Labour government making the right noises about cycling.

Just to say – more of this please.

Positive health improvements and public investment – let’s get things going.

It’s been years of cut, remove, efficiency bollocks. Total disaster. Time to change the narrative that the Tories have controlled for so long about what we can’t have.

Please, please don’t turn this into just another wet promise Labour.

If it can be done and we want to do it – we can afford it. Things like this create growth too.

Country is dying on its arse to move forward into a new era of better.

Sponsored by Malbec and positivity.

Has anyone got faith in this government, so far it’s been a disaster, in such a short period their approval rating has plummeted.

Still more popular than the opposition.

Make more disused railway lines into cycleway…..plenty link smaller towns and villages and would be a brilliant way of commuting safely.

They don’t have to be full-on tarmac, but graded so a hybrid could navigate then safely…..

Has anyone got faith in this government, so far it’s been a disaster, in such a short period their approval rating has plummeted

No not really. I’m pretty appalled by lack of good ideas (especially the monstrous lies about financing) but it was on the cards. Reeves has been pretty clear about her direction.

…But still plenty of time to make things go in the right direction.

Budget ought to be a big wake up call. If that flops – seriously, God help us. It will pave the way for a lot of heartache.

We got some seriously good improvements in Notts and Lincs – in 2008-2009 with loads of connections upgraded.

It all looks so tired now.

You can see it with the width of the tracks. Never been maintained since.

You can see it with the width of the tracks. Never been maintained since.

Funding comes in two forms. Capital and Revenue.

Capital is the stuff that is created to pay for new shiny things. Want a new cycleway or a pretty bridge? That’s Capital – it’s a one-off payment to create / build the [thing] in question. It’s the stuff that Government announce (and the usually retract, cut, re-announce and then eventually and very reluctantly cough up for.

Do you want that cycleway or bridge maintaining? Oh, you should have said. Cos that’s Revenue funding and that is basically short-term expenses used to run the daily business operations. That’s the stuff that’s been cut to the bone in the last 14 years of austerity. So we can build you a nice new cycleway which will look great for a year. But there’s no money to sweep it, repair it or stop it from flooding.

I think one of the major barriers to cycling is secure bike storage / lack of crime prevention in the centres.

In the workplace its also changing/shower facilities.

I used to regularly cycle commute (before basically going full work from home) and the storage facilities were okay especially since I just took in a big **** off lock and chain once and left it there but being able to change was limited.

If everyone who had brought a bike on cycle to work had actually done so we would have been screwed.

First office we had three shower/changing rooms in the entire building shared between, I think, about 1000 people.

Second we had 2 between about 200.

Luckily in the first there was a handful of people who regularly cycled (least starting at 9ish) so we could happily coexist and in the latter dont think I ever saw anyone else.

Admittedly e-bikes would counter this since can ride at an easier pace but even so during winter it would get special.

Funding comes in two forms. Capital and Revenue.

Oddly enough I was reading an article about the water companies and how they are incentivised to go for grandiose new reservoir/desalination plant schemes vs repairing pipes for just this reason. The former are capital and hence they can ask to bill the customers extra for it whereas the latter they are expected to do as standard.

Just back from a few days in Edinburgh, staying at the hostel on the Leith road.

When we were there 3 years ago they were installing the tram lines. Delighted to see they put in cycle lanes as well. I was pleasantly surprised to see how many folk, of all ages were using it, and let’s be honest Edinburgh is not a flat place to cycle.

Build it, and they will come. And as others have said, doesn’t have to be big infrastructure,  smaller schemes linking routes and side streets could be as important.

Let’s see what the government does to turn words into action.

edinburghs cycling provision is a mix of great and dangerously bad

Making the right noises is one thing, actually doing anything is something else.  The issue is that to make decent provision for cycling and walking you need to take space aw2ay from cars.  Its the only way to do it.  that creates such a backlash politicians are too scared to do it so we end up with useless nonsense of cycleways that are dangerous to use

Make more disused railway lines into cycleway

What’s wrong with using disused railways as railways again? It’s another part of the solution.

@molgrips would you be happy sending a child off to ride Dutch infrastructure?

Now consider the same question for a car filled side street.

What’s “appropriate for British streets” anyway? I was in Apeldoorn, it isn’t any way different to most UK towns other than the infra. Same street widths, similar roads out of town. That’s just a cop out.

Indeed – that is such a cop out.  Amsterdam is a crowded city with narrow streets and has decent cycling provision.  they got it by taking space away from cars.

Near me National Highways have recently finished a ‘behind the hedge’ cycle route between Lewes and Eastbourne. I think it’s about 13 miles and Laura Laker in her recent book described it as one of the best long distance segregated cycle ways in the country (direct, rarely beside the carriageway, wide and not too hilly). Because it was National Highways rather than a charity, it went in as critical infrastructure which meant land owners cooperated as they would be faced with compulsory purchase of field margins, so planning/design was very quick.

I think I read that if major road building projects were paused for one year, most significant towns could be connected with quality ‘behind the hedge’ cycle lanes with the allocated budget.

Imagine the impact of that along with replacing the cycle2work scheme with VAT free bikes and ebikes and sorting out legal requirements for e-wheeling, loads of people could suddenly bike or wheel to work and school.

(I’ll watch the link tomorrow as can’t right now!)

Just to add another optimistic voice here. I listened to the full interview that the OP article is based on:

It seems that she’s focused on making active travel a more mainstream part of all transport planning. I suspect that will come under the guise of simplifying (and hopefully expanding) how the infrastructure is funded. Getting more funding outside of the biggest cities is an important objective too. It’s nice to hear an engaged and curious politician talk on the subject.

I also selfishly hope that some of the rhetoric makes its way north of the border (Transport policy is reserved). The cycling infrastructure outside of the central belt is sorely lacking (I think my council has <5km dedicated cycle lanes).

Because it was National Highways rather than a charity, it went in as critical infrastructure which meant land owners cooperated as they would be faced with compulsory purchase of field margins, so planning/design was very quick.

Because it was National Highways, it actually had some money and proper engineering behind it! Rather than piecemeal funding scraped together and a volunteer workforce supplementing some contractors!

I’m no fan of National Highways by any means, they’ve done some truly abysmal stuff, not least their terrible policy of infilling bridges but on that occasion they genuinely delivered.

Sustrans – well I’m no fan of them either. Decades of a hodge-podge of underfunded *cycle routes” partially delivered by begging councils for literally any money going and then claiming success when 1/4 mile of paint was dropped along a pavement or a 2ft wide strip of dirt around the back of an industrial estate acquired a blue sign….

Some of their stuff is good. A lot of it is woeful and there’s usually little way to tell the difference until you actually ride it!

Good to hear that Louise Haigh has recognised that anomaly (of key infrastructure being delivered by a charity) and at least made hints that it’ll be addressed although there’s been no commitment so far. Whether it’s taking Sustrans “in house” to DfT or binning them off altogether and letting ATE deal with everything, I guess we’ll find out.

I believer sustrans has changed their ethos in the last few years and will no longer accept any old rubbish as better than nothing and are insisting on higher standards

I believer sustrans has changed their ethos in the last few years and will no longer accept any old rubbish as better than nothing and are insisting on higher standards

They have now but that came at the expense of cutting about half their network and admitting that much of it was shit.

For decades, they’d beg and plead for scraps off the table, eventually a council would throw them a few grand to get them to shut up and go away and they’d pop some signs along 200m of canal towpath and say what a wonderful job they’d done securing investment in “infrastructure”.

For decades, they’d beg and plead for scraps off the table…

…when they should have been properly funded.  It might not all be great but I’m grateful for what they have achieved on a shoestring budget, negotiating with landowners, with no legal power to encourage cooperation.

I don’t think making driving expensive gets people out of cars. Driving already has a “I’m considerably richer than yow” thing about it, and many people seem to want to be seen in vehicles that are eye-watering to buy/run.

Alternatives need to be attractive. Either it looks fun, looks cool, looks like I might feel special doing it, even looks expensive.

Alternatives need to be attractive.

Like Swiss and Austrian trains. Comfortable, convenient and with features that make them attractive to everyone such as dining cars etc.

It sounds great and really encouraging but, as a natural cynic, I have to say that we’ve heard it all before (even from the Conservatives during the Covid cycling boom). It’s certainly a huge step forward but it needs to be seen through and still worked on when money gets tight and when elections loom and politicians want to be ‘the motorists’ friend’.

It’d be good if Government got together with Cycling UK & Sustrans too and involved them.

Make more disused railway lines into cycleway…..plenty link smaller towns and villages and would be a brilliant way of commuting safely.

Something I’ve always been keen on. There’s a great project (The Strawberry Line) down here in Somerset and I suspect that it’s mirrored elsewhere in the country. It’d be great to join all these up.

https://www.thestrawberryline.org.uk/

That’s just a cop out.

We’ve done this to death already but you must understand that these decisions don’t get made in a vacuum. There is not an unlimited amount of money and public goodwill. You can’t simply make a decision to do things just because you want to, nor can any government. Sure, technically we could decide to rip up half our streets for cycleways, but can you imagine the fallout from attempting to do it? I’d love to see it, but it’s not practically possible in the UK today.

Serious suggestion – I’m not having a go here – why not take a section of your own town or city and plan out what you’d like to do? I am really interested in the idea, I do this in my head regularly.

 Sure, technically we could decide to rip up half our streets for cycleways, but can you imagine the fallout from attempting to do it? I’d love to see it, but it’s not practically possible in the UK today.

That’s not what is needed. In Holland they just changed the specs that were needed when roads were renewed. No ripping up above and beyond what was going to happen anyway.

Serious suggestion – I’m not having a go here – why not take a section of your own town or city and plan out what you’d like to do? I am really interested in the idea, I do this in my head regularly.

This is part of the problem with public consultations because they quite often involve this sort of “engagement”. Some bright spark in the council has thought “we’ll engage with the residents and it’ll be all democratic and that way we build what THEY want!” so they invite people along and get them to draw out on big maps where THEY think cycle routes should go.

And the result is a dog’s breakfast of stuff that can never be delivered for various reasons and no-one gets what they wanted, in fact the exercise engenders more mistrust than it ever solved.

And frankly, the active travel team should already have a very good knowledge of what routes would balance access, geography, population density, cost, safety, behaviour change, future land use plans and so on. And that’s a major part of Active Travel England’s remit – sense checking stuff to make sure the council aren’t coming up with nonsense that benefit no-one.

That’s not what is needed. In Holland they just changed the specs that were needed when roads were renewed. No ripping up above and beyond what was going to happen anyway.

And when would that be for 2024 UK?

I don’t think making driving expensive gets people out of cars. Driving already has a “I’m considerably richer than yow” thing about it, and many people seem to want to be seen in vehicles that are eye-watering to buy/run.

Alternatives need to be attractive. Either it looks fun, looks cool, looks like I might feel special doing it, even looks expensive.

I think it only works with both.  There are some indications that even making public transport free doesn’t actually boost numbers all that much.

https://www.sciencenorway.no/cars-and-traffic-politics-transport/did-people-drive-less-when-they-were-offered-free-public-transport/2323193

Likewise, if you double the cost of driving but driving is the only way to get to work then you aren’t going to cut the number of cars.

I think it only works if you increase the costs of driving and improve the attractiveness of the alternatives.

scheduled maintenance is far different to what would be needed to create high quality active travel infrastructure.  It’s usually surface dressing, resurfacing  and lining (relatively cheap).  Does not usually extend to improving i.e. kerb line changes.   Those sort of changes need a lot of thought and money.

that is also forgetting that maintenance is cut to the bone so re doing whole stretches of road as opposed to minimal patching is even less likely.

The local highway authorities have the powers and tools to make the changes, what they don’t have is the money, or perhaps the political will.  This government seriously need to  up the funding for active travel.  Delivering on the original Active Travel England promise with funding to match.  They were originally talking about a £5bn settlement.  this was reduced down a lot in the end but the principles set up by BoJo are still there so they don’t need to reinvent things.  just fund it and push it as an agenda.

they can also look at the way planning affects transport.  if they are intending to build more homes they need to let us know how they will fund better infrastructure to make better places as opposed to piecemeal delivery of housing that leads to locking in car dependency.  Really need a land owner tax so there are higher contributions and obligations that can fund decent infrastructure.

Likewise, if you double the cost of driving but driving is the only way to get to work then you aren’t going to cut the number of cars.

I think it only works if you increase the costs of driving and improve the attractiveness of the alternatives.

Transport demand is usually derived from comfort/convenience, time and cost so you are partly right.  it’s those trips to non work destinations that will reduce by higher operating costs.  plus in the long term that will impact where people work and live.  i.e.  30mins avg travel time from work has been fairly constant for years.  the car has just enabled the distance to grow…

I’d love to see it, but it’s not practically possible in the UK today.

why not?  What is so special about the UK that we cannot do what is widespread in other countries?

There are some indications that even making public transport free doesn’t actually boost numbers all that much.

anecdotally not the Scottish experience.  You only pay for public transport if you are between 26 and 60 here and loads of folk use buses in the cities and even to travel around

There comes a time when those cranks just need to be told to get back in their box. Multiple rounds of council elections have shown that councils that actually deliver on decent infrastructure, including the supposedly controversial LTNs, are re-elected and are popular.

Our LTN was pulled at the end of the summer term. The reason it turns out, was they hadnt risk assessed people posting dog mess through the letter boxes of council staff facilitating the scheme, and threats were increasing. They deemed it not worth council staff personal safety. (which i dont disagree with)

Democracy in action!

The cycling infrastructure outside of the central belt is sorely lacking

The infra inside isn’t much better, plenty of missing links and woeful joins when they eventually happen. The link through Fairlie still won’t be traffic free when it’s complete and comprises of an open path about half a meter above the high tide mark that’s taken about a decade to build.

Sure, technically we could decide to rip up half our streets for cycleways, but can you imagine the fallout from attempting to do it? I’d love to see it, but it’s not practically possible in the UK today.

As said, that’s not completely necessary. The point is to get cyclists off the main roads and onto their own dedicated infrastructure that takes them where they need to go. Your idea is part of that but without main routes you’re just stuck bimbling about side streets and not really solving the problems where they actually happen.