snorri
Legendary Member
- Location
- East coast, up a bit.
..but not all represent London constituencies, and this campaign is quite clearly not a nationwide(UK) campaign.
Cities Fit for Cycling - The Times
- Thread starter gaz
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Scotland hasn't yet got independence or devo max, The Times is a national newspaper, cities are located all over the UK, and a good number of the MP's who went weren't from London seats
MrHappyCyclist
Riding the Devil's HIghway
- Location
- Bolton, England
Yes, there were a whole 3 just from the tiny hamlet that is Greater Manchester!
snorri
Legendary Member
- Location
- East coast, up a bit.
The Times is an English national newspaper whose Scottish edition has a very low circulation, I have never seen copies on the shelves around here. The campaign suggested we write to our MPs in an attempt to enlist their support, apparently unaware that our MPs have no say in transport issues. References to the Highways Agency and DfT are further indications of the regional nature of the campaign.
I'm not knocking the campaign, just knocking the claims that it is a national campaign.
Fab Foodie
hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
- Location
- Kirton, Devon.
If you can get the top tory totty into lycra and on a bicycle, I'll lend you my Mont Blanc (you're not left handed are you?) and supply the Basildon Bond!
I agree with Snorri in this sense - the Times is published across the UK but its circulation is concentrated in London and Roseland. The profile of cycling in London is far removed from the profile of cycling in the rest of the country (setting aside Oxbridge hotspots) and I cannot imagine newspapers running cycling in search of circulation with anything other than London in mind. The Times is pitched straight at the Evening Standard readership, and the ES has been majoring on cycling for three years.
The spread of MPs probably reflects the pressure exerted by constituents.
What is remarkable, Snorri, is that the campaign, while articulated in London, is founded on fear, and that fear would be more rational in every part of the UK except London. Lenin's point about the revolution starting in the very place where the proletariat were best off, and getting better off is entirely applicable here - setting aside the uncomfortable fact that the Times prospectus, and 'Go Dutch' are fifteen years out of date.
The spread of MPs probably reflects the pressure exerted by constituents.
What is remarkable, Snorri, is that the campaign, while articulated in London, is founded on fear, and that fear would be more rational in every part of the UK except London. Lenin's point about the revolution starting in the very place where the proletariat were best off, and getting better off is entirely applicable here - setting aside the uncomfortable fact that the Times prospectus, and 'Go Dutch' are fifteen years out of date.
Richard Mann
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Oxford
A cycle chic event might be a bit more likely. The City could probably lend her the mayoral bike for the occasion. Hmm
stowie
Legendary Member
My MP attended.
I assumed that I was currently being represented by someone who may not yet have reached their 21st birthday. Then I found out she was only 4 years younger than me. Either she looks young for 35, or I haven't aged well...
deptfordmarmoset
Full time tea drinker
- Location
- Armonmy Way
I just had a quick skim through and didn't see this link to the recording of the debate - http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=10088
I warn you, it's 2:30 hours long but there are a few good contributions. The honourable member for Totnes began her speech with "30 years ago I fell in love on the back of a tandem''
Sorry if it's already been posted up.
I warn you, it's 2:30 hours long but there are a few good contributions. The honourable member for Totnes began her speech with "30 years ago I fell in love on the back of a tandem''
Sorry if it's already been posted up.
srw
It's a bit more complicated than that...
All done with make-up, hair dye and soft lighting. The bags under the eyes and the slightly weary smile almost make me sorry for her.My MP attended.
I assumed that I was currently being represented by someone who may not yet have reached their 21st birthday. Then I found out she was only 4 years younger than me. Either she looks young for 35, or I haven't aged well...
Titan yer tummy
No meatings b4 dinner!
- Location
- Beckenham, SE London
I have always been nervous of joining in demonstrations. So often the peaceful intentions of the many get hi-jacked by a malignant few and what would have been a perfectly respectable event becomes the subject of righteous (and rightful) indignation and completely detracts from the cause; it ends up doing more harm than good. I have not been on a CM ride. I frequently see it setting up and to be honest I don’t like the look of it and so have never been tempted to join.
I did join the Tour de Danger. I thought it well organised, its intentions were peaceful as were the good natured folk who participated. There was no real intention to obstruct and delay traffic, although this inevitably happened. But there was no deliberate and malicious blocking of junctions just for the sake of it; rather junctions were simply blocked to enable the passing of the peloton. But hey, on a Saturday is this really so serious? Somehow the organisers had done a splendid job ensuring that rent-a-mob had been discouraged from getting involved in this.
I also joined the Westminster ride on Wednesday. I was stunned at the turnout and take my helmet off to Mark Ames and Danny Williams. Once again the ride was well planned, peaceful and had clearly defined objectives. Our point could be made by a single circuit of Parliament, and that’s all we did and in my view it worked.
I have viewed the parliamentary debate online. I have never watched a debate of this kind before so at first, when they were crowing that there were 77 MPs present, I thought they were being sarcastic. It was only later that it became clear that for this type of debate this qualified as a sell-out. It was also clear from the debate that the MPs were aware of our ‘demo’ the evening before. It was likewise obvious that our political masters are gradually beginning to wake up to the fact that our cause has traction.
I had written to my own MP, Col Bob Stewart (Con, Beckenham), and received a slightly edited template response. His editing was to point out that he deprecated law breaking by some cyclists. He also said that due to other commitments he did not think he would be able to attend the debate. I wrote back to him and pointed out that he hadn’t signed the EDM either and he responded that he had a general policy not to sign them on grounds of cost or something. In the end he did attend the debate and spoke – admittedly only to make the same rather negative point about law breaking cyclists. But he did attend.
I congratulate The Times, The LCC, but above all Danny and Mark for forcing this issue onto the agenda, there may be much to do but I sense the wind of change rattling the windows of the halls of power. It will be a brave MP (or one with a significant majority) who does not sit up and begin listening to the cycling constituency. We are at last starting to turn the screw.
We are perhaps at a watershed it would be too easy for the cycling community to press the wrong buttons and see the valuable work stall or unravel. My greatest fear is that time and again politicians will be called to address the misbehaviour of some of our number. I see this as an increasing threat to our cause. Somehow we have to persuade the RLJers, the no lighters, the 1 way streeters and the pavement jockeys amongst our numbers to change their ways. I feel this is vital to enable us to move the discussion on and gain some of the prizes we seek. I do hope that we can continue the pressure. I think we have a good cause. I believe that politicians recognise it as such and are generally disposed to support us. The next step is in our hands.
Mark and Danny I await your call!!
I did join the Tour de Danger. I thought it well organised, its intentions were peaceful as were the good natured folk who participated. There was no real intention to obstruct and delay traffic, although this inevitably happened. But there was no deliberate and malicious blocking of junctions just for the sake of it; rather junctions were simply blocked to enable the passing of the peloton. But hey, on a Saturday is this really so serious? Somehow the organisers had done a splendid job ensuring that rent-a-mob had been discouraged from getting involved in this.
I also joined the Westminster ride on Wednesday. I was stunned at the turnout and take my helmet off to Mark Ames and Danny Williams. Once again the ride was well planned, peaceful and had clearly defined objectives. Our point could be made by a single circuit of Parliament, and that’s all we did and in my view it worked.
I have viewed the parliamentary debate online. I have never watched a debate of this kind before so at first, when they were crowing that there were 77 MPs present, I thought they were being sarcastic. It was only later that it became clear that for this type of debate this qualified as a sell-out. It was also clear from the debate that the MPs were aware of our ‘demo’ the evening before. It was likewise obvious that our political masters are gradually beginning to wake up to the fact that our cause has traction.
I had written to my own MP, Col Bob Stewart (Con, Beckenham), and received a slightly edited template response. His editing was to point out that he deprecated law breaking by some cyclists. He also said that due to other commitments he did not think he would be able to attend the debate. I wrote back to him and pointed out that he hadn’t signed the EDM either and he responded that he had a general policy not to sign them on grounds of cost or something. In the end he did attend the debate and spoke – admittedly only to make the same rather negative point about law breaking cyclists. But he did attend.
I congratulate The Times, The LCC, but above all Danny and Mark for forcing this issue onto the agenda, there may be much to do but I sense the wind of change rattling the windows of the halls of power. It will be a brave MP (or one with a significant majority) who does not sit up and begin listening to the cycling constituency. We are at last starting to turn the screw.
We are perhaps at a watershed it would be too easy for the cycling community to press the wrong buttons and see the valuable work stall or unravel. My greatest fear is that time and again politicians will be called to address the misbehaviour of some of our number. I see this as an increasing threat to our cause. Somehow we have to persuade the RLJers, the no lighters, the 1 way streeters and the pavement jockeys amongst our numbers to change their ways. I feel this is vital to enable us to move the discussion on and gain some of the prizes we seek. I do hope that we can continue the pressure. I think we have a good cause. I believe that politicians recognise it as such and are generally disposed to support us. The next step is in our hands.
Mark and Danny I await your call!!
stowie
Legendary Member
Titan,
The "cyclists RLJ / ride on pavements" is a complete straw-man. Firstly, it is a rather odd excuse not to look at improving the lot of the majority because of the activities of some. I cannot imagine motorway widening being put on hold because a significant number of drivers speed and some ignore the highway code. Secondly, it is an excuse for inactivity. There will never be a time when every cyclist obey the highway code and the law to the letter. This is because cyclists are human as well and there will always be some who don't follow the rules. Even if we did manage to get everyone to obey the law, then people like your MP would still find a reason for inactivity - they fundamentally don't get cycling, and don't want to promote or help cyclists, but don't want to actually say it. The good news is that people like this are starting to sound out of step with sentiment, at least of their peers.
The cause is certainly worth pursuing. In fact, I think it more than about cycling - it is about taking the next step to improve our cities for living, working and leisure. It is only when I stand back and look at places like Parliament square that I realise how far we need to go. Here is an iconic site, one that can be recognised around the world, one of the images of London. And it is flanked by narrow pavements and a multi lane racetrack which is almost completely impassable for pedestrians. Or, more locally to me, Bow Church, a lovely building which has graced Bow for 700 years, but is currently stranded in the middle of the A11 / Bow Flyover approach - a road which is more motorway than urban street. When people generally see that this is just madness and destroying communities, then we all will have collectively won.
The "cyclists RLJ / ride on pavements" is a complete straw-man. Firstly, it is a rather odd excuse not to look at improving the lot of the majority because of the activities of some. I cannot imagine motorway widening being put on hold because a significant number of drivers speed and some ignore the highway code. Secondly, it is an excuse for inactivity. There will never be a time when every cyclist obey the highway code and the law to the letter. This is because cyclists are human as well and there will always be some who don't follow the rules. Even if we did manage to get everyone to obey the law, then people like your MP would still find a reason for inactivity - they fundamentally don't get cycling, and don't want to promote or help cyclists, but don't want to actually say it. The good news is that people like this are starting to sound out of step with sentiment, at least of their peers.
The cause is certainly worth pursuing. In fact, I think it more than about cycling - it is about taking the next step to improve our cities for living, working and leisure. It is only when I stand back and look at places like Parliament square that I realise how far we need to go. Here is an iconic site, one that can be recognised around the world, one of the images of London. And it is flanked by narrow pavements and a multi lane racetrack which is almost completely impassable for pedestrians. Or, more locally to me, Bow Church, a lovely building which has graced Bow for 700 years, but is currently stranded in the middle of the A11 / Bow Flyover approach - a road which is more motorway than urban street. When people generally see that this is just madness and destroying communities, then we all will have collectively won.
AnotherEye
Well-Known Member
- Location
- North London
I fully agree with Stowie (as Chris Peck said on Telly the other day "97% of pedestrian injuries caused by RLJ'ing are by motor vehicles". Was this ever mentioned in the 'end the war on motorist's [sic]' discussion?).
Before we get the necessary paradigm shift we need to identify & critique the current one; otherwise all we'll get from the current debate is more narrow cycle lanes that we don't want.
What is the paradigm? I'm not going to name it (I've not done the work) but to start with let's identify some of the symptoms:
* Govt gives subsidy to motorists who replace old car with new.
* fewer children walking & cycling to school.
* pedestrians often have to wait at 2 or more lights to cross a junction (or even just a road).
Please add to this list.
Before we get the necessary paradigm shift we need to identify & critique the current one; otherwise all we'll get from the current debate is more narrow cycle lanes that we don't want.
What is the paradigm? I'm not going to name it (I've not done the work) but to start with let's identify some of the symptoms:
* Govt gives subsidy to motorists who replace old car with new.
* fewer children walking & cycling to school.
* pedestrians often have to wait at 2 or more lights to cross a junction (or even just a road).
Please add to this list.
* Air pollution that kills and injures people (and degrades the environment generally), known to be mainly generated in urban areas from motor vehicles but with no effective steps taken to massively reduce it at source
* Unwillingness to show political leadership - at all levels - to introduce widespread 20mph speed limits and thus reduce road danger at source
* Unwillingness to show political leadership - at all levels - to introduce widespread 20mph speed limits and thus reduce road danger at source
MrHappyCyclist
Riding the Devil's HIghway
- Location
- Bolton, England
Some hooligans go on foot, they are called "hooligans" and pedestrians don't refer to them as "some of our number"; some hooligans drive cars, they are called "hooligans in cars" and motorists don't refer to them as "some of our number"; some hooligans ride motorcycles, they are called "hooligans on motorcycles" and motorcyclists don't refer to them as "some of our number"; but for some reason, when the hooligans are on bicycles, they are called "cyclists" and some cyclists do insist on refering to them as "some of our number".
