The husband of one of Boris Johnson’s top aides is fighting for his life after a collision with a lorry driver as he cycled in Primrose Hill on Thursday morning.
Police and London Ambulance Service medics were called to the North London junction of Primrose Hill Road and Adelaide Road at 6.08am. It is now understood the cyclist involved was Alex Finn, husband of Baroness Finn, Downing Street’s deputy chief of staff and close friend of the PM’s wife Carrie Johnson.
The driver of the lorry stopped at the scene and is helping police with their enquiries.
A Met Police statement read: “The cyclist, a man in his 60s, was taken to hospital where he remains in a life-threatening condition. The driver of the lorry stopped at the scene and is helping police with their enquiries.”
Finn’s employer, accountancy firm PwC also released a statement last night, wishing him a “speedy and full recovery”.
This latest high-profile incident comes just a week after children’s doctor Marta Krawiec lost her life in a collision involving a lorry driver at a junction on London’s “notoriously hostile” Holborn gyratory. She is the seventh cyclist to have been killed at that junction since 2008 and her death has sparked renewed calls for segregated lanes and proper consideration for cycle safety at junctions.
A London Cycling Campaign petition calling on Mayor Sadiq Khan and local councils to fix “critical issues” demanded: “Inaction costs lives. The time is over for excuses. Proper action is needed now.”
30 thoughts on “Husband of Boris Johnson’s key aide fighting for his life after collision with lorry driver”
Sadiq Khan would like to do
Sadiq Khan would like to do something, but he’s too busy begging BoJo for an extra £50mil in funding.
RoubaixCube wrote:
It would also break the habit of a lifetime – he’s an atrocious mayor that bankrupted TfL even before covid with unaffordable fare freezes – just as many said he would when he first ran for office.
No Sadiq Khan didn’t bankrupt
No Sadiq Khan didn’t bankrupt TfL before the pandemic. In fact, he brought TfL back into the black after the previous Mayor had created a massive deficit. Johnson had spent huge amounts on failed projects such as the Garden Bridge, water cannon and other pointless things. You can see the annual reports on TfL’s website for full information. Or you can carry on spreading lies for your own agenda. Other people can look at TfL’s website for full information.
Spokesperson wrote:
The water cannons would have ended the riots in minutes if Khan had actually used them…
Jenova20 wrote:
Um, firstly the riots were on Johnson’s watch (2011), not Khan’s, secondly Johnson purchased them after the riots (2014), so they weren’t even available then, and lastly their use is banned in this country, as was confirmed by Theresa May as Home Secretary, so anyone using them would have been open to prosecution. Otherwise spot on.
Rendel Harris wrote:
My bad, let me retry. Water cannons aren’t banned, they’re an “operational” choice for police if they wish to use them, as confirmed by Theresa May, and could have been bought over from Northern Ireland if required. Johnson bought water cannons for future use, but they were sold by Khan. Really they should have been kept, as they could have been useful in future if necessary.
Water cannon require
Water cannon require authorisation from the Home Secretary. May did not authorise them so why would anyone think it would be worth keeping?
You have a rather tenuous grasp of the facts.
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/home-secretarys-decision-on-water-cannon-use
hirsute wrote:
May did authorise them.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8197432/Police-could-use-water-cannon-to-disperse-rioters-Theresa-May-says.html
You have a very tenuous grasp of the facts.
Brilliant, someone who
Brilliant, someone who castigated Sadiq Khan for not using water cannon that at the time weren’t bought and were illegal to use on a riot that took place when he wasn’t mayor accuses others of having a tenuous grasp of the facts!
May didn’t authorise the use of water cannon, she said at the time of the article to which you link (2010) that she would consider authorising their use if police commissioners asked for them (the vast majority of police commissioners, incidentally, have stated that they think they would be useless and serve only to fuel antagonism between the police and the public). However, she rendered that statement obsolete in any case in 2015 when she stated that she would never authorise the use of water cannon on the streets of England or Wales:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/23/theresa-may-police-water-cannon-use-england-wales
What are you on about?
What are you on about?
In response to my link to the official government decision in 2015, you give me a link to a press article from 2010.
Which do you think represents the actual postion then? Did you even read the government statement?
Is there anything about this that have have got correct ?
I don’t see any operational
I don’t see any operational choice at all in these words. I see she is not authorising use in England and Wales where she has the power to control this usage.
And no, he bought them ahead of any decisions, and again as in the wording of May’s statement, they were 25 years old, and would need some extra expediture to fix serious issues before they could have been used in any operational sense even if they had been allowed.
Your bad – yes, having
Your bad – yes, having accused Khan of not using water cannons that it would be illegal to use on a riot that occurred when he wasn’t Mayor at a time when the water cannons hadn’t been purchased yet, quite bad.
They are in fact banned until the ban is lifted by the Home Secretary giving police a licence to use them. May made it quite clear that she would not issue such a licence anywhere in England, and the devolved authorities in Wales and Scotland have stated that they would not allow their use either.
open_roads wrote:
Cool story dude
Captain Badger]
It’s a package of untruths rather than a story. As listed in other posts, Khan restored TfL’s finances after Boris Johnson had left TfL in the lurch financially. The current financial woes of TfL are related to the massive drop in the use of public transport due to the pandemic. Khan was voted back as mayor fairly recently because a majority of Londoners haven’t fallen for the Tory lies.
One other benefit of Khan’s time as mayor has been the massive reduction in pollution levels since the ULEZ was implemented in central London. This has seen particulate and NOx levels being halved. The implications for health are substantial and this will result in a major saving for the NHS incidentally. With the expansion of the ULEZ coming soon, this will see further health benefits (and health cost savings) for Londoners. But all you hear from Toris on this is the cost of the ULEZ charges. They also avoid mentioning that during Boris Johnson’s time as mayor, water spray systems were used around the polluion monitors to deliberaly make it seem as if the pollution wasn’t quite so bad.
OldRidgeback wrote:
— OldRidgebackWhat! Is there proof of this?
Boris Johnson sticks by
Boris Johnson sticks by gluing pollution to roads – BBC News
Of course it is described as something else but essentially it is as OR described.
eburtthebike wrote:
I can’t find the original report but I did find this:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/16/boris-johnson-accused-of-burying-study-linking-pollution-and-deprived-schools
and this:
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/boris-johnson-climate-change_uk_5ddea6a4e4b0913e6f77c1f4
open_roads wrote:
Simply a lie. Johnson left TfL with £9BN in debt. That has risen by £2BN under Khan, primarily because of the legacy failure of Johnson to keep the Elizabeth line on time and, of course, a 90% drop in fare revenues caused by the pandemic. Khan has cut operational debt for TfL by 71%. The Tories hate Khan for his popularity and have deliberately tried to undermine him at every turn, e.g. cutting police funding, and particularly on transport they refused to give the Mayor control over overground rail services (something they were planning to do before they lost the 2016 Mayoral race) and forced a package of measures, such as extending the times of the congestion charge, on Khan in return for the TfL bailout made necessary by the pandemic in an attempt to damage his popularity before the elections.
The fares freezes were not unaffordable, they represent £640M on a turnover of £20BN.
Khan’s so “atrocious” that we voted him back in with a 10%+ majority this year.
open_roads wrote:
In addition to the factual corrections already posted, you need calling out on politicising an event where a person may lose his life. I am no supporter of the Tories, but this is a human, a husband, a son and possibly lots else to other humans.
Very sad to hear I wish Mr
Very sad to hear I wish Mr Finn all the best for a good recovery.
Very sad news, hope for the
Very sad news, hope for the best possible outcome for the cyclist. I do wonder though if the issue of p*sspoor driving standards and driver behaviour will now gain traction now that a high level Tory has been driven over.
Indeed. Sadly the only thing
Indeed. Sadly the only thing that might result in any changes are a few high-profile casualties amongst close friends and relatives of those few politicians that actually have the power and direct influence to bring about changes.
the issue of p*sspoor driving
the issue of p*sspoor driving standards and driver behaviour will now gain traction now that a high level Tory has been driven over
I think being a cyclist trumps even being a Tory, so the death will simply be written off as acceptable collateral damage: ‘you’re bound to hit a few when they repeatedly come onto the roads’.
What a strange way of
What a strange way of reporting this news. Surely he collided with a lorry, not a lorry driver.
It is a tough one. The
It is a tough one. The attempt at reporting incidents to show inanimate objects are not causing this but humans are involved means the reporting can be construed as you mentioned. However a collision with a lorry is along the lines of car collides with house type reporting
So just stating lorry / truck in a collision can lead to was it parked up? was it rolling because a parking brake was not put on? or was it Driven?
It’s not a tough one at all,
It’s not a tough one at all, e.g. “…after a collision with a lorry being driven on Primrose Hill”. He didn’t collide with a lorry driver.
Best wishes to Mr Finn and hoping he pulls through.
ASL’s at all four roads
ASL’s at all four roads leading onto that junction? So not seeing the cyclist had entered the box or left turning?
This is in my local area and
This is in my local area and I took this photo. The position of the lorry suggests that the driver had totally cut the corner of the junction, probably driving directly at the cyclist.
what photo?
what photo?
Actually, it might have been Parks And Rec but I think I might have seen a photo of a truck driver “laughing” when with a Police officer after an accident the other day. Obviously shock does cause different reactions and Police Officers might appear to be “friendly” after one of these to try and coax info that might not have been forthcoming if he was stern etc. Plus also a “frame” doesn’t always tell the correct story so I didn’t take it at face value. But think it must have been this one.
This is a link to the twitter
This is a link to the twitter I mentioned yesterday. I would take the initial tweet comments lightly at the moment but the Pictures tell a story definitely including the one from MarsFlyer.