Will spending on cycling infrastructure lessen during government austerity?

[Markymark]

Discuss.

 

[NickNick]

It shouldn't as done properly investment in cycling should actually be a net contributor once you take into account savings to the NHS, not needing to build new roads to cover increasing car journeys, not getting taking to court every year due to illegal particulate & pollution levels...

However that's not how austerity works, but then I might be starting to veer into politics...

 

[mjr]

Is there a good analysis of how much has been spent over the recent past?

I think Cycle City Ambition Grants CCAG phase 1 was £77 million over 3 years (ignoring the national parks schemes) but much of that seemed to be subverted into related non-cycling infrastructure such as parking spaces, paving public squares and traffic light renewals, as discussed in other threads here previously. CCAG phase 2 was £115 million over 3 years to 2018, so we're still waiting to see if there are scandals about how they've spent it.

https://www.cyclinguk.org/blog/roge...nvestment-strategy-woefully-little-investment says Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Strategy CWIS funding is £316m for 2016-2021 (so £63m/year?) but that might include the last 2 years of CCAG2 (which was probably itself biased towards the last 2 years - EDIT: yes it does and was, £101m of it). EDIT: that also gives a break down:

CCAG2: £101m remains
Bikeability: £50m, as £12.5m per annum up to 2019/20, but with none for 2020/21.
Highways England roads: £85m improving cycle access - anyone seen anything useful yet?
Access fund: £80m, replaces LSTF which was rarely spent on cycling - I wonder if this is allocated to cycling either?
TOTAL: £316m

Another serious problem is that CCAG has been completely unequal, with the blessed cities getting it all and all other cities, towns and rural areas getting nothing, leaving islands of infrastructure connected to nothing. The way CWIS looks, with areas only getting funding if they've local CWI plans (LCWIPs), will probably mean that the same few places still get most of that money. So I guess in a lot of the country, the answer to "Will spending lessen?" will be "No, they can't spend less than zero."

 

[Drago]

Yes, it will.

 

[snorri]

No, it's looking good.........so far.
http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/sc...es-spend-on-walking-and-cycling-to-80m/021797

 

[Profpointy]

Yes, it will.

hopefully

 

[mjr]

Isn’t austerity ‘political’?

I'm told political about cycling is allowed here or in general cycling discussions, depending on the topic. I'm not clear how "about cycling" it must be and the thread seeking clarification was locked after a mod started insulting people

 

[mjr]

hopefully

While you might think that if they're not spending on cycling, they won't be building the bad stuff either, I'm sure they'll still find the money to fark up existing cycle routes, such as not connecting country lanes when split by a new quasi motorway.

 

[MacB]

Discuss.

There is no austerity, spending has kept rising it's the flow of where the funds go that's altering. If you have the right connections and set up a cycling infrastructure company then your old school chums, currently in government, will see that dosh heads your way. Yes you will have to hand out a few board seats etc but you'll make so much more than the kickbacks it costs you. The great thing about doing it this way is that, as it's just a bung between friends, the infrastructure doesn't need to be fit for purpose or of good value.

 

[BoldonLad]

There is no austerity spending has kept rising it's the flow of where the funds go that's altering. If you have the right connections and set up a cycling infrastructure company then your old school chums, currently in government, will see that dosh heads your way. Yes you will have to hand out a few board seats etc but you'll make so much more than the kickbacks it costs you. The great thing about doing it this way is that, as it's just a bung between friends, the infrastructure doesn't need to be fit for purpose or of good value.

Cynical..... but true

 

[mjr]

Let us know if you spot any changes to cycling funding in the budget today. Hopefully this thread won't disappear like the other one

 

[Nigel-YZ1]

I'm in a foul mood so probably not a good time to post. Unless it's a publicity flagship cycling infrastructure is a token crock of shoot with dimwits going out with concrete and paint brushes and fulfilling enough of a quota to get lots of grant money to buy something nice and shiny for councillors.
So austerity may be an improvement as it keeps new limousines from being bought.

 

[spen666]

What Government Austerity?

I see no austerity in spending by or on MPs including the government

 

[mjr]

I'm in a foul mood so probably not a good time to post. Unless it's a publicity flagship cycling infrastructure is a token crock of shoot with dimwits going out with concrete and paint brushes and fulfilling enough of a quota to get lots of grant money to buy something nice and shiny for councillors.

Which category would you put the Manchester Oxford/Wilmslow Road stuff in? I thought it contained some very annoying bloopers and was generally like the veloducts some London boroughs were building 20 years ago rather than the recent E-W and N-S superhighways, maybe making it something like a flagship with some shoot, but http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/ma...ay-hits-the-million-journeys-milestone/022227 claims they've massively increased numbers cycling.

Maybe while we should keep pressing government to keep improving, things had gotten so bad that even the crocks improve things a bit for the majority, although I can understand that they're a bit irritating for those who don't mind the previous traffic conditions. That's both and IMO

 

[Siclo]

Which category would you put the Manchester Oxford/Wilmslow Road stuff in?

The one that covers misappropriation of funding, at the end of day it was all about building a massive on street bus depot, the flooded composting facility at the edges was just an excuse.