Roads Minister interview

[ChrisButch]

A reassuringly intelligent interview today from the Roads Minister, Jesse Norman. The headline is about possible e-bike subsidies, but there's interesting clarification of the approach to be adopted in the promised review of 'cyclists' safety'. At least as spun like this, it no longer sounds quite so much like a knee-jerk reaction to Alliston:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/oct/20/uk-may-consider-electric-vehicle-subsidy-to-increase-cycling

[ianrobo]

he even says policy will be 'evidence based' but throws in compulsory helmet and hi vis. The former I do anyway, the later I do on and off as I believe it is totally pointless.

The thing is all this energy open making cycling 'safer' ignore the two basic facts

1 - Dutch style separation negates the crap about helmets and hi vis
2 - vast majority of accidents on cyclists are caused by car driver and often they are let or get pathetic sentences.

Sort these two out and I suspect the other issues disappear quickly

[PH]

This says it all really

Norman said he could not promise extra funding for cycle routes, but said central government could start pushing councils to take more action.

Government says there's no money tree, but they think every council has a forest of them.

[Wanlock Dod]

We also have a strong and stable government providing a strong and stable economy and delivering a brexit that works for everyone.

[ANTONISH]

I came across a 1997 copy of "Cycling Plus" a few days ago.
Under the heading "A new deal for cycling ?" was the following;
' Nothing must be allowed to obstruct the great car economy' declared Margeret Thatcher 1n 1979, and for most of the next 18 years, 11 Tory Transport Ministers adhered to her words.
Now, with a new Labour government - and a statement from Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott that the 'car culture' must end - hopes are high that we may be moving towards an integrated transport policy, with cycling at last being treated seriously as an alternative to the car.

I don't know how to express my gratitude on the way politicians in general have delivered on 'integrated transport' in the last twenty years.

[rmurphy195]

I came across a 1997 copy of "Cycling Plus" a few days ago.
Under the heading "A new deal for cycling ?" was the following;
' Nothing must be allowed to obstruct the great car economy' declared Margeret Thatcher 1n 1979, and for most of the next 18 years, 11 Tory Transport Ministers adhered to her words.
Now, with a new Labour government - and a statement from Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott that the 'car culture' must end - hopes are high that we may be moving towards an integrated transport policy, with cycling at last being treated seriously as an alternative to the car.

I don't know how to express my gratitude on the way politicians in general have delivered on 'integrated transport' in the last twenty years.

You can guarantee that John "Two Jags" Prescott was doing what politicians do, and are still doing - that is, saying the opposite to what the politicians of the other party are saying. This is especially true when they haven't got to live up to their utterings.

[Stevek76]

This says it all really

Norman said he could not promise extra funding for cycle routes, but said central government could start pushing councils to take more action.

Government says there's no money tree, but they think every council has a forest of them.

The government seems to have one for roads and (some) rail too.

[Roadster]

The huge amounts of money earmarked by central government for High Speed trains would go a long way towards the cost of an integrated transport policy which truly valued the contribution offered by cycling. Moreover, the cost-benefits would be more widely distributed geographically and available to a much greater proportion of the population.

[reohn2]

Usual smoke,mirrors and crap

[ianrobo]

The huge amounts of money earmarked by central government for High Speed trains would go a long way towards the cost of an integrated transport policy which truly valued the contribution offered by cycling. Moreover, the cost-benefits would be more widely distributed geographically and available to a much greater proportion of the population.

Why are so many against HS2, are you not aware the West coast Mainline is basically full and can not be expanded. Are you suggested no new tramline would be needed then ? It is not one for the other but for both and we can invest and do both at the same time.

[RickH]

Why are so many against HS2, are you not aware the West coast Mainline is basically full and can not be expanded. Are you suggested no new tramline would be needed then ? It is not one for the other but for both and we can invest and do both at the same time.

I agree. I think the biggest problem with HS2 (& other similar projects) is the emphasis that has been put on saving a few minutes on a journey when the extra capacity is what is so desperately needed if we want to get freight movement as well as people off the roads. If you spend any time at a West Coast mainline station, such as Wigan or Warrington you can see how full it is.

You might be able to squeeze a more traffic in with things like on board signalling - where the control signal is sent directly to the train rather than a static one trackside - but that in itself would need major investment & would only work properly when all movements can be controlled that way. It will probably be built into HS2 from the start.

[reohn2]

I agree. I think the biggest problem with HS2 (& other similar projects) is the emphasis that has been put on saving a few minutes on a journey when the extra capacity is what is so desperately needed if we want to get freight movement as well as people off the roads. If you spend any time at a West Coast mainline station, such as Wigan or Warrington you can see how full it is.

You might be able to squeeze a more traffic in with things like on board signalling - where the control signal is sent directly to the train rather than a static one trackside - but that in itself would need major investment & would only work properly when all movements can be controlled that way. It will probably be built into HS2 from the start.

The problem with HS2 is there are no new stations being built and so as you say its all about shaving minutes off a long distant journey which,frankly is why I find it a white elephant.
I agree the west coast line over burdened but will HS2 aleviate that problem,no one official has mentioned that it will,only that HS2cut journey times

[Vorpal]

I came across a 1997 copy of "Cycling Plus" a few days ago.
Under the heading "A new deal for cycling ?" was the following;
' Nothing must be allowed to obstruct the great car economy' declared Margeret Thatcher 1n 1979, and for most of the next 18 years, 11 Tory Transport Ministers adhered to her words.
Now, with a new Labour government - and a statement from Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott that the 'car culture' must end - hopes are high that we may be moving towards an integrated transport policy, with cycling at last being treated seriously as an alternative to the car.

I don't know how to express my gratitude on the way politicians in general have delivered on 'integrated transport' in the last twenty years.

But! They created a successful pattern that continues to be followed...
-they established the National Cycling Strategy Board which came up with a bunch of lovely sounding promises & some excellent documents
-the lack of funding failed to deliver anything and the documents were ignored by anyone actually doing stuff with transport
-a report said they needed a different strategy and more funding
-they developed a different strategy and established Cycling England which came up with the Cycling Demonstration Towns
-a report said that this was a partially successful strategy that deserved more funding, better standards, and coordination across Great Britain
-instead of building on success, they established a new strategy and disbanded Cycling England to replace it with Local Sustainability Travel Funds
<sarcasm alert>
This has been an extremely cost effective way to approach the problem of sustainable transport.

[Tangled Metal]

Whether HS2 or something else, there's no real interest in solving the way coast line capacity. It's not London! London to Birmingham by train, London to leeds by train all just about OK but anywhere further north west and you are going to be very late.

I used to take a local branch line. It also went to Manchester Airport in some of the trains. So it used the main line with the long distance virgin trains. That's OK at quarter past 7 when I got the outward train but after 5pm it plays second fiddle to every virgin main line train that are all running late. Result is my train often leaves the station 15 minutes late. Then nearer my station (one down the line) you get parked up to allow another virgin train through. That's another 10 minutes often. This is all because the line has no slack in it to cope with delays.

I am not bothered anymore, because I use my bike instead and am happier and fitter for it.

[mjr]

The problem with HS2 is there are no new stations being built and so as you say its all about shaving minutes off a long distant journey which,frankly is why I find it a white elephant.
I agree the west coast line over burdened but will HS2 aleviate that problem,no one official has mentioned that it will,only that HS2cut journey times

I suspect part of the reason is that if you make it about capacity more than speed, then it would increase the pressure to add a few more curves to stick more closely to the Great Central corridor into London and the M40/Chiltern Line/M42 corridors to/past Birmingham instead of cutting new corridors into London and between Coventry and Warwick.