Cycle funding is discriminatory says UKIP candidate

Surely he should be asking why motorists receive so much subsidy? Giving money to a group who have not paid for it does not sound like a UKIP policy. Maybe he should re think his political party.
Imagine if he gets voted in? It will probably no different to the existing MPs who all appear to be in it for themselves with 7 houses and expenses for everything and huge pay rises for themselves as it they chose to become an MP but forgot that they cannot live on a salary alone and sometimes have to work 9 hours a day unlike the rest of the UK.
RANT OVER.

Spending money on Motorways is discriminatory. It discriminates against cyclists who cannot ride on Motorways.

Spending money on Motorways is discriminatory. It discriminates against cyclists who cannot ride on Motorways.

If you want to tell him your views upon his leaflet you can contact him via his facebook campain page https://www.facebook.com/sturrgosforth?fref=nf

Just one new roundabout to get you slightly more quickly from the M1 to the edge of Luton: £30 million (needed due to the M1 being widened, at a cost of £800 million). We need to stop wasting money on ... oh wait, this is for brum-brums!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-24924553

"A UKIP parliamentary candidate in Newcastle upon Tyne says that cyclists are ‘the chosen people’, while motorists are simply ‘a cash cow’."

So he's right on one thing then. ; )

Joking.

But all this fuss over bike lanes when the govt is spending £How Much on widening the M1 and other road additions each year? "Perspective and balance, meet politics"

Stop publicising these idiots. They are not even the fourth most popular political party in the UK, who cares what they say?

UKIP, are they a political party?

This article really should link to the BikeBiz piece:

http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/cyclists-are-the-chosen-people-complain...

Despite all of the above, it has been brought to our attention that last year Thompson told Newcastle City Council he was in favour of cycle lanes. [A would-be politician saying one thing to one audience and the opposite to another? Tell us this cannot be true!]

Here's what Thompson said:

"We believe that the only way to encourage people to use cycle tracks is to implement continuous 24 hour cycle tracks which are protected by raised curbs the full length of the High Street. By reducing the traffic lanes to one each way we will calm traffic flow, create space for cycle tracks and valuable residential parking spaces where they are desperately needed to the south of the high street where the current advisory cycle tracks are located. Uniquely on this stretch there is enough space for cycle tracks, traffic and parking.

"Cycle tracks need to be protected from traffic by a raised curb and they also need a visual or physical barrier or differentiation from pedestrians to safeguard both cyclists and pedestrians. This can be done by the use of a variety of curb/barriers, coloured cycle tracks using different materials in their construction.

"The use of dropped pavement then raised curb (wide enough to offer protection from traffic and parked cars doors opening) followed where possible by parking spaces and then traffic lanes is the best solution. The cycle tracks could be dual or placed upon either side of the road, although dual cycle tracks may take up less road space and make junctions and turning points easier and cheaper to implement depending on the design and physical protection method. In any case we ask that the design of junctions and turning points be more carefully considered. We also urge planners to consult more fully with organisations such as the Newcastle Cycling Campaign, who some may argue have been wholly under-consulted. To the south of the High Street the lack of street furniture and utility cabinets, as well as the spacious width of the pavement, mean that cycle tracks and parking spaces can be implemented relatively cheaply and simply compared to other areas of the High Street. In addition the area is residential rather than commercial, given the total absence of retail outlets."

Yeah I'll go for it, 24 comments already so past Godwin's law.
Please don't dismiss them as loonies or not going anywhere in the elections because that's exactly what a load of europeans did prior to 1933. Please be sure to vote to make sure that they not only don't get seats but lose thier deposits as well.

I can't see how this bunch of morons should get any votes

This is ridiculous! And people believe this is a good party, do they want to stop GB winning medals in the olympics? And pedestrians having more rights... i tell you who are discriminatory Ukip... against cyclists

'UKIP. WTF are they like?'

Well, they're sort of like the BNP, crossed with the Monster Raving Loony party.

Motorists having few rights?

Cyclists can't go on the pavement, while at the same time have to contend with the few reckless drivers on the road, enough to sour the cycling experience.

Oh look, as a UKIP member he'll be a strong supporter of law and order?

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/sturr-gosforth-campa...

Nope. He has a criminal record.

UKIP. WTF are they like?
I realise there's probably a bit of confirmation bias going on which means that idiotic statements from their members get pounced on while we might not hear about the daft things coming out of the fringes of the other parties.
But still, they just seem to be a bunch of caricature buffoons. I don't get how anyone can possibly take them seriously.

Doesn't he realise that the best thing he could do for any motorist is to get 50% of the other buggers out of their cars and on to a bike?

Imagine how much nicer it would be to drive around and how many parking spaces would be available at your destination...

Good for the UKIP guy, it's his job to apply to the lowest common denominator be it on race, homophobia or transport. If UKIP are denouncing something you believe in you know you're probably on the right track!

over 65% of cyclists actually own a car(in the family)but want to get fitter, heltheir and to work quicker saving the nhs a fortune in later yars and freeing up road space for ambulances to get to emergincies of old people falling and fat peole having heart attacks at 45,

Does Mr 'motorists are a cash cow' Thompson mention how much the current upgrade of the A1 around Tyneside is costing as a comparison to the apparently excessive expenditure on bike lanes in the area, or the £380 million being spent on widening 12 miles of the same road a little further south?

United Kingdom Ignoramus Party.

Quote:

"How many elderly ladies will get on their bikes on a dark December night in Newcastle?"

That's similar to the number that would feel safe walking to the shops, which has very little to do with cycling and more about personal safety on the streets. Moron.

Quote:

"Surely giving all the rights to cyclists, who are usually young people, is discrimination against the elderly and infirm?"

What rights? Or does Moron mean money? cyclists are usually young as they are the only ones brave enough to fight though the current car dominated jungle. Moron

Since Moron thinks spending money on cyclepaths where few currently cycle is pointless, I presume Moron also thinks spending money on new roads such as bypasses and even developments on green or brownfield sites also a waste as not many drivers drive there. Moron

Quote:

Cyclists are the chosen people...

I wish we were. "He's not the chosen one, he's just a very naughty pavement cyclist!"

Quote:

Motorists are simply a cash cow and have very few rights.

Wow - he really does live in a different world, doesn't he... Which makes the number of MPs they will probably get into the next parliament even scarier.

"Motorists have very few rights..." Hmm - tell that to Michael Mason's family, or the family of Daniel Squire. Tell that to the people where a prospective parliamentary candidate is quibbling about £10m on cycle lanes (which I think buys about a half mile, nowadays ) whilst literally billions can be thrown at the initial research before deciding how many billions more can be spent on HS2.

Based on the last year or so of headlines, motorists appear to have a right to use their phone whenever and wherever they d*** well please, to drive as fast as they like whatever the weather or the road conditions, to ignore the moving things right in front of them, to be constantly surprised by the sun rising or setting, to take up our public highways with their big metal boxes so they don't have to cycle, or walk, or share an even bigger metal box with strangers (god forbid). I could go on.

Yet more unfiltered brain farts from UKIP.

By the quoted highlights, I'm going to guess he's a member of the ABD (Alliance of British Drivers). There's a lot of them in UKIP.

I am assuming the gentleman is in favour of increased pollution, of increased levels of respiratory illness, of heart disease....