[Closed] Green Party is like a car crash...

Clueless indeed

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/sgordons-natalie-bennett-that-was-bad

🙂

Doh!

I saw the news earlier, I was squirming with embarrassment.
They want to force motorcyclists off of powerful bikes onto scooters and moped-type bikes as well; you can imagine how well that proposal is going down!
From bikechatforums:

Dear Danny

Thanks for your email, apologies for the delay in replying.

Our policy on motorbikes is that Smaller, low powered motorcycles are
generally preferable to cars (especially those with a single occupant)
as
they take up less road space and are more economic consumers of fuel.
However, the Green Party does not wish to see increased use of
motorcycles
because they emit pollution and noise and can endanger road users. The
aim
is to encourage much less use of high powered machines and for low
powered
machines to offer an alternative for those who currently use these or
cars
and could not transfer to more sustainable modes.
The Green Party would take measures to encourage a transfer of motor
cycle
manufacture and use from larger, powerful machines to less powerful
ones
including scooters and mopeds. These would include setting and
enforcing
strict noise limits and, for higher powered machines, speed limiters.
For the safety of other users, the Green Party does not feel it
appropriate
for motorcyclists to be able to use any priority measures put in for
pedestrians and cyclists, including those shared with public transport.

Best wishes

Greg Patton
Administrative Officer
The Green Party
020 7272 4474

Amazing, they lost my vote in just one e-mail. Laughing

TR320 Smaller, low powered motorcycles are generally preferable to cars (especially those with a single occupant) as they take up less road space and are more economic consumers of fuel. However, the Green Party does not wish to see increased use of motorcycles because they emit pollution and noise and can endanger road users. The aim is to encourage much less use of high powered machines and for low powered machines to offer an alternative for those who currently use these or cars and could not transfer to more sustainable modes.

TR321 The Green Party would take measures to encourage a transfer of motor cycle manufacture and use from larger, powerful machines to less powerful ones including scooters and mopeds. These would include setting and enforcing strict noise limits and, for higher powered machines, speed limiters.

TR322 For the safety of other users, the Green Party does not feel it appropriate for motorcyclists to be able to use any priority measures put in for pedestrians and cyclists, including those shared with public transport.

http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/tr.html

Doesn't exactly seem insane to me...

Doesn't exactly seem insane to me...

LOL, because he doesn't think the policy is insane, you think he doesn't understand. Why not just admit you are actually too thick too explain any point you might have.

If you don't understand, I'm not sure I can explain it to you.

Just seems like a strange line in the sand.

You can lead us into illegal wars, you can abandon core manifesto promises and sell out your principles, you can hobble our welfare state and damage our frontline health services but you'll never enforce a noise limit on my motorbike.

It's hard to argue with speed limiters really, I mean my little 650's never reached its top speed, 186mph'd be no more useful than a set of number plate testicles to me... I mean really, what is your rational argument against a limit that stops bikes from going at over 2 and a half times the speed limit?

The bus lane thing is daft though, all the evidence shows that allowing ptws in bus lanes reduces congestion but also makes roads safer. (counterintuitive- it seems like people are more cautious around bus lanes when they think there might be a ton of bandit 12 in it doing a thousand miles an hour, rather than just some pushbiker they can knock over with impunity.)

I ride a motorcycle. I've been racing and I enjoy trackdays, which is just riding round in circles burning fuel and 2T oil for the sake of it if we're honest with ourselves. I'll gladly forsake that to get a Green government.

These threads seem to always get a 'look a what those crazy greens are up to now' with a link to a sensible policy that I tend to agree with.

Someone has to make the (real) difficult choices, and it's the Greens. I don't care how good they are in interview situations.

[i]These threads seem to always get a 'look a what those crazy greens are up to now' with a link to a sensible policy that I tend to agree with.[/i]

Thinking the same.

The Green Party's entire argument rests on the understanding that major sacrifices will need to be made now to safeguard our future. This policy is largely in keeping with that wider goal. People have become too used to political parties trying to be all things to all people. The Greens are, well, green. If you don't agree with their policies, no worries, but I think it would be insane for them to pursue large scale reductions in greenhouse emissions except with regard to motorbikes, because we like motorbikes...

The Greens are, well, green. If you don't agree with their policies, no worries, but I think it would be insane for them to pursue large scale reductions in greenhouse emissions except with regard to motorbikes, because we like motorbikes...

Clearly you don't ride a bike.

The Tories seem to want to squeeze the poor and the sick for every single penny, whilst letting their wealthy mates off the hook for £60bn a year in tax.

Labour are just Tory-lite. They seem unable to grasp the notion that renationalising certain public services is extremely popular.

The Lib-Dems can't keep a single manifesto pledge.

We're running out of electable political parties.

😆 at lemonysam

Wot is de greane parti policee on spellin an headyukayshun 😀

They seem unable to grasp the notion that renationalising certain public services is extremely popular.

Yes it is strange and all the more so as Tony Blair's/New Labour's trump card whenever under pressure from the left was always "that would be unpopular with voters" (the other option of "making the case for....[i]whatever[/i]" was never even considered).

Ultimately I guess it's just down to the fact that today's Labour Party lacks the guts, confidence, and conviction, to take a policy stance that would very unpopular with the Tories and the Tory press which they control, even if it was popular with ordinary working people.

Power lies in the hands of bankers, industrialists, the media they control, and the politicians that they sponsor, not ordinary working people, so better to appease them and let the likes of Rupert Murdoch and Nick Ferrari set the agenda and the priorities.

I ride a bike. A nice powerful, noisy 800cc one.

I will happily, however, trade that in for an equivalent electric one as soon as such a thing exists. I don't need petrol to make it an adventure to ride. Tbh quieter and more environmentally friendly would be kinda cool too.

// mind you I should probably mention I'll be standing as a Green Party local council candidate in May...

Rachel

What Ernie said.

I wondered over the weekend after learning on friday that another guy I know had been killed on his motorbike if the government would ever ban high powered motorbikes.

First time I had ever given it any thought. I'm clearly not the only one.

Fairly sure the Green Party will move on to wanting to ban mountain bikers on spurious environmental grounds and then other extreme sports for safety reasons, meanwhile legalizing pot and heroin.

Meh.

It's all pissing in the wind, the best thing we can do now is just adapt to climate change.

I wondered over the weekend after learning on friday that another guy I know had been killed on his motorbike if the government would ever ban high powered motorbikes

Thing is, high power isn't really what kills people, most fatal collisions occur within the performance range of most bikes. I learned on a GS500, a 50bhp donkey but it'll still take you to 115mph if you want. More power gets you up to speed faster and does give you greater ability to highside yourself into space though but, basically, the risk factor isn't power. I reckon there's a pretty strong correlation between riding like a fanny and buying a race rep though.

Fairly sure the Green Party will move on to wanting to ban mountain bikers

Yeah, and I'm fairly sure they will want to ban large TV sets, and loud music, and Christmas, and dancing. And introduce sharia law.

Yeah, and I'm fairly sure they will want to ban large TV sets, and loud music, and Christmas, and dancing. And introduce sharia law.

Lot's of them do hate the soil erosion and having to share trails with chavvy mountain bikers. 😆

[img] [/img]

I ride a bike. A nice powerful, noisy 800cc one.

I thought you had. A BMW adventure bike, have you changed it?

Don't motorbikes cause similar emissions to cars despite their lower weight? I'm sure I read that the legislation on emissions has not kept pace with cars. So it would be a bit mad for any government to want to reduce car emissions but ignore motorbikes.

Motorbikes in bus lanes...they eventually allowed it in Brighton, however apparently the accident rate has gone up, perhaps due to cars pulling through the bus lane into side roads and taking out the now faster bikers.

And whilst we are on bus lanes...anyone reckon buses (and taxi's) shouldn't be able to undertake traffic adjacent to a bus lane until they are down to say 15mph? Its scary how those kamikaze drivers will thread an 18 ton bus straight through the middle of a city centre traffic jam at 35mph with no regard for pedestrians and drivers chopping and changing lanes 😯 You don't see many HGV's trying to maintain that speed in congested streets.

It's all pissing in the wind, the best thing we can do now is just adapt to climate change.

Tell that to millions of Bangladeshis who will lose their homes to rising sea levels and millions of sub Saharan Africans who will, unless they move, become Saharan Africans.

Seems sensible, they've got my vote.

Lot's of them do hate the soil erosion and having to share trails with chavvy mountain bikers

You seem to be confusing the green party with the ramblers.

The point was made above - the Greens are seeking to scale back consumption to secure the long term future of the planet, as they see it.

Most people want to continue to have the wealth and ability to "improve" their quality of life by consuming stuff, and the other parties are happy to pander to that to gain "power".

I don't particularly agree with the Greens short term policies, but at least they still have an underlying principle that they believe in.

I should probably mention I'll be standing as a Green Party local council candidate in May

All the best people are 😉

Not read the Greens manifesto but are they going to target powerful cars and gas guzzling 4 wheel drives. I think they would find very stiff opposition to this due to the lobbying power of motor manufacturers.

[quote="joeegg"][u][b]Not read the Greens manifesto[/b][/u] but are they going to target powerful cars and gas guzzling 4 wheel drives. I think they would find very stiff opposition to this due to the lobbying power of motor manufacturers.

Perhaps you should read their manifesto and find out for yourself. Something has to change because the system as it is cannot sustain itself, and yes, that might mean that some of us have to stop driving badges.

edited to add- big deal, the motor manufacturers might have to re-purpose their factories and- gasp! - make smaller, lighter, more efficient cars. People will get over it.

edited again- Me and Chris joined the Green Party a few months ago as they have the most policies we agree with and are most likely to enact change (abolishing the monarchy? Sign me up!) despite their being historically unlikely to gain a majority. We're voting for the policies we agree with and if more people did that and stopped cocking about with 'tactical' votes or just not voting at all there might actually be change for the better. For what it's worth to all you saying that "nowt'll change", the Greens do intend to change the voting system should they gain power-

http://policy.greenp....org.uk/pa.html

Our constituency (Easington) didn't have a Green candidate in 2010 but they have one for this election 😀

spooky_b329 - Member

Don't motorbikes cause similar emissions to cars despite their lower weight? I'm sure I read that the legislation on emissions has not kept pace with cars

The emissions per gram of fuel are higher and fuel efficiency's lagged so they don't look as good as they could in the current emissions obsessed climate... but that's offset by their natural advantages- able to keep moving and cut congestion (which saves you fuel and also saves everyone else fuel), less parking impact and road wear/pressure, and much lower production impact.

Don't motorbikes cause similar emissions to cars despite their lower weight? I'm sure I read that the legislation on emissions has not kept pace with cars

It probably depends on how you choose to measure it but as my 750cc bike returns fuel economy of over 70mpg and the total cost of taxing it as £80 I'd say that overall it is far less polluting than a car.

If the Greens wanted to maximise their impact then they'd be targetting cars first and only then tacle motorbikes.

What Green Governance actually looks like...

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9342592/brighton-has-become-an-object-lesson-in-why-it-is-a-disaster-to-vote-green/

I'd say 70mpg was pretty poor for a one person vehicle. You can easily get 40-50 from 4/5 seater car (Although most are driven with only one occupant, which is why the greens are actually promoting the use of motorbikes, Just not high power ones). AIUI They are targeting all inefficient vehicles including bikes and cars. No need to start with just one.

Awesome use of Conservative-biased linkage there, Mr Woppit.

What Green Governance actually looks like...

nickjb - Member

I'd say 70mpg was pretty poor for a one person vehicle. You can easily get 40-50 from 4 seater (Although most are driven with only one occupant).

A bike's a 2 person vehicle normally. Though as you say the more important part is actual use not maximum capacity. But like I say, mpg isn't that useful a measurement for bikes especially in towns where they spend so much less time doing 0mpg.

No doubt at all that they could be better though. The modification culture doesn't help- it's environmental madness to put a catalytic convertor on a bike if the owner just takes it off and fits a race can frinstance. But the slacker emissions regs and consumer desires mean that bikes have lagged.

The other thing you really have to do is compare like with like. A 600 sports bike always gets compared to a family car which is silly- it should be compared with a sports car.

It probably depends on how you choose to measure it but as my 750cc bike returns fuel economy of over 70mpg

As said - for carrying one person at or around the speed limit, it ought to be way better than that. Engine and aerodynamic improvements would be on top of the urban driving efficiencies mentioned.

Has anyone ever marketed a motorbike for environmental reasons? Does anyone buy one for this reason? If someone started making and marketing them as such, perhaps it might make a more positive impact than they already does.

I'd say 70mpg was pretty poor for a one person vehicle. You can easily get 40-50 from 4 seater (Although most are driven with only one occupant).

If you are going to claim that a car is 4 person vehicle then you'd have to put motorbikes as two person vehicles. You'd also struggle to find a car that can do 40-50 easily on anything other than a motorway/dual carriageway cruise.

No need to start with just one

No need perhaps however you'd get a lot more "bang for your buck" by starting with cars, not least because there are more of them.

As said - for carrying one person at or around the speed limit, it ought to be way better than that.

It's way better than any car can achieve and lest be honest, most car journey do not involve them carrying 4 people.

You'd also struggle to find a car that can do 40-50 easily on anything other than a motorway/dual carriageway cruise

40-50mpg? You seriously think that's unachievable off a motorway?

I drove through heavy traffic across Cardiff and back in an old auto Passat - got 40mpg!

It's way better than any car can achieve

Rubbish!

40-50mpg? You serious?

When you include commuting, and all the stop start that involves driving around a town, yes. Oh and if we're going to compare like with like, petrol engined too.

drove through heavy traffic across Cardiff and back in an old auto Passat - got 40mpg!

It's way better than any car can achieve

Rubbish!

So less than than 70 then?

Both car and big bike are bad that is why both will be targeted. A bike might be slightly better than a car for some journeys at the moment but that doesn't make it good.

A bit like asking would you prefer a kick in shins or in the nuts. The kick in the shins is preferable but if there is a third, less harmful option, as there is with transportation then that should be the one we consider.

I think they would find very stiff opposition to this due to the lobbying power of motor manufacturers.

but that's offset by their natural advantages

So less than than 70 then?

When you include commuting, and all the stop start that involves driving around a town, yes.

You're wrong. Loads of cars can do 40-50 round town.

Your motorbike does 70 in urban commuting?

or are there already super eco bikes out there but that no-one worth their leathers will actually ride?

This is the point I was trying to make, rather than getting into a scrap. I want to see someone try to make the most efficient engine powered two wheeled vehicle possible, just to see what can be done.

Yeah, there are some super-dull Hondas 700/750s that do a squillion mpg but nobody with a functioning adrenal gland would want to ride one for fun.

Your motorbike does 70 in urban commuting?

That's a rough average that includes urban commuting, yes.

I want to see someone try to make the most efficient engine powered two wheeled vehicle possible, just to see what can be done

Well that would be an electric powered one which aren't, or don't seem to be, as available in the UK as in other parts of the world.

Liberal-based linkage.

Still looks like a bunch of cranks squabbling about nothing, to me.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/dec/15/greens-blown-it-in-brighton

molgrips - Member

Your motorbike does 70 in urban commuting?

Mine doesn't but like I say, it's a sports bike so comparing it with an economy car is silly.

But my old 125? No problem at all, despite it being ancient and shit. A fuel tank smaller than a jerry can is kind of a statement of intent 🙂

The current Honda Forza does 122.8mpg, I can't find an urban figure but it'll drop off much less than a car.

That's a rough average that includes urban commuting, yes.

How much urban commuting?

Mine doesn't but like I say, it's a sports bike so comparing it with an economy car is silly.

Well yes and no. The fact that it's a sports bike is the issue - where are the economy bikes? Motorbikes aren't an econonmy solution as long as manufacturers are creating and selling them for the RRROOOAAARRR! instead of the greens.

Seems to me that the small utilitarian bikes all seem to be un-faired, which probably doesn't help.

How much urban commuting?

Dunno, I don't keep a breakdown of miles commuting in urban, commuting in non urban, general riding urban, general riding non urban. Bikes aren't stationary as often as cars are so the urban average is bound to be closer to the overall than a car. In comparison, my car will average about 24 mpg doing similar driving.

molgrips - Member

Well yes and no. The fact that it's a sports bike is the issue - where are the economy bikes?

Everywhere! Over half of all motorbikes sold annually are 125cc or lower. And that's disregarding the economic larger capacity bikes. The most popular ptw in the UK claims 130mpg.

Fairings actually make very little difference except to comfort/weatherproofing, at least at legal speeds.

Liberal-based linkage.

That paints a rather different picture to your previous one which used remarkably puerile right-wing terminology such as "eco-comrades". Why do right-wing ranters both here and the United States use such childish schoolyard taunting language? Is making their point in a grow-up sensible manner really beyond their capability?

And yes the Green minority administration in Brighton has had some issues as that dated Guardian link points out. However a more recent analysis in a [i]non-political[/i] manner, if you accept that Lord Ashcroft is capable of that, suggests a reasonable level of satisfaction from Green voters in Brighton :

[url= http://stevehynd.com/2014/12/18/green-party-to-hold-brighton-pavilion-in-2015-general-election/ ]Green Party to hold Brighton Pavilion in 2015 General Election[/url]

[b][i]The polling puts the Green Party ten points ahead of Labour (38 to Labour’s 28%).[/i][/b]

If this is reflected in the May general election it will represent a huge increase in support for the Green Party in Brighton.

You might think that they are [i]"a bunch of cranks squabbling about nothing"[/i] but many voters in Brighton, which you felt was important to draw our attention to, don't appear to agree with you.

Not read the Greens manifesto but are they going to target powerful cars and gas guzzling 4 wheel drives. I think they would find very stiff opposition to this due to the lobbying power of motor manufacturers.

I have a "gas guzzling" sports car on which I have to pay £500 a year road tax. The car does 2,500 miles a year so actually does less environmental damage than a 1.3L driven more often

The car does 2,500 miles a year so actually does less environmental damage than a 1.3L driven more often

But more than a 1.3l driven 2,500 miles?

Everywhere! Half of all motorbikes sold annually are 125cc or lower. And that's disregarding the economic larger capacity bikes. The most popular ptw in the UK claims 130mpg.

Interesting comments posted above about the impact of the interview on Green voters. Having thought about it most of their likely voters won't actually care, I suspect they don't really care about whether policies are costed or not, they just care about the policy and take the view the money will be found from somewhere.

We need more social housing and we certainly need to stop selling off that which we do have (happening aggressively in London where Labour boroughs are selling to developers). We also need to address lifelong security of tenure, in South West London (eg Pimlico, Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea) there is lots of social housing. Once people get a place they don't move, why would they even when their kids have gone and they retire, they are living in a place costing 15-20% of the market rent ? These places need to be freed up for people who work in central London and need social housing provision, large family apartments need to be freed up for families and not kept by retirees.

My main problem with the Greens is that they seem willing to sacrifice the ecology for idealism...
i.e. the increased traffic pollution in Brighton due to the road changes which don't understand traffic flow and are cosmetic ideas,
the inept implementation of cycle lanes that seem more aimed at killing cyclists
and their complete meltdown when it comes to implementing recycling

As someone whose life is Brighton based (i.e. an ex-Brighton resident who can no longer afford to live there) and someone who is committed to environmental causes would I vote Green?
Not from what I've seen so far.

But more than a 1.3l driven 2,500 miles?

@DaRC, yup agreed. My daughter and her husband live in Brighton and share your views.

Jenny Jones did not do the party any favours yesterday on newsnight
Evan Davis was bending over backwards to be nice to her and polite about Natalie Bennets earlier cock up

Jones came across as petulant and defensive when her party were being cut way more slack by Davis than any other party would get

Jamby, all local councils will keep selling off housing stock and cutting other services until the government stops hammering their finances and actually take sthe lead on the housing crisis, which will never happen as everything theyve done seems to be about engineering another housing boom!

I didn't leave a 30mph zone with my last tank of fuel and got 47.2mpg measured by fill to fill. Exactly the same on the computer btw. The wife's car says it's doing 53mpg I doubt it's been reset in months and is mixed local and country roads.
The difference between bike and car is probably marginal and arguing between them is just a distraction to the actual point.

Pesky bloody Greens with their "ideals" and "principles"

Meanwhile the proper politicians have to get on with the important business of running the country and getting caught by undercover reporters selling parliamentary access for money.

In all the years I've owned and ridden motorbikes on the road (nearly 40) i dont think I've ever calculated the mpg, it's it's irrelevant to me and pretty much every other motorcyclist i know.
they're toys for the most part for me, eaking out fuel would defeat the main purpose of them.

Why do right-wing ranters both here and the United States use such childish schoolyard taunting language?

oooOOOhh.

but many voters in Brighton, which you felt was important to draw our attention to, don't appear to agree with you.

At least two on here, do. What's your point, caller?

In all the years I've owned and ridden motorbikes on the road (nearly 40) i dont think I've ever calculated the mpg, it's it's irrelevant to me and pretty much every other motorcyclist i know.
they're toys for the most part for me, eaking out fuel would defeat the main purpose of them.

jambalaya - Member

I think the differential even with both driven 2,500 is quite minor on the grand scheme of things

It is, but that just starts the other argument which is that building a car and having it drive 2500 miles a year is environmentally terrible. And generally financially too. That's not a criticism of you btw!

Like, my dad's car's almost 10 years old and has 9000 miles on the clock. That makes the cost of ownership terrible, he could have hired cars or taken taxis for every one of those miles and saved a fortune, and it'd be better environmentally. But we're a nation of car drivers, in a country built for cars, my dad just wouldn't be without a car even though it barely moves.

Mr Woppit - Member

"but many voters in Brighton, which you felt was important to draw our attention to, don't appear to agree with you."

At least two on here, do. What's your point, caller?

Seriously? You can't understand the point I'm making? 😕

I would have thought that it was self-explanatory.......ie, many voters in Brighton don't appear to agree with you. And in sufficient numbers it would appear to give the Greens an [i]increased[/i] majority in May's election.

I'm not sure why you think the fact that you have found two Brighton voters who don't support the Greens somehow makes that comment less valid. No one has suggested that every single voter in Brighton will be voting Green.

Most motorcycles are not ridden very far each year
Those that are generally get ridden slowly as commuters and achieve good mpg
Motorbikes use a lot less fossil fuel to construct as they contain far far fewer parts
Motorbikes last longer than cars (see the 90's bike thread!), contribute less to congestion and take up less space when parked.

And there really aren't very many of us anyway - have you seen how difficult it is to get a license these days?

Like many things, the perception often trumps reality - probably best to concentrate on the things that really matter.

Like many things, the perception often trumps reality - probably best to concentrate on the things that really matter.

They have 15 paragraphs in their policy document about cars and 3 about motorcycles - it seems they agree with you.

It is, but that just starts the other argument which is that building a car and having it drive 2500 miles a year is environmentally terrible. And generally financially too. That's not a criticism of you btw!

they're toys for the most part for me

Great, but some people might use them for transport. Hell, I might, if it would do 200mpg.

Motorbikes last longer than cars

This debate is muddied. Motorcycles can be eco friendly if you buy one and use it all year instead of a car. If you still own a car, and use your motorbike to commute occasionally and to razz round the countryside on the weekend, this is not eco friendly 🙂

Pesky bloody Greens with their "ideals" and "principles"

Edit - except in Brighton they do seem to have engaged young people in voting; it might not be Green but it is radical which is what those Brightonians like (I think)