- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Train approaching London Paddington (copyright Simon MacMichael)Replace railway lines with bus routes, says think tank - but no mention of cycling
Just days after Mayor of London Boris Johnson warned it would be “suicide” for any political party to omit cycling from its manifesto for the forthcoming general election, a right-wing think tank has published a report calling for busy commuter rail lines into the capital to be turned into busways.
An ideal opportunity to put in some cycle lanes alongside, you’d think, to help provide for London’s cycling boom?
Well, no, there isn’t a single mention of cycling at all in the 44-page report, published by the Institute of Economic Affairs, described in 2007 by broadcaster Andrew Marr as "undoubtedly the most influential think tank in modern British history."
In its report, Paving over the tracks: a better use of Britain’s railways? the Institute of Economic Affairs claims that the government spends a disproportionate amount on railways.
The report says: “The support received by the rail industry is disproportional to its importance to travellers. Individuals in the UK are far more likely to travel by car than train, with 90 per cent of passengers and 70 per cent of freight traffic carried by roads.
“Despite this disparity, state funding of railways is just 30 per cent lower than that spent on roads,” it adds.
It points to bus rapid transit systems in Asia and Latin America as providing a blueprint that could be followed here.
Reference is made to Cambridgeshire's guided busway - but not to the cycle track running alongside it - with that and similar systems criticised due to the cost involved and "their lack of flexibility
in terms of the type of traffic accommodated."
The focus of the report is largely on London, where it is claimed the quarter of a million daily rail commuters could be served by a fleet of 150 coaches, each with a capacity of 75 people.
According to the report, the coaches “would be able to carry the same number of commuters while occupying one seventh of the capacity of a one-lane busway, of a similar width to that required by a train.”
They add that everyone would get a seat, fares would be cheaper, journey times “the same, if not shorter,” and “door-to-door time savings offered by busways would reduce journey times further, as direct services could operate from suburbs and villages not on the rail network.”
Bicycles, some might expect, could make the journey at either end easier still, with buses perhaps fitted with bike racks to carry them, but again there is no mention of that in the report.
Co-author Dr Richard Wellings, head of transport at the Institute of Economic Affairs, said: “Ongoing interference by politicians in the rail industry has led to everyone getting a raw deal.
“Passengers face increasingly expensive fares only to fight their way onto trains during peak times and taxpayers continue to prop up an industry whose importance to the country is disproportionally small relative to the level of resources it receives.
“Adopting more efficient methods of transport could offer considerable benefits to passengers and the taxpayer alike.
“But only when the sector is liberalised from rigid state control, will we see such alternatives being seriously considered,” he added.
Last week, Mr Johnson was adamant that political parties should "absolutely" pledge significant funding for cycling.
"I’m sure it will be in the Conservative manifesto,” he said. “Other parties can commit suicide by failing to promote cycling if they want.
“We need a cycling revolution across the country as a whole and I think we should be looking at a much more thorough system of links across Britain.”
His comments were made after he gave the go-ahead for the planned East-West and North-South Cycle Superhighways in London, which are due to be approved by the board of Transport for London (TfL) this week.
Yesterday, TfL revealed that bicycles make up one sixth of traffic in the Congestion Charge zone, and that in some parts of the city they account for as much as half at peak times.
Among the more left-field cycle infrastructure proposals put forward in the past couple of years for a network of aerial cycle paths running alongside railway viaducts, as well as a floating cycle way running along the Thames from Vauxhall to Canary Wharf.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- wtjs 14 min 31 sec ago
Yep! The badly-spelled NIMBY-ism variant.
- wtjs 19 min 35 sec ago
If you're exercising in the heat you need to drink more, who knew? ...
- S.E. 3 hours 53 min ago
My guess is that they sell mainly on the German market - feel free to correct me. That might explain why they are not "pushing" their products,...
- ktache 4 hours 18 min ago
Now Emily Chappell really liked the Lezyne , I have the HV version, good, but I find the handle uncomfortable in use. I've often wondered about the...
- biking59boomer 3 hours 25 min ago
What about this one!? Taken in Cardiff Civic Centre 1939
- Muddy Ford 4 hours 29 min ago
Charlie Alliston got 18mths and is the reference case (because there are so few cases) for all campaigns by anti-cyclists that 'cyclists are not...
- belugabob 5 hours 30 min ago
My local football practice pitches (all weather, in a fenced off area, are regularly the scene of inconsiderate parking, with vehicles blocking the...
- Spangly Shiny 5 hours 55 min ago
Assos ASOS anyone?
- chrisonabike 6 hours 9 min ago
Replace them all with Bromptons and they'd take up zero space within days or even hours, as they are all relocated elsewhere. To eBay or possibly...
- Andrewbanshee 6 hours 40 min ago
Where I live we are experiencing a lot of housing development on small and large plots of land. These developers don't seem to have problems...
Add new comment
25 comments
A right-wing "think tank" that has shit for brains?...
Definitely a typo on the part of Road.cc
Should read, "right-wing stink tank".
Com'on guys! Lift your editorial game for God's sake!
Tim Fenton at Zelo Street covered this too;
http://zelo-street.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/iea-exhumes-flat-earth-idea.html
Aah...
It's actually walking if the commute is getting your body from A to B. I'm sure we could all think of reasons why a bicycle is a very attractive option, but walking has many advantages, not least for the businesses and shops one passes at walking pace.
Heavily subsidised public transport is the key, owned and run by non-profit companies or even local councils. Link that to a national rail system which exists to move people quickly and efficiently instead of making Richard Branson richer. Then add in cycling and promote walking for commutes.
The car is slowly destroying the places we live and work.
Depends on how you look at it really. I insure many, many nice expensive vehicles which only increases my book of business & profitability which in turn improves my place of residence.
This morning I attended a conference on the future need for infrastructure investment in London. A question was asked about replacing rail routes with buses, and the person asking the question was almost laughed out of the room. This was an event attended by a cross party group of transportation experts who all agreed rail and tube investment holds the key. The people who suggested using buses got their sums wrong, badly. The number of commuters in London has increased in the last 20 years and all modes of transport have seen a massive jump (buses 67%, trains 66%), apart from car transport which has declined 13%.
All this nonsense about subsidised public transport is wrong.
The car is subsidised massively.
Cycling wont get a look in because it wont make anybody rich enough to set up a self sustaining lobby group.
Monbiot summed up free market think tanks pretty well..
"whenever you hear the term free market thinktank, think of a tank, crushing democracy, driven by big business. "
http://www.monbiot.com/2011/09/12/think-of-a-tank/
Off topic, but I'm never going to be able to read anything about or by George Monbiot again without laughing at this line from Mrs [Samantha] Cameron's Diary in the Guardian last week: "Mummy was like, Monbiot, Monbiot, would he be one of the Oxfordshire Monbiots ... "
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/jan/27/-sp-mrs-camerons-dia...
Just taking the case of London, they want to replace trains most of which generate their power in remote power stations (not as green as they could be but that's another matter). They then want hundreds or thousands of bus journeys powered by diesel engines within the London Area.
I would love to see what that would do to the already poor air quality in London
40% of all commutes are less than 5km
source ONS census 2011
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census-analysis/distance-trave...
Without doubt the cheapest, simplest most flexible solution for a 5km commute is a bicycle.
The mind boggles.
Stupid right wing ideologues produce more stupid right wing drivel.
So, in conclusion, the think-tank says it'll be cheaper & better to replace a chain of linked vehicles driven by one driver on a set route with many more single vehicles driven along the same set route by many more drivers. Oh, and spend £multi-billions converting tracks to tarmac. Eat your heart out Dr.Beeching!
Similar to Greater Manchester's obsession with trams where they replaced a frequent and well-used train service on the Oldham/Rochdale/Manchester line with trams along pretty much the same route with increased journey times, no access for bikes/prams etc and astronomical conversion/construction costs. Blithering idiots, the lot of 'em
Yes, absolutely wibbling indeed. It's so easily and often debunked you can only marvel at the sheer committed lunacy of them.
Here's an historical one:
http://www.londonreconnections.com/2014/near-terminal-case-saving-maryle...
Ah, yes, Dr Richard Wellings ...
Think-tank’s Head of Transport says cyclists are “low-value”, don’t pay for roads and “delay traffic”: http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/this-clever-economist-t...
When a libertarian cites Sweden you know there’s something fishy going on: http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/when-a-libertarian-cite...
http://whofundsyou.org/org/institute-of-economic-affairs
These guys are clearly an impartial and transparent source of information. No hidden agendas I'm sure...
These think tanks would seem to me to be an opportunity for any interested party to pay money to get the ear of the media from an organisation that has a superficial appearance of impartiality. Somehow I find their claim that their editorial position is independent of donors a lot harder to believe when they won't publish who their funding is from.
At least you can usually find out who paid for pieces of academic research.
“Replace think tanks with common sense” say cyclists
Mr Wellings has well publicised difficulties with bicycles often broadcast on his twitter feed, never missing an opportunity to complain about road closures/delays/congestion which he blames on bicycles so i really wouldn't expect to see two wheels form any part of any analysis. He often argues there are no benefits or externalities from cycling despite clear evidence from Holland and his solution for roads often ends with "privatise them" based on his an analysis of a wealthy estate in a corner of Sao Paulo. "Go figure" as our American cousins say....
75 x 150 = 11,250.
250,000 / 11,250 = 22.2
Each and every bus/coach would have to make 22 or 23 journeys in order to accommodate all the current rail passengers.
I don't know the average commute time for train passengers but if it's an hour, it would take somewhere between 44-46 hours to get everyone into work... This premise seems to fall down on basic maths, let alone anything else!
Edit: It's actually 3,750 coaches (150 per current line in), so ignore that ^ .
3750 coach drivers would be quite expensive to employ. If they could connect say 10 coaches together so that one person could drive them ...
and maybe put some metals guides down on the road so that the trailers follow in a straight line and the whole thing can go a lot faster?
and howabout providing an external electric power source to reduce emissions?
It might just work...let's call it, a train
Why do people take these think-tanks seriously? They usually spew out idiotic nonsense based upon political views not practical realities.
They have no obligation to be impartial and they usually aren't.
I wouldn't be surprised if some of the members of the think tank even have shares in guided busway construction / bus building.
the IEA are wibbling idealogues who are frequently quite astonishingly wrong. Like right now.
None of these 'so called experts' have ever been on a train at rush hour I'd wager.
Perhaps buses could work if passenger demand was spread evenly out across the day, but it would never cope with the peak demands. Absolutely barking.