A flurry of articles have appeared over the last couple of days discussing the various merits of the Mayor’s embryonic transport agenda.
First, James Daley in the Independent wrings his hands of the absence of pip-squeezing Green influence on the Mayor’s budget, which pushed Ken Livingstone to support a cycling agenda. Mayor Johnson, he says, does not seem so committed:
…the fact that the Greens are now having to fight Boris on a cycling issue shows how the balance of power has shifted. Alas, Jenny Jones (the London Greens leader and former cycling adviser to Ken) no longer has the same sway in the assembly, and will find it harder to keep Boris on the straight and narrow.
I’m sure it won’t be all bad news. Boris does at least support the abolition of bendy buses – one of London’s true menaces – and has agreed to push ahead with Ken’s plan to implement the bike rental scheme. But it does seem ironic that in the future cyclists may look back and realise that they did much better out of a mayor who didn’t even ride a bike.
Jenny Jones herself joins the chorus, debating the merits of Johnson’s decision to allow another consultation on the Western Extension of the Congestion Charge. This will, most likely, result in the extension being closed down (the previous consultation showed 63% of residents and 72% of firms being opposed).
The congestion charge successfully reduced traffic and made central Londoner’s streets slightly more pleasant places to live, work and shop. I won’t claim it as the miracle cure to the major problems of climate change and air quality, but it certainly helps.
Finally, Dave Hill comments on the impending launch of the competition to design a 21st century Routemaster for London. A self-confessed fan of the bendy-bus, he nonetheless speaks warmly of the idea behind the scheme:
At its heart lies the excellent and rather socialist principle that a city’s public facilities should be cherished and protected; rendered sacred. The return of conductors or the Oyster-age equivalent would make any bus feel friendlier and in so doing make it safer and more pleasant to use.
One could argue that Mayor Johnson is merely fulfilling his campaign pledges and not forging a coherent policy towards above-ground transport in London. However, there is a distinct whiff of strategy in these moves - one of reducing congestion and therefore C02 emissions.
The Climate Trust, based in Portland, Oregon has argued for a sensible and joined-up policy of above-ground transport which Mayor Johnson seems very close to implementing. These policies would include re-phasing traffic lights in order to cut idling and the carbon intensive practice of accelerating and breaking towards traffic lights, making biking safer, encouraging cycling, and cutting the congestion caused by single-decker buses by reintroducing higher capacity ones. He has made moves in all these directions.
Tied to his plans for greater use of river transport, the overall reach of Mr Johnson’s vision for transport in London appears to be one of low-congestion, creating a better environment for cars to operate in, and enabling the switch between cars and bikes, or cars and other forms of public transport, to be less painful.
Perhaps this isn’t the most dynamic of proposals, but its goals are both achievable and coherent. We must wait for the Mayor to deliver his full plan for London before we know for certain his priorities, though at the moment efficiency and de-congestion appear to be his strikingly sensible watchwords.
Share This
The Evening Standard uses the reasonably low injury rates sustained on the two remaining ‘legacy’ Routemaster routes as a jumping point to talk about the re-introduction of a 21st century version of the bus:
Only two passengers have suffered accidents requiring medical treatment on London’s two remaining Routemaster bus routes during the past three years.
The official figures show that during the same period, more than four million people travelled on the buses, giving an accident rate per passenger of only a fraction of one per cent.
The Mayor is due to launch his vision for the new bus within days. Overcoming the high cost of designing, building and staffing (conductors were part of Mr Johnson’s campaign pledge) the new Routemasters is going to be a huge challenge.
The Mayor’s understanding of the situation and approach to raising funds without hitting Londoners’ pockets is going to speak volumes over how he will deliver other high-profile projects during his tenure. We’ll update you as soon as there is more.
Share This
Following our story on Tuesday about breaches of the Oyster Card system, the Guardian has produced a thoughtful article on the subject. Whilst hacking cards may be attractive, the practice must also be put into perspective:
What’s also unclear is how worthwhile it would be for criminals. An Oyster card costs £3 - enough for two trips in the inner Zone 1. Only those who can get hold of them virtually free could make a profit. Criminals probably have their ways. But this isn’t going to lead to a collapse in Oyster’s use.
That said, there is a worrying article on the BBC website today about TfL’s data collection tendencies:
The Information Commissioner’s Office has criticised Transport for London for “collecting data without a clear purpose” for the children’s photocard… but some parents have raised concerns given that TfL admits application data will be shared with its subsidiaries.
Government and its agencies have a worrying record of data management. If the Oyster system is demonstrably insecure, then it is essential that the data corresponding to these cards is. The more data sharing between TfL and its subsidiaries, the more potential routes for data-loss exist. The Mayor and TfL need to take this issue very seriously.
Share This
Researchers, giving evidence to the Dutch parliament, claim to have hacked London’s Oyster cards.
Their research has allowed them to “clone” cards, alter the balance stored on there, and effectively shut down certain Tube entry gates, states business technology website, ZDNet:
Security experts called for TfL to upgrade the Mifare chips in April, after a series of Mifare cracks were publicised. “My understanding is there are now three [Mifare] cracks at least,” Adam Laurie, an RFID and communications protocol security researcher and consultant, said in a keynote speech on RFID flaws at the Infosec 2008 conference. …Laurie said he thought TfL, the body that runs the Oyster-card scheme, “ought to think about upgrading as soon as possible”.
TechRadar also carries the story, noting that TfL’s response has changed notably from the March answer of Oyster never having “been breached” to the current line of any rogue cards being picked up and blocked within 24 hours.
This development is particularly worrying given Mayor Johnson’s stated plans to “Oysterise” the entire network by May 2009. The extension of the Oyster network to the outer zones and to train operating companies will provide far, far more entry points and a lessening of the security checks which central London offers.
We have already covered the privacy and contractual issues which arose over the introduction of the OnePulse credit/Oyster card. The next roll-out of Oyster will be watched even more closely. No doubt Barclays will be paying close attention to these developments, not wanting any product of theirs, the link however tenuous, to be ‘hacked’. As the contractual agreement between the then-Mayor and Barclays remain unreleased, we do not know if TfL are liable should the Oyster component of those cards be hacked. If such contractual clauses do exist, the fallout could be substantial.
In an unrelated development, researchers are launching an open-source smart card project with far stronger security protocols than the current Oyster cards hold.
Two billion people across the globe use smart cards with the Mifare chip (the component which holds information in Oyster cards). TfL and the Mayor have a duty of care to protect Londoners’ information, security, and to provide value for money. They must now evaluate the potential costs if the hacking of Oyster cards becomes systemic and weigh these against the value of upgrading to a more secure system.
Share This
