Tim,
I'm glad you got beyond the knee-jerk reaction to the idea of 'road investment'. I don't think any complicated statistical analysis is required to tell us that with 13% of the population and a similar percentage of the road accidents in the capital, that 2% of the investment in road improvements is not a fair share for South East London.

In fairness most of the road enhancements are in zone 1 which is shared by more users than the population would suggest, as many people commute to central London and then use the roads (on foot, bike, bus, taxi, private car, or vans). But knowing that the ratio of accidents to population in central London is likely to be higher due to high usage by non-residents, this means that the other areas of London have less accidents per population than SE London (I'll leave you to work the numbers to prove or disprove).

But beyond zone 1 there is a massive discrepancy between the investment in the four quadrants of London, or at least the other three have about the same and SE has none.

As for promoting cycling by amenity societies, you may be aware that the Forest Hill Society this year organised two weekend cycle rides. Improving cycling on local roads is less easy to change, but it has certainly been a consideration whenever discussing road issues. One of the ideas that came out of the planning workshop we organised was an enhanced footpath and cycle route next to the railway (parallel to Dartmouth Road), but it really needs some investment to make sightlines and widths safe.

But that shouldn't mean that cycling on pavements is an issue that cannot ever be discussed (but possibly not on this thread if we can avoid it).