Labour pledges £50 a head active travel spend to get England cycling

peted76 wrote:

I read this article with widening eyes of disbelief, could this be one thing I've been looking for from a party.. has the unicorn landed.. well, on the face of it, it looks like it's what we've been asking for a heap of cash per-head for active travel..and them some.. so I went and read their manifesto on it - https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Real-Change-Labour-Mani... (from page19).

Wowzers, it literally promises to do everything anyone ever wanted to happen it's in there. I'm daren't read outside the 'Travel' section.. as I'm still reeling from just the one section.. I'm not even convinced that I've not just read gotten a few people in a room and created a 'wish list'. 

I think I know what's happened here. Diane Abbot has found what she thinks to be Harry Potters wand in a second hand shop in Wandsworth, she sensibly hasn't dared to use it it's full power yet, but a light comes on and it makes a jangling noise when waved in the air. It's believable enough that she's convinced Emily Thornberry and Tom Watson that it's a sure vote winner, Jeremy brought into it when the three of them approached him with what sounded like a clear plan, he was only half-listening as his cheese sandwich was under the grill at the time, still he got the jist of it and brought into their conviction.  Armed with this secret wand they've written a storming manifesto which cannot fail, once they've sorted out the UK, Diane has plans to take a month off with John McDonnell to see Lions on Safari, she won't take the wand with her just in case she gets stopped going through customs and take it off her.

I was so impressed that you read it that I wanted to see this wonderous Manifesto commitment.  Out of 107 pages it mentions "cycle" twice although one of them was a vicious cycle.  I think I got close passed by one of those on my last Sportive.

burtthebike wrote:

This has just been featured on BBC R4 Today prog, and all the interviewer wanted to talk about was what road schemes will be dropped and how much the rail fare reductions will cost; just not interested in the single most effective way to improve our towns and cities, reduce pollution, congestion, ill health and obesity by investing in cycling and walking.  Good old BBC; they're never going to change.

Starts at 2:35:25 https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000bvw3

The tabloids this morning have gone off on one about how it's disgusting that VED might be used to subsidise public transport instead of using it solely to repair and expand the road network used by the Hard Pressed Motorist (TM).

Philh68 wrote:

Here’s my take from the Antipodes:

Its an election promise, which needs to be taken with a grain of salt. It’s a policy differentiator, a way of making Labour appear clearly different from the Tories. You know that on 90 percent of issues they will be in agreement, it’s the 10 percent or less that decide elections. For Labour it’s important because it’s a social leveller - a billionaire on a bike has no real advantage over anyone else. Equality of mobility reduces social disadvantage. But it’s also an attempt to capture the social conscience and capitalise on present environmental concerns. Watch the motivation for grand policy announcements.

The problem is when it gets attached to elections like this, it becomes a partisan issue regardless of the merit of the policy. If Labour lose the election, it greenlights the Tories to continue to ignore it while post election bloodletting could derail it as Labour policy. The result would be another decade of neglect.

And that would be a disaster because fundamentally it’s a good policy. A relatively cheap way of lowering emissions, while stimulating the economy through infrastructure spending. Having that policy at the top changes the conversation around transport planning, from how many cars per hour to how many people per hour. And that may be its greatest contribution.

Quite Phil. Which was more eloquently what I was trying to say, with a bit of the reality of how it occurs here in the UK...

Philh68 wrote:

Here’s my take from the Antipodes:

Its an election promise, which needs to be taken with a grain of salt. It’s a policy differentiator, a way of making Labour appear clearly different from the Tories. You know that on 90 percent of issues they will be in agreement, it’s the 10 percent or less that decide elections. For Labour it’s important because it’s a social leveller - a billionaire on a bike has no real advantage over anyone else. Equality of mobility reduces social disadvantage. But it’s also an attempt to capture the social conscience and capitalise on present environmental concerns. Watch the motivation for grand policy announcements.

The problem is when it gets attached to elections like this, it becomes a partisan issue regardless of the merit of the policy. If Labour lose the election, it greenlights the Tories to continue to ignore it while post election bloodletting could derail it as Labour policy. The result would be another decade of neglect.

And that would be a disaster because fundamentally it’s a good policy. A relatively cheap way of lowering emissions, while stimulating the economy through infrastructure spending. Having that policy at the top changes the conversation around transport planning, from how many cars per hour to how many people per hour. And that may be its greatest contribution.

Quite Phil. Which was more eloquently what I was trying to say, with a bit of the reality of how it occurs here in the UK...

CyclingInBeastMode wrote:

Pilot Pete, why do you and your wife think segregated is the solution to increasing cycling/cycling safety and is deliverable, say in 10 years, how much spend and how much increase in cycling for your region/town?

Have you even thought that stopping up parts of the road network to motors is vastly more effective, opens up a space of land that is wide enough for every cycle user type in large numbers and is direct and has absolute priority is a better option? It's also massively cheaper than building segregated as well as timescale wise hugely quicker.

That stopping the flow of driving (desire lines) forces people out of cars because it's no longer an option to get to places and because the option of a 3.5m wide lane that can be used in complete safety is actually attractive, particularly to parents with small/younger children as well as faster commuter cyclists who would be able to get past easily/safely which segregated rarely ever does.

Segregated infra as projected and currently built is not even remotely attractive to young families within the built environment. My town isn't much bigger than yours population wise, we have a 'greenway' that goes around the town that is a leisure route (but is useless otherwise), aside from that what little infra there is it's horrendous, segregation and allowing motoring to continue unabated will not resolve or change anything, it needs change by force, carrots will not be enough because the UK population is so tied to the motor vehicle as a means to get about.

You are right, I should have pointed out that she is looking at reducing the road share for cars to provide the infrastructure - we are getting a bypass which means we should be able, in time to get rid of the dual carriageway that runs right through the middle of our town, reducing it to a boulevard with one lane each side and safe cycling infrastructure. 

Im a roadie, who will still ride on the road whatever segregated cycling infrastructure you build, but getting local, non cycling people to swap their car for a bike means you have to think like they do - cycling on the same bit of road space as cars is dangerous... give them an alternative and they may change their attitude. Give their kids safe cycling infrastructure and you will change a generational view. Eventually we end up like Denmark or the Netherlands...

PP

Pilot Pete wrote:

At face value this looks a fantastic policy for their manifesto. But a number of questions are posed by such an announcement.

1. Words are easy. Spend figures just as easy. Financing it as part of a budget slightly harder. So far, both major parties budget promises have been deemed unachievable. 

2. With that in mind, how confident should an individual be that the party will deliver on its promises? Or do you think that maybe they are tapping into the surge in cyclist numbers thinking this may be a policy that will entice cyclist voters to tick the ‘right’ box on Election Day?

3. We are all calling out for better infrastructure and a commitment to such is welcome, but is it believabale? Will the money be spent wisely if it is made available, or will it be frittered away on crap schemes for political point scoring?

4. Do those of us who pay tax want to be taxed into oblivion to meet the rest of Labour’s spending promises when this idea is taken as part of an overall spending spree?

5. Does this make Corbyn electable? That’s a huge stumbling block when you consider his militant stance, hatred of anyone he considers ‘rich’ (and I don’t just mean the billionaires, but the professionals who hold professional qualifications, who have invested significant sums in their careers and who are now reaping the rewards for years and years of taking responsibility for others lives, saving avidly to provide for their pension and old age care and generally adding significantly to society)? And no, don’t just say they earn a decent wage therefore they can afford to pay more - that idea is totally flawed - Labour tried it in the 1970s and the true ‘rich’ (million and billionaires just became non-resident for tax purposes) so never paid the rediculous 80-90% tax rate. However, middle England gets caught up and the tax becomes punitive for those who have tried to better themselves and made something of themselves. Should we all have to live on minimum wage as that is ‘fairer’? Or should doctors be paid more that road sweepers?

So, it all sounds great, but I just don’t think it will be delivered. I’m no roaring Tory, I’ve had enough of them too, but we as a group of cyclists can’t just fall for this dangly fruit.

My wife is an Independent Town and County Councillor. She is so impressive she has been given the role as Cycling and Walking Champion for our county - think Chris Boardman without the palmares! But, what she does have is a passion and drive to achieve EXACTLY what we as cyclists want and even more so, what current (would consider cycling) car drivers want to see - infrastructure that is segregated, safe and will permit riding into town as a viable option to the car, cycling with or without their kids to school, etc etc.

We have 24,000 residents in our town, increasing through massive house building to 34,000 over the next few years. My wife is driving change to get suitable infrastructure. However, it is like turning an oil tanker - she spent four years at town council level trying to get change and got words and no action. She realised she had to be around the table where the money is - County (or City) Council level and duly got herself elected. She is chipping away and making the change. Budget is a red herring - every council has a highways budget to the tune of millions already, they just have to decide to spend it differently! Car has been, and continues to be king. Don’t get me wrong, central government earmarked budget spend on cycling infrastructure will be brilliant, but it is attitudes at council highways and planning level that HAS to change to best spend ANY money that comes their way. Will Corbyn’s pledge deliver this? I doubt it.

PP 

I couldn't be bothered to read all that, so here's the same response I posted to another whinger earlier.

Did you not read what Harrogate Spa posted?

"This is essentially what a lot of us have been asking for for a very long time. What's the reaction when it's offered? Largely negative. We've got so used to complaining, we can't stop.

We've got to learn to criticise when necessary, but welcome positive proposals.

Anyway, if you want investment in active travel, it's absolutely clear: don't vote Tory. (Or is it factcheckUK?)"

Why do you attack the very people who are finally promising what we've all been demanding for the past thirty years, instead of welcoming it with open arms and rejoicing that someone finally gets it?  I simply don't understand anyone who criticises this announcement.

burtthebike wrote:

Pilot Pete wrote:

At face value this looks a fantastic policy for their manifesto. But a number of questions are posed by such an announcement.

1. Words are easy. Spend figures just as easy. Financing it as part of a budget slightly harder. So far, both major parties budget promises have been deemed unachievable. 

2. With that in mind, how confident should an individual be that the party will deliver on its promises? Or do you think that maybe they are tapping into the surge in cyclist numbers thinking this may be a policy that will entice cyclist voters to tick the ‘right’ box on Election Day?

3. We are all calling out for better infrastructure and a commitment to such is welcome, but is it believabale? Will the money be spent wisely if it is made available, or will it be frittered away on crap schemes for political point scoring?

4. Do those of us who pay tax want to be taxed into oblivion to meet the rest of Labour’s spending promises when this idea is taken as part of an overall spending spree?

5. Does this make Corbyn electable? That’s a huge stumbling block when you consider his militant stance, hatred of anyone he considers ‘rich’ (and I don’t just mean the billionaires, but the professionals who hold professional qualifications, who have invested significant sums in their careers and who are now reaping the rewards for years and years of taking responsibility for others lives, saving avidly to provide for their pension and old age care and generally adding significantly to society)? And no, don’t just say they earn a decent wage therefore they can afford to pay more - that idea is totally flawed - Labour tried it in the 1970s and the true ‘rich’ (million and billionaires just became non-resident for tax purposes) so never paid the rediculous 80-90% tax rate. However, middle England gets caught up and the tax becomes punitive for those who have tried to better themselves and made something of themselves. Should we all have to live on minimum wage as that is ‘fairer’? Or should doctors be paid more that road sweepers?

So, it all sounds great, but I just don’t think it will be delivered. I’m no roaring Tory, I’ve had enough of them too, but we as a group of cyclists can’t just fall for this dangly fruit.

My wife is an Independent Town and County Councillor. She is so impressive she has been given the role as Cycling and Walking Champion for our county - think Chris Boardman without the palmares! But, what she does have is a passion and drive to achieve EXACTLY what we as cyclists want and even more so, what current (would consider cycling) car drivers want to see - infrastructure that is segregated, safe and will permit riding into town as a viable option to the car, cycling with or without their kids to school, etc etc.

We have 24,000 residents in our town, increasing through massive house building to 34,000 over the next few years. My wife is driving change to get suitable infrastructure. However, it is like turning an oil tanker - she spent four years at town council level trying to get change and got words and no action. She realised she had to be around the table where the money is - County (or City) Council level and duly got herself elected. She is chipping away and making the change. Budget is a red herring - every council has a highways budget to the tune of millions already, they just have to decide to spend it differently! Car has been, and continues to be king. Don’t get me wrong, central government earmarked budget spend on cycling infrastructure will be brilliant, but it is attitudes at council highways and planning level that HAS to change to best spend ANY money that comes their way. Will Corbyn’s pledge deliver this? I doubt it.

PP 

I couldn't be bothered to read all that, so here's the same response I posted to another whinger earlier.

Did you not read what Harrogate Spa posted?

"This is essentially what a lot of us have been asking for for a very long time. What's the reaction when it's offered? Largely negative. We've got so used to complaining, we can't stop.

We've got to learn to criticise when necessary, but welcome positive proposals.

Anyway, if you want investment in active travel, it's absolutely clear: don't vote Tory. (Or is it factcheckUK?)"

Why do you attack the very people who are finally promising what we've all been demanding for the past thirty years, instead of welcoming it with open arms and rejoicing that someone finally gets it?  I simply don't understand anyone who criticises this announcement.

Well, you show yourself as not worthy of debate then if you can’t be bothered to read anyone else’s opinion.

PP

p.s. And Labour have just pledged to cut rail fares by a third. Yet another dangly carrot for the donkeys...

Pilot Pete wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

Pilot Pete wrote:

At face value this looks a fantastic policy for their manifesto. But a number of questions are posed by such an announcement.

1. Words are easy. Spend figures just as easy. Financing it as part of a budget slightly harder. So far, both major parties budget promises have been deemed unachievable. 

2. With that in mind, how confident should an individual be that the party will deliver on its promises? Or do you think that maybe they are tapping into the surge in cyclist numbers thinking this may be a policy that will entice cyclist voters to tick the ‘right’ box on Election Day?

3. We are all calling out for better infrastructure and a commitment to such is welcome, but is it believabale? Will the money be spent wisely if it is made available, or will it be frittered away on crap schemes for political point scoring?

4. Do those of us who pay tax want to be taxed into oblivion to meet the rest of Labour’s spending promises when this idea is taken as part of an overall spending spree?

5. Does this make Corbyn electable? That’s a huge stumbling block when you consider his militant stance, hatred of anyone he considers ‘rich’ (and I don’t just mean the billionaires, but the professionals who hold professional qualifications, who have invested significant sums in their careers and who are now reaping the rewards for years and years of taking responsibility for others lives, saving avidly to provide for their pension and old age care and generally adding significantly to society)? And no, don’t just say they earn a decent wage therefore they can afford to pay more - that idea is totally flawed - Labour tried it in the 1970s and the true ‘rich’ (million and billionaires just became non-resident for tax purposes) so never paid the rediculous 80-90% tax rate. However, middle England gets caught up and the tax becomes punitive for those who have tried to better themselves and made something of themselves. Should we all have to live on minimum wage as that is ‘fairer’? Or should doctors be paid more that road sweepers?

So, it all sounds great, but I just don’t think it will be delivered. I’m no roaring Tory, I’ve had enough of them too, but we as a group of cyclists can’t just fall for this dangly fruit.

My wife is an Independent Town and County Councillor. She is so impressive she has been given the role as Cycling and Walking Champion for our county - think Chris Boardman without the palmares! But, what she does have is a passion and drive to achieve EXACTLY what we as cyclists want and even more so, what current (would consider cycling) car drivers want to see - infrastructure that is segregated, safe and will permit riding into town as a viable option to the car, cycling with or without their kids to school, etc etc.

We have 24,000 residents in our town, increasing through massive house building to 34,000 over the next few years. My wife is driving change to get suitable infrastructure. However, it is like turning an oil tanker - she spent four years at town council level trying to get change and got words and no action. She realised she had to be around the table where the money is - County (or City) Council level and duly got herself elected. She is chipping away and making the change. Budget is a red herring - every council has a highways budget to the tune of millions already, they just have to decide to spend it differently! Car has been, and continues to be king. Don’t get me wrong, central government earmarked budget spend on cycling infrastructure will be brilliant, but it is attitudes at council highways and planning level that HAS to change to best spend ANY money that comes their way. Will Corbyn’s pledge deliver this? I doubt it.

PP 

I couldn't be bothered to read all that, so here's the same response I posted to another whinger earlier.

Did you not read what Harrogate Spa posted?

"This is essentially what a lot of us have been asking for for a very long time. What's the reaction when it's offered? Largely negative. We've got so used to complaining, we can't stop.

We've got to learn to criticise when necessary, but welcome positive proposals.

Anyway, if you want investment in active travel, it's absolutely clear: don't vote Tory. (Or is it factcheckUK?)"

Why do you attack the very people who are finally promising what we've all been demanding for the past thirty years, instead of welcoming it with open arms and rejoicing that someone finally gets it?  I simply don't understand anyone who criticises this announcement.

Well, you show yourself as not worthy of debate then if you can’t be bothered to read anyone else’s opinion.

PP

p.s. And Labour have just pledged to cut rail fares by a third. Yet another dangly carrot for the donkeys...

You mistake prolix for debate.

burtthebike wrote:

Pilot Pete wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

Pilot Pete wrote:

At face value this looks a fantastic policy for their manifesto. But a number of questions are posed by such an announcement.

1. Words are easy. Spend figures just as easy. Financing it as part of a budget slightly harder. So far, both major parties budget promises have been deemed unachievable. 

2. With that in mind, how confident should an individual be that the party will deliver on its promises? Or do you think that maybe they are tapping into the surge in cyclist numbers thinking this may be a policy that will entice cyclist voters to tick the ‘right’ box on Election Day?

3. We are all calling out for better infrastructure and a commitment to such is welcome, but is it believabale? Will the money be spent wisely if it is made available, or will it be frittered away on crap schemes for political point scoring?

4. Do those of us who pay tax want to be taxed into oblivion to meet the rest of Labour’s spending promises when this idea is taken as part of an overall spending spree?

5. Does this make Corbyn electable? That’s a huge stumbling block when you consider his militant stance, hatred of anyone he considers ‘rich’ (and I don’t just mean the billionaires, but the professionals who hold professional qualifications, who have invested significant sums in their careers and who are now reaping the rewards for years and years of taking responsibility for others lives, saving avidly to provide for their pension and old age care and generally adding significantly to society)? And no, don’t just say they earn a decent wage therefore they can afford to pay more - that idea is totally flawed - Labour tried it in the 1970s and the true ‘rich’ (million and billionaires just became non-resident for tax purposes) so never paid the rediculous 80-90% tax rate. However, middle England gets caught up and the tax becomes punitive for those who have tried to better themselves and made something of themselves. Should we all have to live on minimum wage as that is ‘fairer’? Or should doctors be paid more that road sweepers?

So, it all sounds great, but I just don’t think it will be delivered. I’m no roaring Tory, I’ve had enough of them too, but we as a group of cyclists can’t just fall for this dangly fruit.

My wife is an Independent Town and County Councillor. She is so impressive she has been given the role as Cycling and Walking Champion for our county - think Chris Boardman without the palmares! But, what she does have is a passion and drive to achieve EXACTLY what we as cyclists want and even more so, what current (would consider cycling) car drivers want to see - infrastructure that is segregated, safe and will permit riding into town as a viable option to the car, cycling with or without their kids to school, etc etc.

We have 24,000 residents in our town, increasing through massive house building to 34,000 over the next few years. My wife is driving change to get suitable infrastructure. However, it is like turning an oil tanker - she spent four years at town council level trying to get change and got words and no action. She realised she had to be around the table where the money is - County (or City) Council level and duly got herself elected. She is chipping away and making the change. Budget is a red herring - every council has a highways budget to the tune of millions already, they just have to decide to spend it differently! Car has been, and continues to be king. Don’t get me wrong, central government earmarked budget spend on cycling infrastructure will be brilliant, but it is attitudes at council highways and planning level that HAS to change to best spend ANY money that comes their way. Will Corbyn’s pledge deliver this? I doubt it.

PP 

I couldn't be bothered to read all that, so here's the same response I posted to another whinger earlier.

Did you not read what Harrogate Spa posted?

"This is essentially what a lot of us have been asking for for a very long time. What's the reaction when it's offered? Largely negative. We've got so used to complaining, we can't stop.

We've got to learn to criticise when necessary, but welcome positive proposals.

Anyway, if you want investment in active travel, it's absolutely clear: don't vote Tory. (Or is it factcheckUK?)"

Why do you attack the very people who are finally promising what we've all been demanding for the past thirty years, instead of welcoming it with open arms and rejoicing that someone finally gets it?  I simply don't understand anyone who criticises this announcement.

Well, you show yourself as not worthy of debate then if you can’t be bothered to read anyone else’s opinion.

PP

p.s. And Labour have just pledged to cut rail fares by a third. Yet another dangly carrot for the donkeys...

You mistake prolix for debate.

And you mistake your opinion as being the only valid one...

Pilot Pete wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

Pilot Pete wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

Pilot Pete wrote:

At face value this looks a fantastic policy for their manifesto. But a number of questions are posed by such an announcement.

1. Words are easy. Spend figures just as easy. Financing it as part of a budget slightly harder. So far, both major parties budget promises have been deemed unachievable. 

2. With that in mind, how confident should an individual be that the party will deliver on its promises? Or do you think that maybe they are tapping into the surge in cyclist numbers thinking this may be a policy that will entice cyclist voters to tick the ‘right’ box on Election Day?

3. We are all calling out for better infrastructure and a commitment to such is welcome, but is it believabale? Will the money be spent wisely if it is made available, or will it be frittered away on crap schemes for political point scoring?

4. Do those of us who pay tax want to be taxed into oblivion to meet the rest of Labour’s spending promises when this idea is taken as part of an overall spending spree?

5. Does this make Corbyn electable? That’s a huge stumbling block when you consider his militant stance, hatred of anyone he considers ‘rich’ (and I don’t just mean the billionaires, but the professionals who hold professional qualifications, who have invested significant sums in their careers and who are now reaping the rewards for years and years of taking responsibility for others lives, saving avidly to provide for their pension and old age care and generally adding significantly to society)? And no, don’t just say they earn a decent wage therefore they can afford to pay more - that idea is totally flawed - Labour tried it in the 1970s and the true ‘rich’ (million and billionaires just became non-resident for tax purposes) so never paid the rediculous 80-90% tax rate. However, middle England gets caught up and the tax becomes punitive for those who have tried to better themselves and made something of themselves. Should we all have to live on minimum wage as that is ‘fairer’? Or should doctors be paid more that road sweepers?

So, it all sounds great, but I just don’t think it will be delivered. I’m no roaring Tory, I’ve had enough of them too, but we as a group of cyclists can’t just fall for this dangly fruit.

My wife is an Independent Town and County Councillor. She is so impressive she has been given the role as Cycling and Walking Champion for our county - think Chris Boardman without the palmares! But, what she does have is a passion and drive to achieve EXACTLY what we as cyclists want and even more so, what current (would consider cycling) car drivers want to see - infrastructure that is segregated, safe and will permit riding into town as a viable option to the car, cycling with or without their kids to school, etc etc.

We have 24,000 residents in our town, increasing through massive house building to 34,000 over the next few years. My wife is driving change to get suitable infrastructure. However, it is like turning an oil tanker - she spent four years at town council level trying to get change and got words and no action. She realised she had to be around the table where the money is - County (or City) Council level and duly got herself elected. She is chipping away and making the change. Budget is a red herring - every council has a highways budget to the tune of millions already, they just have to decide to spend it differently! Car has been, and continues to be king. Don’t get me wrong, central government earmarked budget spend on cycling infrastructure will be brilliant, but it is attitudes at council highways and planning level that HAS to change to best spend ANY money that comes their way. Will Corbyn’s pledge deliver this? I doubt it.

PP 

I couldn't be bothered to read all that, so here's the same response I posted to another whinger earlier.

Did you not read what Harrogate Spa posted?

"This is essentially what a lot of us have been asking for for a very long time. What's the reaction when it's offered? Largely negative. We've got so used to complaining, we can't stop.

We've got to learn to criticise when necessary, but welcome positive proposals.

Anyway, if you want investment in active travel, it's absolutely clear: don't vote Tory. (Or is it factcheckUK?)"

Why do you attack the very people who are finally promising what we've all been demanding for the past thirty years, instead of welcoming it with open arms and rejoicing that someone finally gets it?  I simply don't understand anyone who criticises this announcement.

Well, you show yourself as not worthy of debate then if you can’t be bothered to read anyone else’s opinion.

PP

p.s. And Labour have just pledged to cut rail fares by a third. Yet another dangly carrot for the donkeys...

You mistake prolix for debate.

And you mistake your opinion as being the only valid one...

Far from it.  I'm happy to read anyone who is succinct and to the point, but I utterly detest waffle.

HarrogateSpa wrote:

This is essentially what a lot of us have been asking for for a very long time. What's the reaction when it's offered? Largely negative. We've got so used to complaining, we can't stop.

We've got to learn to criticise when necessary, but welcome positive proposals.

Anyway, if you want investment in active travel, it's absolutely clear: don't vote Tory. (Or is it factcheckUK?)

No, we've gotten so used to seeing money pissed away on shitty schemes that don't do squat, pointless chucking money at something when the underlying problem isn't being addressed and won't be. Just look at the NHS, EVs, Rail System, general infra and so on, billions thrown at it and no improvements.

Why is throwing more money to be wasted in exactly the same way as before and it not making a single change in terms of increasing cycling/cycle safety something positive when it's proven time and again to be anything but?

Oh and Labour proven to be as big a bunch of delusional liars as the Cons, it's all meaningless number throwing, it won't do squat, I guess seeing 5% increaaes here or 10% there will get the bunting out for some, it's absolutely nothing, it's tiny increases of a tiny number, in fact with greater populations and distances travelled plus better safety for peds/motorists overall we will be going backwards, 15 years on and despite all the efforts cycling has gone nowhere yet lags behind massively in terms of increasing road safety particularly compared to pedestrians and motorcyclists!

The only target we should be aiming for is 25% modal share, anything less is just low bar rubbish. 25% modal share for cycling to get places would save tens of billions every single year to the tax payer just on the NHS alone from less sedentary lifestyles as well as making a huge change in our built environ, but Labour will absolutely not be able to get a 1% increase in modal share for cycling in 10 years, I will lay a charitable wager on that, that's IF they get into power, which I don't think they will.

CyclingInBeastMode wrote:

HarrogateSpa wrote:

This is essentially what a lot of us have been asking for for a very long time. What's the reaction when it's offered? Largely negative. We've got so used to complaining, we can't stop.

We've got to learn to criticise when necessary, but welcome positive proposals.

Anyway, if you want investment in active travel, it's absolutely clear: don't vote Tory. (Or is it factcheckUK?)

No, we've gotten so used to seeing money pissed away on shitty schemes that don't do squat, pointless chucking money at something when the underlying problem isn't being addressed and won't be. Just look at the NHS, EVs, Rail System, general infra and so on, billions thrown at it and no improvements.

Why is throwing more money to be wasted in exactly the same way as before and it not making a single change in terms of increasing cycling/cycle safety something positive when it's proven time and again to be anything but?

Oh and Labour proven to be as big a bunch of delusional liars as the Cons, it's all meaningless number throwing, it won't do squat, I guess seeing 5% increaaes here or 10% there will get the bunting out for some, it's absolutely nothing, it's tiny increases of a tiny number, in fact with greater populations and distances travelled plus better safety for peds/motorists overall we will be going backwards, 15 years on and despite all the efforts cycling has gone nowhere yet lags behind massively in terms of increasing road safety particularly compared to pedestrians and motorcyclists!

The only target we should be aiming for is 25% modal share, anything less is just low bar rubbish. 25% modal share for cycling to get places would save tens of billions every single year to the tax payer just on the NHS alone from less sedentary lifestyles as well as making a huge change in our built environ, but Labour will absolutely not be able to get a 1% increase in modal share for cycling in 10 years, I will lay a charitable wager on that, that's IF they get into power, which I don't think they will.

Did you not read what Harrogate Spa posted?

"This is essentially what a lot of us have been asking for for a very long time. What's the reaction when it's offered? Largely negative. We've got so used to complaining, we can't stop.

We've got to learn to criticise when necessary, but welcome positive proposals.

Anyway, if you want investment in active travel, it's absolutely clear: don't vote Tory. (Or is it factcheckUK?)"

Why do you attack the very people who are finally promising what we've all been demanding for the past thirty years, instead of welcoming it with open arms and rejoicing that someone finally gets it?  I simply don't understand anyone who criticises this announcement.

burtthebike wrote:

 

Why do you attack the very people who are finally promising what we've all been demanding for the past thirty years, instead of welcoming it with open arms and rejoicing that someone finally gets it?  I simply don't understand anyone who criticises this announcement.

We crticise them because we don't believe them.  London is a fine example where there are great pledges by the Mayor on cycling, but it in the end all we get is paint on the roads, and repeated changes of signs to justify new press releases.  And is this a manifesto commitment, or simply another unfunded pledge that played well in some focus group somewhere and will never see the light of day.  We will only take them seriously when the political parties stop lying through their back teeth, and smearing their opposition with fake news.

dmack wrote:

burtthebike wrote:

 

Why do you attack the very people who are finally promising what we've all been demanding for the past thirty years, instead of welcoming it with open arms and rejoicing that someone finally gets it?  I simply don't understand anyone who criticises this announcement.

We crticise them because we don't believe them.  London is a fine example where there are great pledges by the Mayor on cycling, but it in the end all we get is paint on the roads, and repeated changes of signs to justify new press releases.  And is this a manifesto commitment, or simply another unfunded pledge that played well in some focus group somewhere and will never see the light of day.  We will only take them seriously when the political parties stop lying through their back teeth, and smearing their opposition with fake news.

Exactly. Words are cheap and political parties aren't to be trusted at the best of times, let alone an election.

My advice is to ignore what they say and focus on what they do (or don't do as is more likely).

Karbon Kev wrote:

What a load of rubbish. it won't happen, like so much namby-pamby corbyn promises, they're just lies!

You appear to have gotten lost on the way to the Daily Mail website.

Karbon Kev wrote:

What a load of rubbish. it won't happen, like so much namby-pamby corbyn promises, they're just lies!

Absolutely!  So different to all those absolutely fulfilled tory promises of the last ten years to invest in cycling and walking that have already totally transformed our cities and towns, where cycling is now so safe and convenient that most people have sold their cars because of the comprehensive network of cycle routes.*

Having watched the Andrew Marr show where Boris came over as a lying, evasive bully, I wouldn't trust a word he says, and it's time we gave someone other than these entitled public school twats a chance.

* May contain traces of irony.