Yes, I know it’s early, but I think we may have already found the least self-aware social media post of 2025, courtesy of the fine folks over at the ‘London Traffic Watch’ Twitter/X account.
While on the surface at least, London Traffic Watch operates as, well, a normal traffic watch account – informing the capital’s residents of road closures, congestion and delays due to incidents, tube closures, and so on – it also has a tendency to repost the views of those opposed, oddly enough, to traffic-calming measures and active travel schemes.
In the last two days alone, the account has shared our old friend and retired Hackney councillor Vincent Stops’ latest criticism of Transport for London’s cycling initiatives, along with posts by anti-ULEZ groups and campaigners opposed to low traffic neighbourhoods.
So, it was no surprise, then, when London Traffic Watch posted this evocative image and Daily Mail-style headline this week:
“London grinding to a halt. Road restrictions squeezing the lifeblood out of the capital,” the account proclaimed, under an image of at least five lanes of traffic packed mostly with, you guessed it, cars.
Let’s just say the irony of that particular image wasn’t lost on Twitter’s remaining cohort of cyclists.
“Congestion?” asked Bob from Accounts in response to the traffic account’s post. “It’s not road restrictions. It’s not cycle lanes. It’s not 20mph zones. It’s not LTNs. It’s not the timing of traffic lights
“It’s this: too many cars.”
“It’s drivers causing all the congestion and blocking up the roads,” agreed Cycling Mikey. “We can’t afford to have so many cars in London.”
Chapona Bike added: “It’s already one of the busiest cities in the world. The only answer is to reduce private cars.”
“But, but but… it’s all those cycle lanes causing it, apparently! Not the fact that there are way too many motorised vehicles,” wrote Keith.
> BBC U-turns on article blaming London’s ‘most congested city’ title on cycle lanes
“Interesting that these characters equate ‘lifeblood’ with lots of cars,” noted Dr Robert Davis, chair of the Road Danger Reduction Forum.
“Traffic isn’t the lifeblood of the capital,” concurred Rob. “It’s a blight on the capital, ruining it for everyone. Cities should be designed for people, not cars.”
“Because giving up large swathes of public space for people to go around in large metal boxes on their own is somehow good for the economy?” the Cycleway, my arse! account helpfully suggested (don’t give them any ideas).
“Those objecting to road restrictions, cycle lanes, 20mph zones, LTNs, and traffic lights timings forget that 30 years ago when there were far less of them congestion was still horrendous,” Mark pointed out.
“Congestion was, is and always will be caused by too many vehicles.”
“The fun thing is that they themselves demonstrated the cause with their own poster,” joked Valerie.
What was I saying about self-awareness?
Add new comment
22 comments
It's not just "too many cars" causing congesgtion in London, but also the fact that said cars are getting bigger all the time, especially in width. So even with the same amount of road and the same number of cars, congestion is worsening because of the growing size of cars.
You missed the Gendarmerie bike at Paris Nice, great parking in a ditch
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/c39vpgeg170o
Police seize three vehicles after one stop
"Officers were... on the streets of Luton for a day of targeting drivers without insurance, during which time they caught 43."
43 in one day.
And thats just the ones they caught in that small area they targetted.
Imagine the actual number on the roads...
But of course, some drivers say that cyclists should have to pay "road tax" and insurance...
Lilo - Old Kent Road to Maldon, some Deliveroo journey that was!
Dries isn't really pronounced anything like the english "dries" (as in, in the process of drying). It'd actually be almost exactly the same pronunciation as the Scots word "driech", ending excepted.
I quite liked the Cycling song/video, but I couldn't understand what was said at the end.
Can anyone help me, as I am clearly hard of hearing/understanding?
"Here's the chinese you ordered!"
Thank you.
I'm not sure where to ask this, so I'll ask here (and might again tomorrow when it's not so late so hopefully Ryan / Road.CC staff might see it):
Can I enter the TORQ comp if in the Channel Islands? Not 100% strictly UK but Royal Mail postage costs are the same and I see dropdowns for the two main islands.
Cheers and 🤞!
(and other comps that say UK)
Not sure who is "grinding to a halt" in London. My journey this morning during rush hour from Paddington Station to my office by Trafalgar Square took just 16 minutes. Pleasant ride through Hyde Park, Green Park and along the Mall, apart from a few traffic lights no hold ups at all. Wouldn't like to try to drive it though...
I've often said, we need to compare journey times for cyclists and motorists both during rush hour/school run and other non-peak times.
Lets see who is affected more by the difference in motor traffic volume...
I know I'm not fast but I can honestly say that my journey times are barely 10% longer when having to slowly filter through queues of motorists.
We all know what happens to driving times during rush hour.
Always good to see that image used by Traffic Watch, much beloved of those who claim that cycling is responsible for congestion in London, apparently oblivious to the irony that you can only see one cyclist in the picture squeezing his way through all the modes of traffic. The picture was in fact taken more than eight years ago, February 20, 2017 to be precise, and shows traffic approaching Bank junction, a place where congestion and air quality have improved very significantly over recent years due to traffic control measures.
Ah, but surely it's just the few slow cyclists you can't see in the picture getting in the way of drivers which clogs the system up (grit in oyster theory)!
Or - it's because they reduced road capacity somewhere by adding a cycle lane / lowering junction capacity?
TBF I think the following are reasonable observations a) at busy times the system may basically be at capacity for motor traffic, so any small disturbance can have a disproportionate effect and b) because motor traffic is so space inefficient it is subject to dramatic effects from small changes in capacity. (e.g. expressed thoughtfully here by the Invisible Visible man).
Of course ... that's kind of identifying the real issues we should address though: motor traffic is space-inefficient, and without a suite of measures to make alternatives relatively attractive to driving and also make driving a bit lesss attractive, drivers will keep filling the space until it reaches capacity and the Downs-Thomson paradox applies.
I thought you were going to say, "That's me!"
So it is literally a "before" picture, showing how much congestion there was before LTNs, 20mph zones, segregated cycle lanes etc (not just at Bank, but generally)?
Exactly, it's a brilliant argument against their own case!
Robert Wheetman has an article on the trope of "Traffic is the lifeblood of the city".
I hear in London it may be a tale of two cities - the centre and the outer regions?
Centrally I think private transport use is lower. "Congestion" may be more to do with just having traffic lights (for buses and taxis and goods / service vehicles) and how those interact with the large numbers of pedestrians *.
Outside the centre there may be more "but it's a long way to travel and public transport doesn't work for me" - there may indeed be plenty of room to lean on motorists to reduce trips?
* Presumably feedback went: more vehicles, so wider roads / more lanes -> more demand for pedestrian crossings -> those need to be wide (because wide roads) so it takes time for pedestrians to cross -> longer pedestrian phase -> complaints by drivers -> longer times between pedestrian phases and drivers certainly aren't going to be sympathetic to "informal" crossings etc.
Where there are cycle paths it should be so easy to cross that formal crossings are not needed, but because of the history above pedestrians will expect that *everybody* comes to a stop when they cross. Which makes cycling less efficient as well...
I've heard claims that one of the increasing problems is Uber drivers. When they don't have a fair they just drive around as there's no where to stop. Is there ant data to back up this claim?
And what only a few of us know about, these Uber drivers who are driving and monitoring the Uber App on their "Smartphones" at the same time, are committing an offence under Regulation 109 (CUR1986 as amended). The Police now know this, because 'someone' raised the issue of Reg.109 and display screens in vehicles back in December 2018, which caused the Police to rush through emergency legislation because they didn't realize using ANPR was also an offence!!
Who is behind London Traffic Watch? Who funds it?
Follow the money.
Don't think it costs much if anything to pump out crap on Twit/X ?
Who is behind London Traffic Watch?
Obviously a load of Mail/ Torygraph/ Sun /Express-reading tossers blessed with absolutely no insight or self-awareness (unlike Skynet)