School cycle ban

[661-Pete]

This. I don't know if it's already been posted.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-no ... e-42726383
Quite honestly, I can't think of anything to say, that wouldn't fall foul of forum rules...
Perhaps someone else can do better?

[Psamathe]

I assume it must be a Public School (as in fee paying, not taxpayer funded) - as it would seem beyond comprehension that a public funded school would be allowed to create such daft rules.

Ian

[Psamathe]

It also seems there is something of an "escalation" of OTT competition between Head Teachers going on as to who can impose most/greatest barriers to cycling. We seem to be getting the "no cycling to school without lights", "no cycling to school without helmets" and now exams, permits, etc.

What further barriers will they now discover and the race hots-up as to which Head can get those in place 1st!

Ian

[NUKe]

Bet its the Motons that complained. Our local secondary school, every morning as I pass it the helicopter parents are dropping their little cherubs as close to the entrance as they can possibly get, which includes parking close to junctions, cutting you up to then park illegally. swinging blindly round in the entrance to the school,

[661-Pete]

I assume it must be a Public School (as in fee paying, not taxpayer funded)

Apparently not.

[mjr]

Bet its the Motons that complained. Our local secondary school, every morning as I pass it the helicopter parents are dropping their little cherubs as close to the entrance as they can possibly get, which includes parking close to junctions, cutting you up to then park illegally. swinging blindly round in the entrance to the school,

I hope you're complaining, rather than accepting that as "typical motoring" like most cyclists would. Obviously the school will respond by banning all motoring drop-offs and pick-ups unless the drivers pass the school's own test with bizarre rules, obtain a permit and leave their car in a locked compound until those walking and cycling have left.

[Tizme]

I assume that if a student continues to cycle without these requirements they will be banned from cycling.

I am sure they could then claim hardship, in that they would be unable to get to school any other way and have the ban lifted, after all that's what drivers do when caught breaking the LAW.
[Removes tongue from cheek]

[Richard Fairhurst]

Quite honestly, I can't think of anything to say, that wouldn't fall foul of forum rules...
Perhaps someone else can do better?

Unfortunately not, but I thought it was worth adding to the school's Wikipedia page, complete with choice quotes from Chris Boardman and Sarah Storey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellis_Guilford_School

[windysmithy]

If i knew how to wikipede, i would add

", which is ironic, in light of the cycling ban referred to in the previous paragraph"

after:

"The school has won an award for the best school for healthy living in Nottingham"

[windysmithy]

Or is it "Wikipedal" ?

[Psamathe]

Quite honestly, I can't think of anything to say, that wouldn't fall foul of forum rules... :evil:
Perhaps someone else can do better?

Unfortunately not, but I thought it was worth adding to the school's Wikipedia page, complete with choice quotes from Chris Boardman and Sarah Storey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellis_Guilford_School

I'd keep our eye on your changes as I suspect the article has been put there by school staff members. Check the "Talk" pages and e.g. "The information is biased and incomplete" and " It should not say that the school is proud ox certain achievements. This is highly inappropriate. I have changed some of the more major errors, corrected some of the - frankly - shocking linguistic errors ...". Or the article history "idy-up of a poorly-written article which seems to be written by the school, as an advert for the school!"

Cynic in me suspects that when the school notice your changes they will be reverted out (or edited praising the school for their lead in child transport safety ...).

Ian

[Cyril Haearn]

The bbc language is awful, "will not be able" probably means "will not be allowed"

I have a hunch: the school has a financial bonus arrangement with the motor industry

€€€!

[Outlaw13]

I know the school fairly well. I use the astroturf there every week to play touch rugby league. We also use it to train RL. The school is pretty sports focussed. I'm surprised they have done this but I think it has come from a position of student safety rather than anything else. What would have been good is if the school could have made a statement about making the area around the school safer for pupils cycling along with maybe stopping students cycling until they felt it was safer. There's a cycle path that runs up to the school that is constantly blocked with cars parking to go to the local sainsbury's. There's also a junction at a busy dual carriageway (30mph speed limit) that could be improved. Other than that most of the areas around are big housing estates and as such it should be easy to make the environment safe for kids to cycle.

[The utility cyclist]

How about banning parents from driving their kids to school if they have any points on their license and/or have not passed an advanced driving course? Surely that should be the thing they consider first in terms of safety, how many have been killed or seriously injured by the kids on bikes?
And then there's the indoctrination to wearing helmets that bikeability provides and which it easily follows to pushing kids to wearing them all the time thus making them even less safe than before due to risk compensation.
All total BS, why are LA allowing this to happen when they do naff all to restrict the real dangers that does kill and maim?

[mjr]

All total BS, why are LA allowing this to happen when they do naff all to restrict the real dangers that does kill and maim?

Because fewer people complain about abusing children like this than slightly inconveniencing motorists?