The new Vision Zero Action Plan - what it is, why it’s important, and what’s next.
London’s new road danger plan is full of things to celebrate - but it could have gone further on the gig economy, and doesn’t spell out solutions on traffic.
What is the Vision Zero Action Plan 2?
Transport for London has just published ‘Vision Zero Action Plan 2’ - a long-awaited update on how London plans to end road deaths and serious injuries on London’s road network.
The good news is that we’ve already reached record lows, but we still have a long way to go. Over 20,000 people are hurt on London’s roads every year, and over a hundred people lose their lives in preventable tragedies. The human, and economic, cost is enormous.*
Why is this plan important in the fight against the climate crisis?
Road danger is a climate issue because dangerous roads are high-carbon roads.
Lots of the interventions that make our roads safer for people make them safer for the climate too by cutting emissions, and enabling more of us to get around in sustainable ways.
Lower speeds, smaller vehicles, reduced traffic levels and shifting from private cars to public transport, walking, wheeling and cycling all bring down road risks and emissions.
So as a climate charity campaigning for a zero-carbon transport network, what have we made of the plan? Overall, there’s a lot to celebrate - but it could have gone further on the issues in the gig economy, and it leaves you wondering how London is planning to cut traffic at the scale and pace required.
Lots to celebrate: safe systems, proven interventions
Overall, the Vision Zero plan is a powerful piece of reading, clearly informed by the voices of victims, and taking a public health approach to eradicating harm on the roads. It’s not just the tone of the plan, but the specific policies it backs.
The plan is clear in championing what works, from lower speed limits, to LTNs, to cycle lanes and more. It draws on the evidence to reaffirm support for 20mph limits, both on borough-managed roads and the strategic major road network that’s managed by Transport for London (“TLRN”).
It reiterates that separating people from motor vehicles, and reducing the numbers of motor vehicles in the first place, cuts danger, whether this is through cycle lanes, hospital zones, or keeping cars off roads at certain times of day (like School Streets and new ‘Evening Streets’).
It recognises the specific risks for people driving and riding for work, who make up just under half of all people killed and seriously injured; and commits to a new focus on understanding and tackling work-related danger.
All of this is exactly what we’ve been calling for. It’s particularly welcome, given the constant misinformation that has surrounded so many traffic calming measures in recent years, and is evidence that people power works. Thank you everyone who has got involved with our campaigns!
What’s all this about SUVs?
The bit that’s had by far the most press - thanks to the dedicated campaigning by all of us who make up the SUV Alliance - is the plan’s clear-sighted take on the dangers posed by our cars getting bigger and heavier. The text is unequivocal: big cars kill. With the launch accompanied by press and social media activity from the Mayor and prominent members of his team, you have to wonder - is London gearing up for a Paris-style tariff on SUVs? We’d welcome it, because of the higher emissions and pollution they bring (including from tyres and brakes on both electric and non-electric models), and with more than 60% of new cars now SUVs.
Our research from a few years ago, which took Kensington and Chelsea as a case study, found that SUVs are more common in the wealthiest postcodes, and that the more expensive a vehicle is to buy, the more environmental damage it’s doing. Polling suggests that higher fees on SUVs would be very popular with the public, too. It’s got to be an obvious win for a mayor looking to consolidate his legacy on clean air and the climate crisis.
Where does traffic reduction fit in?
Vision Zero Action Plan 2 makes numerous references to what we all instinctively know is true - the fewer vehicles on our streets, the safer they are.
“Action to redesign our streets, reduce motor traffic dominance and to separate people from motor traffic is essential to making London’s streets safer. “
“Evidence from London borough and TfL schemes, and comparable international cities consistently shows that reducing motor traffic lowers casualties”
“tackling the dominance of motorised traffic across London is essential to make the whole street network safer”
“To create safer streets, we must reduce traffic”
“Reducing traffic is linked to fewer people being killed or seriously injured. In Oslo, policies to reduce traffic in the city led to zero people killed while walking or cycling in 2019 and 2023”
This is exciting. We’ve been calling for action to tackle car dependency for years, and it’s brilliant to see this message in TfL’s plan.
However, despite clearly recognising the need to get more of us out of our cars, the plan doesn’t really spell out how this will be achieved, beyond individual schemes to redesign and reallocate roadspace towards buses, walking, wheeling and cycling.
The elephant in the room is road user charging, which the mayor said in 2022 was the only way of achieving his net zero traffic reduction target, and which was taken off the table in the run up to the 2024 mayoral election.
“The scale of reductions required - a 27 per cent reduction in vehicle kilometres according to the ‘Accelerated Green’ scenario – is only possible with some form of road user charging. Such a system could abolish all existing road user charges – such as the Congestion Charge and ULEZ - and replace them with a simple and fair scheme where drivers pay per mile, with different rates depending on how polluting vehicles are, the level of congestion in the area and access to public transport.”
Mayor of London, ‘London Net Zero 2030: An Updated Pathway’ (2022)
With road transport still the biggest source of key pollutants like PM2.5 and nitrogen dioxide, the co-benefits of traffic reduction at this scale would be huge - not just for the climate but for our health as well.
The gig economy
Cycle couriers are a key group that are impacted by London’s road network, with up to one in ten cycle journeys in the city being taken by a delivery rider. We did a lot of work on this with IWGB a couple of years ago (see our ‘Hot Wheels’ report), and we’re disappointed that TfL’s plan doesn’t get deeper into the issues. It doesn’t explore the underlying reasons why gig economy riders might be at higher risk - like low wages, delivery schedules, and precarious working conditions, or why some riders turn to illegally modified bikes. Many of these issues are explored in Hot Wheels’ (2024) and the APPG for Cycling and Walking’s ‘Unregulated and Unsafe’ (2025). These are glaring omissions for a workforce who tell us they feel so unsafe on the roads.
Promisingly, the plan does say that Transport for London will “support and incentivise a shift to active travel and public transport wherever possible – including cargo bikes for freight and servicing operators”. But it doesn’t spell out what these forms of support or incentives might be. They say they’ll have “targeted interventions and policy” based on “a robust, measurable evidence-base for work-related road risk in London” in 2027. We hope to see TfL consider offering financial support for riders to switch from motorbikes and illegally modified cycles to safe e-bikes (eg. through social leasing schemes or zero-interest loans or grants) as we’ve been calling for since 2024 .
Having set out to make the case for cycle lanes as a workplace safety issue when we started Hot Wheels back in 2023, it’s good to see the plan does acknowledge that “work-related road risk is currently not treated with the same rigour by industry or by regulators” and says that “defined accountability for parties operating within the gig economy [is required]”; “legal reform is essential”. Transport for London commit to pushing for greater accountability for companies operating in the gig economy - which is a good start, even if it’s difficult to see what’s really going to change in London for delivery riders in the short to medium term.
Joe Durbidge, IWGB rep, said:
“While Vision Zero's aims and progress are to be welcomed, there is not enough detail on the incredibly risky work of couriers, who are involved in collisions each year, some sadly fatal. The work that they do comes with heightened risk, which is significantly exacerbated by the way in which companies continually put pressure on couriers to work fast. Delivery companies continue to drive down wages and therefore the work is becoming ever more dangerous, which runs contrary to the declared goals of Vision Zero. While London does not currently regulate the industry directly, we must recognise the specific risks inherent in delivery work and ensure at a minimum that workers’ voices are referenced within this plan and continue to be heard when considering road infrastructure. Novel solutions will be needed to keep all couriers safe.”
What’s next?
After years of campaigning for low-carbon roads in the capital, it’s great to see so many of the things we’ve been calling for show up in Transport for London’s action plan. A huge thank you to everyone who has taken part in our campaigns.
This is evidence that people power works - our messages are getting through, and decision makers are taking action for people and the planet.
As we’ve mentioned above, there’s still a long way to go. We’ll keep pushing for practical solutions to tackle carbon emissions and road dangers in London and bring about a cleaner, safer transport system for the city.
Love what we’re doing?
At Possible, our vision is a zero carbon UK, built by and for everyone. We show people and politicians across the country that this is possible, and inspire practical action to make sure we get there at the speed required.
As a registered charity, we rely on donations from people like you.
If you can, please consider donating just £3 a month to support our work.]
*A briefing we published last year estimated that the toll of fatalities and serious injuries alone can be measured at £1.2 billion a year. For collisions taking place in two boroughs - Westminster and Lambeth - the costs to society are estimated to be more than £70 million/year per borough.