Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

National Express boss who sits on TfL board accused of blaming cyclists for own deaths

Sir John Armitt's comments to TfL board came minutes after cyclist injured in collision with National Express coach...

The chairman of transport provider National Express, who also sits on the board of Transport for London (TfL), says the biggest danger to cyclists on the capital’s streets are bike riders themselves, leading to an accusation from London Cycling Campaign's Charlie Lloyd that he "blames cyclists for their own deaths."

Sir John Armitt’s remarks were made at a meeting of TfL’s board that this morning approved the two new Cycle Superhighways that will cross the centre of the capital, and came shortly after a National Express vehicle was involved in a collision at Marble Arch in which a cyclist was injured.

"I would say the biggest danger to London cyclists on the roads in London are actually themselves," he told the meeting.

"The way in which many, many, many of them ride one is surprised that in fact the number of accidents is not far larger because it is an entirely different way of cycling to which you see in many other cities," he added.

The TfL board was told of the collision between the National Express coach and the cyclist just minutes after Armitt made those comments.

He was joined in his unsuccessful attempt to block the scheme by fellow TfL board members who also sit on the boards of Canary Wharf Group and the Licensed Taxi Drivers Association (LTDA).

The LTDA has indicated it may seek a judicial review of the Cycle Superhighways, as well one on a proposed as a daytime ban on most traffic on Tottenham Court Road.

Armitt also rejected surveys which found overwhelming public support for segregated cycle infrastructure in London, saying: "The opinion polls are pretty valueless quite frankly because there is no explanation of who is actually responding.

"Without knowing where somebody is coming from when they respond to an opinion poll then it is pretty difficult to take on board the support or non-support for a scheme."

Times journalist Kaya Burgess, who runs the newspaper’s Cities Fit For Cyclists campaign which was launched in February 2012, said on Twitter that according to the Metropolitan Police, the collision took place at Marble Arch at 9.48 am today.

A police spokesman told him that the injuries sustained by the cyclist involved in the collision with the National Express coach were "not thought to be life-threatening."

National Express is a member of the Confederation for Passenger Transport, whose chief executive said last November that the organisation was “extremely concerned” about the impact of the Ccle Superhighways on operators, and in particular the loss of coach parking spaces on the Embankment.

In the wake of Armitt's comments this morning, there have been calls on Twitter for a boycott of National Express Services.

Plymouth-based CTC cycling development officer Brett Nicolle, wrote: “I will not use @nationalexpress ever, ever again after chairman Sir John Armitt blames cyclists for their own deaths.”

Will Nickell, ethics and environment officer at the University of East London Students’ Union said: “I consider it apt to boycott @nationalexpress until Sir John Armitt is no longer chair. His views of cycling are the most ignorant I've seen.”

Parimal Kumar tweeted, “Yes @tfl board member/National Express chairman John Armitt, it's cyclists who are greatest danger to themselves,” with a link to a YouTube video filmed by a cyclist who said in the description, “Although this is not the closest pass that I have had, I would say that it was potentially the most dangerous.”

A video posted to YouTube in 2013 shows a National Express coach passing extremely close to the cyclist recording the footage.

In the description to the video, user Bicycos quoted a reply he had received from the firm, which said: "The safety and well being of our customers and other road users is our highest priority and I assure you that, under no circumstances, will we tolerate the standard of driving that you have experienced.

While a National Express employee said the firm could not divulge the outcome of its investigation, they added, "I would like to reassure you that the appropriate action has been taken in line with our disciplinary policy."

During the same year, the company teamed up with Sustrans to help devise a sticker for its coaches to warn cyclists of blind spots. The design eventually chosen was described by one road.cc reader who spotted it as “near enough useless.”

Armitt, who also chairs National Express’s safety and environment committee, was chairman of the Olympic Delivery Authority which oversaw the delivery of venues, infrastructure and legacy for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. The non-departmental government body ceased operation at the end of last year.

Charlie Lloyd, campaigns officer at the London Cycling Campaign and a former lorry driver, noted on Twitter: “John Armitt blames cyclists for their own deaths. Four cyclists died on edge of Olympic Park when he was in charge, no safe routes.”

Meanwhile, London cyclist Richard Leeming tweeted: “Cycle facilities at the Olympic park are a joke.”

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

41 comments

Avatar
jacknorell replied to Leodis | 9 years ago
0 likes
Leodis wrote:
fluffy_mike wrote:

Segregation isn't about keeping cyclists safe, its about getting them off the roads.

Go and tell that to the families of all the dead Londoers who would be alive if there had been separation for cycling on main roads and major junctions

Jesus... What about the rest of the country who has a fraction of the investment London receives? Its tragic and accidents happen and always will, its the risk we and other road users take when we use them, you cannot segregate the whole of the UK or is this just about protecting "londoers"?

What we need is driver awareness, new laws with presumed liability included, better justice and take responsibility for ourselves on the roads.

Yes, we do need better justice, and stronger laws protecting vulnerable road users.

However, we don't need use those as often to begin with, if we fix the infrastructure so that a common (by design...) human error such as saccadic vision or momentary concentration lapses don't kill.

If the incident doesn't take place to begin with, that's the best solution. Everything else is sticking plasters on a ripped-apart person.

Avatar
bikebot replied to Leodis | 9 years ago
0 likes
Leodis wrote:
fluffy_mike wrote:

Segregation isn't about keeping cyclists safe, its about getting them off the roads.

Go and tell that to the families of all the dead Londoers who would be alive if there had been separation for cycling on main roads and major junctions

Jesus... What about the rest of the country who has a fraction of the investment London receives? Its tragic and accidents happen and always will, its the risk we and other road users take when we use them, you cannot segregate the whole of the UK or is this just about protecting "londoers"?

What we need is driver awareness, new laws with presumed liability included, better justice and take responsibility for ourselves on the roads.

What's the point in answering that, when you've ignored the many responses to it that have been given before.

Avatar
dominicall replied to Leodis | 9 years ago
0 likes

Presumed liability is a very very bad idea.

I drive and cycle in London and in the last 18 months I have seen 7 accidents/incidents/collisions between people riding bicycles and other vehicles - fortunately none were too serious. Of these 3 were the fault of the driver and 4 of the people riding the bikes.

Of the 4 that were the the people riding the bikes, all were because they were (IMHO) riding poorly for the road conditions (2 were the riders crossing a red light and they deserved the pain they received, 1 stupidly went up the inside of a lorry waiting at a red light and was very lucky not to have been severely injured and the other looked left but not right before turning out of a junction!).

If we had a law of presumed liability the four drivers would now (potentially) have convictions when they did nothing wrong. Not cool!

We constantly fall into the trap of making this between 'cyclists' and 'motorists'. It's not.

This is about individuals riding or driving badly/inconsiderately or dangerously.

Avatar
bikebot replied to dominicall | 9 years ago
0 likes
dominicall wrote:

If we had a law of presumed liability the four drivers would now (potentially) have convictions when they did nothing wrong. Not cool!

You appear to have invented a fictional form of presumed liability that has the ability to secure criminal convictions. Yes, your invention is a bad idea, those campaigning for presumed liability shouldn't adopt your suggestion.

Avatar
jacknorell | 9 years ago
0 likes

From the LTDA chair's remarks:

"The opinion polls are pretty valueless quite frankly because there is no explanation of who is actually responding.

Without knowing where somebody is coming from when they respond to an opinion poll then it is pretty difficult to take on board the support or non-support for a scheme."

Yes, it is...

Are they, for example, astroturfing on behalf of a PR or lobby firm working on behalf of LTDA, Canary Wharf Group, London First or the City of London?

See how this works?

Avatar
Leodis | 9 years ago
0 likes

Segregation isn't about keeping cyclists safe, its about getting them off the roads.

Avatar
bikebot replied to Leodis | 9 years ago
0 likes
Leodis wrote:

Segregation isn't about keeping cyclists safe, its about getting them off the roads.

Yawn. Go play with the tipper trucks if you want to.

Avatar
P3t3 | 9 years ago
0 likes

Aside from the research indicating that he is plain wrong, creating protected space for cycling will save cyclist lives regardless of who's fault it is. It simply isn't a reason not to build.

It seems negligent for the coach companies not to be protecting themselves from accidents involving cyclists by supporting the superhighways. They win through prevention of lost time, passenger disruption, cost and publicity.

Avatar
Jamminatrix replied to P3t3 | 9 years ago
0 likes
P3t3 wrote:

creating protected space for cycling will save cyclist lives regardless of who's fault it is.

But the reality is you can't pave an entire country with protected lanes, nor make it the sole objective of cycling advocacy. That's fear mongering. There needs to a threshold where motorist education on learning to share the road comes into play.

Avatar
Andrewbanshee | 9 years ago
0 likes

This is why we will never have safe cycleways in the UK.

Avatar
bikebot replied to Andrewbanshee | 9 years ago
0 likes
Andrewbanshee wrote:

This is why we will never have safe cycleways in the UK.

I suspect the public response to National Express, might be about to demonstrate the exact opposite.

Pages

Latest Comments