- 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
news
Big Ben © Simon MacMichaelLabour will put cyclists and pedestrians "at top table of transport policy"
Shadow transport secretary Michael Dugher says that if Labour returns to power following May’s general election, it will create a cross-departmental Cyclist and Pedestrian Advisory Board to put people who get around by bike or on foot “at the top table of transport policy.”
The board would comprise ministers and civil servants from a number of government departments, among them Transport, Health, Communities & Local Government and Education, as well as members of organisations representing cyclists and pedestrians.
In a speech at an event hosted in London by the Campaign for Better Transport, Mr Dugher said that “to show the importance of cycling and walking to a Labour Department for Transport the Secretary of State will chair the board meetings.”
He said: “Over the last five years, this Tory-Lib Dem Government has ignored the interests of pedestrians and failed to deliver on the promise of a ‘cycling revolution’.
“Boosting cycling and walking is a big priority for Labour – it's good for our transport system, for public health and crucially for our environment. That's why we have an ambitious package to promote active travel in government.
"Only by listening and learning from cyclists and pedestrians themselves, and inviting them to sit at the top table, will we be able to deliver the big changes we need across the country.”
He said a Labour Government would “set out a clear, and distinct, long-term active travel budget to give councils the certainty they need to invest effectively.
“For our strategic road network, we will commit to spending £250 million on cycling infrastructure, safety and integration, and we will match the Government’s commitment to spend £114 million on cycling in our cities across the country.”
He also said that since the Coalition Government’s decision in 2010 to scrap Cycling England, “it has been impossible to have a clear idea of where and how money is being spent.
“The lack of certainty and stop-start funding has resulted in an absence of expertise within local authorities, who are unable to plan and invest for long-term, effective change.
As a result, he said Labour would “commit to an in-depth review of how all government departments, agencies, local government, LEPs and the private sector are currently investing in walking and cycling.
“This will help determine the scale, sources and distribution of per capita funding we need for the future.”
The Barnsley East MP promised “ambitious targets” would be set for participation in cycling and walking as well as for road safety.
Local authorities, while having more power over transport issues, would be expected to follow national policy for active travel, while under Bikeability, “every child” would have the chance to learn to cycle.
A Labour Government would also “introduce a powerful HGV Safety Charter, which will call on all HGVs to be fitted with safety kit, including rear-view cameras, rear warning signs for cyclists and flashing light beacons.”
Mr Dugher said there would be an improvement in how the law deals with cases in which vulnerable road users are the victim, saying, “We need to ensure that justice is done and seen to be done in cases where collisions lead to cyclist deaths and serious injuries.”
He said he wanted to "move cycling and walking from the margins to the mainstream – not only swelling the ranks of people cycling and walking to work, but giving people from all walks of life the confidence to ride a bike.
“We will ensure that we change how our streets our designed, improve traffic management and enforcement, and encourage people to change their travel behaviours."
Mr Dugher outlined his belief that “we all need to start looking at transport more in terms of networks rather than isolated or even competing modes.
He went on: “Too often we see organisations pitching themselves against one another, even though their aims are not always mutually exclusive.
“Some people in the transport world have a tendency to forget, or just ignore, the fact that the travelling public use a network and more than just one form of transport to get around.
“We are often presented with a false choice between different types of people who use different modes of transport.
“But to move forward in a sensible way, we must reject the politics of pitching one transport mode against another.
“This is the view that if you are pro-cyclist, you must somehow be anti-car, rather than everyone identifying as road users.
“As we all know, the truth is people are not either just a cyclist or just a motorist. Or just a train commuter or just a bus user.”
“When developing transport policy, we can’t be in denial about peoples’ transport realities,” he added.
Mr Dugher went into greater depth in some of his views on transport in an interview published last month in Politics Today in which, among other things, he shared his view of the currently suspended BBC Top Gear host Jeremy Clarkson, whom he described as “basically an idiot,” and “not remotely representative of motorists.”
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
- username983 5 sec ago
I have a set of the the Scribe 50D and they are a great wheel. Especially for the price. But be warned, the freehub is insanely loud. And not a...
- Secret_squirrel 1 min 27 sec ago
REALLY? I see loads of cyclists going through red lights everyday....
- Griff500 4 min 28 sec ago
It's not that simple. Take a look at the geometry chart on the Scott website and you will see that the Addict stem isn't horizontal, it runs...
- eburtthebike 18 min 38 sec ago
Just been listening to James O'Brien on LBC, waxing eloquently about the obesity epidemic caused by eating the wrong food. Yet again, not a...
- whosatthewheel 22 min 32 sec ago
A re-offender too, having been disqualified for speeding in the past. I don't believe in the "reaching for a chewing gum" bollocks either. More...
- Jimmy Ray Will 33 min 12 sec ago
There is no need for "" around numerous, that is a matter of fact. Similarly, I'm a bit too close to talk freely, but I've been informed that as...
- chrisonabike 2 hours 33 min ago
Of course this kind of stuff is entirely to be expected from humans where mass motoring exists. The con is we don't factor this in sufficiently...
- S.E. 2 hours 55 min ago
Even online-shops offer very limited discounts... I waited for this week to get a 10-25% but nothing on the articles I need....
- levestane 3 hours 28 min ago
What we need is a hanger that can be bent back.
- Bungle_52 4 hours 19 min ago
Gloucestershire have told me the outcomes to nearly all my reports. I have to wait 12 months to find out now whereas I got them immediately before...
Add new comment
35 comments
Because this policy will paper over the fact that Miliband is a clueless idiot? Give me a break.
and cameron isn't?
Pretty interesting to read the take on Michael Dugher / Labour from BikeBiz/Carlton Reid. Some choice quotes from Dugher there:
and
Obviously cyclists do not use the roads in Dugher's mind, they waft about on fairy wings sprinkling environmental pixie dust.
I can not see how anyone can look at the two messages being given out and not conclude that this politician (and Party) at least is not a cynical opportunist who will tell anyone anything they want to hear.
The first quote is Carlton Reid's opinion. Regarding the second quote, it seems to be your opinion that cyclist are not road users, as the MP doesn't say that.
The article you linked then goes on to quote Michael Dugher as follows:
“Quite a number of journeys that people make are less than a mile. There is a lot of evidence that if people switched a proportion of their journeys you’d have a huge influence in terms of environmental benefits.
"But there’s a whole bunch of reasons why people in those circumstances choose to use their cars. There’s got to be viable alternatives. You’re only going to do that if you’ve got a bus network market that isn’t broken, as it is at the moment. You’ll only cycle to the station if, when you leave your bike there, there is a reasonable expectation that it will be still there when you return."
I personally can't see anything outrageous abut those quotes, although Carlton Reid appears to use them to say that the MP is removing the idea that anyone should use their car less.
Jesus. I seem to have stumbled into a Tory Wives Garden Party.
We are even more 'debt ridden' now than 5 years ago. However it seems we have enough money for tax cuts for the rich, even if we can't afford a proper health service and decent pensions.
All sounds good doesn't it.
I can't in all conscience vote for that shower of debt-ridden nutjobs though.
Ed Balls, people. Ed. Balls. Chancellor. Think about that.
To everyone saying that pro cycling events plastered all over the mass media has no impact in cycle usage - have you ever seen how busy your local tennis courts are in the period after Wimbledon?
I see where youre coming from though - but I think that if all types of cycling are displayed in the mass media much more than they were previously then the sport and activity become more normalised and part of this country's culture.
France, Italy and Spain don't have the same push towards utility cycling that Germany, Holland and Denmark have but they are still a pleasure to ride in out of the cities (certainly as a club cyclist) as cycling is in the public psyche.
Yes, but I'm yet to see anyone carrying their shopping home on a tennis raquet or running to work with a rugby ball tucked under their arm, barging people out of their way as they go. Maybe I'll try figure-skating to pick up a paper in the morning.
People who take up cycling as a sport might be more inclined to use a bike for travel (it's 'free' training after all) but it's not a big factor in modal shift. I accept that there is some link but in the grand scheme of things the sport/transport crossover is not relevant. My examples are obvoiusly tounge-in-cheek but people who enjoy running don't even tend to translate this into a transport choice (and there's little reason not to) and I'm pretty sure most people don't choose to drive because they've been infuenced by motorsport.
That is not a meaningful comparison. Immediately after the TdF, the roads are rammed full of "new" roadies for about three weeks. THAT is the parallel to the Wimbledon/local tennis court phenomenon.
And of course, that does precisely nothing at all for Joseph and Joanne Ordinary, the people who get run over in an attempt to ride to the shop to buy a pint of milk.
Your tennis court comparison does hold in one way, though; that is, regardless of British success in tennis (say, for example, Murray winning Wimbledon), no new courts are built for "ordinary" tennis players. Existing courts are not upgraded. The needs of the routine, street-level tennis player continue to be ignored. Err... no, hang on, I was right first time. The Wimbledon comparison doesn't really work.
Pro cycling is exciting and Britain is in the best place in the sport that it has been for years... yes.
"Ordinary" cycling (utility cycling, not grass-roots cycle sport) benefits from this pro sporting success... no.
The cheapest thing Labour could do is re-write many of the laws which are giving bad drivers an easy time and causing cycling on all roads to be unpleasant.
All I see from Labour here is meaningless hot air and a very small bribe. Having a separate budget for cycling shows a lack of understanding. Cycling should be an integral part of our infrastructure, the people building that infrastructure need to be trained. Standards needs to be made.
Which will allow both groups to be ignored at the same time by all departments
"We commit to doing this, this, that and this...". The day after the election, "the country is in a far worse state than we expected so we can no longer afford to meet those commitments".
Is £100m actually anything to write home about? From what I've seen in terms of costs of various schemes that is an absolute pittance to be spread across the whole country. Assuming that includes the cost of consultations, etc, it will achieve very little, other than trying to give a pre-election boost to their popularity among some cyclists.
What an excellent idea, an advisory board that will have no powers to control finance or policy
If they were even halfway serious they would direct the Transport Select Committee to take a joined up and less car centric approach.
But then again it's all kisses and promises before an election.
Why does anyone on a forum think it helps dialogue if they go on an 'all politicians are liars' type of rant? Sorry guys, but telling us you're angry, cynical and bitter is all about you, not about national debates that can and should be influenced.
The debate about the gap between sports cycling and transport cycling is fascinating, and my experience is politicians don't get it in any sensible way. Partly it's because the debate is badly framed by cyclists organizations, who don't always co-operate with each other and operate in silos. The result though is a glass screen between the two forms of cycling, when there needs to be a concerted effort to get people to move from one side of the divide to the other.
Funding for sports cycling should come from the public health and sports participation budgets. Often that can be augmented by money from tourism and economic development budgets, because of the benefits in visitor spend.
Money for commuting cycling should come from the transport budget, and should be prioritized providing it promotes modal shift. However, there also needs to be a recognition that modal shift may be easier in some places than others. The hideous overspend on London's infrastructure needs to be rebalanced, and there needs to be more innovation.
There's an element of truth to this, but nevertheless, cycle sport events can increase the profile and popularity of cycling as a whole.
A lot of GB's elite track cyclists commute to the Manchester velodrome by bike, so they know what they're talking about if interviewed about it.
They may not know more than John Smith, but that's the way the media works, isn't it? If you have a profile, you can make your voice heard. That's part of the reason why Chris Boardman is an effective advocate of cycling.
Don't make me laugh! Politicians are lying scumbags that will say or do anything to try to get votes to gain power. This guy and his Labour cronies will do fuck all for cycling and cyclists. The slaughter will continue.
Translation: "Please vote for us."
I'm sorry, but I now think every party will say whatever they think will get to make people vote for them, and then "forget" whatever they said once they are actually in government.
The party in government says and does one thing, and any parties in opposition - er - oppose them, and it doesn't actually matter which actual party is in government or in opposition.
(Are you reading this, Nick Clegg? I voted Lib-Dem at the last election to try and remove a sitting Conservative MP.)
That's not going to go very far is it? Especially once the money's been spent on "safety and integration" (whatever that means).
I'm always suspicious when walking and cycling are lumped together. They have entirely separate requirements.
This was the first thing that I thought: more crap 'shared-use' pavements and routes on the table then.
segregation is key for me. any party proposing cycling ideas can not be taken seriously if this is not on the table.
They could start by enforcing segregation if they intend to protect pedestrians, a situation where cars commonly drive/park on pavements whilst children are prohibited from cycling on them is clearly an imbalance of rights in my opinion.
The risk of children scratching the parked cars is too high.
Segregation is for the most part an impractical dead end which will not get us where we want to go anyway. It will be a huge battle fought for a goal which is debatable.
Much easier just to get rid of the cars. Here is an article from MotoringWorld arguing just that.
the writer of course is Carlton Reid !
For me it is about living together side by side. As Carlton says bikes are here to stay but so are cars and it is devising systems to make the two do that.
These are all nice noises but no actual commitment. I'll wait and see what the other parties have to say. If they say anything. Ultimately it will be what my local MP candidates have to say for cycling in my area that will get my vote, unless it's UKIP.
thats odd didnt Michael Dugher appear on a number of news sites earlier in the week for promoting his unashamedly pro-motorist, or "pro-road" as he seems to prefer to to call it views, and that Labour would end the war on "people who have a car" (they arent motorists anymore apparently) but these people who have a car,allegedly get grumpy about fuel tax,parking charges, insurance and its Labours plans also to ensure that will change.
sheesh anyone would think there was an election coming up
At least Labour have recognised that cyclist vote, I remember a Tory leader who used to cycle until he got elected, strange that? He suddenly stopped probably had enough of plebs picking on his friends
Its easy to be cynical but it was indeed a Labour mayor who got things moving in London with a push for the Tour de France to visit originally and who got the Barclays Bike Hire scheme moving. Not to mention the bold step of charging cars to drive in Central London and therefore kicking off the movement away from 'car is king' that had certainly been prevalent at that time.
I'd be hopeful if that same energy was put into a nationwide push for cycling and walking. Changing the insurance presumed liability to be more aligned with other enlightened European countries would be a bold easy start.
It IS easy, you are correct. What makes it easy? The fact that he is transparently obviously lying.
Creating a cross-party cycling group? Will that be the same as, or different to, the existing cross-party cycling group that has existed for decades and has done nothing at all for cycling in the UK?
As the nation gets near to general elections. the contempt that the parties hold for ordinary people becomes progressively more infuriating. There is a standing assumption that we are stupid and have no memory.
Which has improved cycling nationwide! Nothing like a major sporting event to improve the lot of ordinary people whose daily ride is completely unrelated to professional sport!
Pages