getting parliament or journalists to take any
notice at all of this issue. :-(

This is typical of neo labour spin
The story is "leaked" to the press, then the PM announces that next week
he will announce when he will announce his resignation.

Martin.

Martin Dann said:

This is typical of neo labour spin
The story is "leaked" to the press, then the PM announces that next week
he will announce when he will announce his resignation.

Lady Macbeth had it best:

Stand not upon the order of your going,
But go at once.

ObCycling: back wheel started shedding spokes on Friday, LBS did an
emergency repair that lasted the weekend - it fell apart ten yards
before I got home! - but now it's back to Haflords for a rebuild. If
they didn't use cheap nasty components in the first place...

R

Roger Burton West said:

ObCycling: back wheel started shedding spokes on Friday, LBS did an
emergency repair that lasted the weekend - it fell apart ten yards
before I got home! - but now it's back to Haflords for a rebuild. If
they didn't use cheap nasty components in the first place...

Now might be a good time to learn to build your own if you don't know
already. I built my first one a couple of weeks ago and it was painless
following the instructions on Sheldon's site:

http://sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuild.html

I now have 2 rims & 2 hubs (although one needs to be replaced as it is a
fixed/free flip flop as opposed to a double fixed) waiting for some
spokes so that I can put them together.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

Are you still here? The message is over. Shoo! Go away!

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Why is the box to type your comments in so small.

Because you don't need to type anything in it? Just compose your
message in notepad and copy&paste it into the box.

You might find Cameron Adams's FormTextResizer bookmarklet is of some use:

http://www.themaninblue.com/experiment/FormTextResizer/

works for me when I come across titchy useless text boxes on websites.

--
Andrew Chadwick

The Luggage said:

I've just emailed my MP:

Dear Paul Clark,

[snip]

I received a reply which said something like I've had a few comments
like this. I've forwrded your letter to Dr Ladyman, and we'll see what
he says. I've just sent him another letter:

Dear Paul Clark,

Thank you for your timely reply to my correspondance on the planned
changes to the Higway Code. I await the response from Dr Ladyman with
interest.

It is my understanding that the changes will automatically proceed
unless Parliament requests amendments or blocks the proposed changes
altogether, and that this process ends within a few days. I therefore
urge you to request that the proposed changes relating to cycle
facilities be removed from the revised version.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Alan Collier

We'll see if anything happens!

TL