Cycling UK Forum

'Because only fit cyclists will use the cycle facilities' !!!!

I am paraphrasing here Jesse Norman of the DfT in a written reply to an MP who is asking a question on behalf of a constituent. The question was regarding the building of a Greenway instead of (or in addition to) East-West rail and the Expressway - linking Oxford and Cambridge.

So to the unhinged in the DfT who need to watch this great NL video (thanks to OP):

* Old / Young / Disabled / Unfit can clearly be seen using these Dutch Greenways
* Most journeys on the Greenway will use only part of the Greenway, not the whole route
* 1000 Ox-Cam Greenways could be built for the same price as Brexit will cost
* The biggest benefit of Greenways are for vulnerable users (old/young/disabled)
* Active travel returns money to society
* Building Stonehenge tunnel, A14 extension, Expressway etc etc will plunge the UK further into debt

The only answer to the OP question I can come up with is: Because our MPs and local leaders are mad. We need to screen our UK leaders for insanity before we let them take office.

atlas_shrugged wrote:'Because only fit cyclists will use the cycle facilities' !!!!

I am paraphrasing here Jesse Norman of the DfT in a written reply to an MP who is asking a question on behalf of a constituent. The question was regarding the building of a Greenway instead of (or in addition to) East-West rail and the Expressway - linking Oxford and Cambridge.

So to the unhinged in the DfT who need to watch this great NL video (thanks to OP):

* Old / Young / Disabled / Unfit can clearly be seen using these Dutch Greenways
* Most journeys on the Greenway will use only part of the Greenway, not the whole route
* 1000 Ox-Cam Greenways could be built for the same price as Brexit will cost
* The biggest benefit of Greenways are for vulnerable users (old/young/disabled)
* Active travel returns money to society
* Building Stonehenge tunnel, A14 extension, Expressway etc etc will plunge the UK further into debt

The only answer to the OP question I can come up with is: Because our MPs and local leaders are mad. We need to screen our UK leaders for insanity before we let them take office.

Modern humans are mostly mad, in that we often ignore the realities biting at our legs in favour of various mad ideological beliefs that we prefer as the drivers of our behaviours. It ain't just the politicians. They stand out because of the publicity around their words and actions, as well as the impact of their amplified powers in the world.

All of us are mad, in that we go on doing the consumer thing, driving our cars, burning the fuel for the central heating and all the rest. We know the effects and consequences but prefer to act in line with the crazy-capitalist ideology of Neo-liberalism, with which we co-operate every day in a hundred ways. Life is a stream of minor frustrations & satisfactions as we scratch one consumer itch after another.

Personally I'm attempting to throttle back on the consumer lifestyle. It's harder than we think. There's also the problem of the tragedy of the commons.

Still, futurology is as useful as astrology for knowing what will happen longer-term. Moreover, none of us have any real control over our behaviour as we are possessed by devil-memes immune to everything but a passing angel-meme.

Cugel

atlas_shrugged wrote:The only answer to the OP question I can come up with is: Because our MPs and local leaders are mad. We need to screen our UK leaders for insanity before we let them take office.

Quite!
Or perhaps where their business interests lie

atlas_shrugged wrote:The only answer to the OP question I can come up with is: Because our MPs and local leaders are mad. We need to screen our UK leaders for insanity before we let them take office.

Chimes with something Dominic Cummins says in this explanation of the successful 'Vote Leave' campaign regarding not letting any MPs anywhere near the campaign management controls!

squeaker wrote:

MikeF wrote:Crawley in West Sussex would be an ideal town to incorporate the ideas from Denmark and Holland, but sadly those in charge have absolutely no idea.
Crawley Loves Bikes Being mostly flat, with lots of cycle paths and increasing facilities for bikes, cycling is the way forward for Crawley.. The people who write this guff haven't ridden a bicycle in Crawley! It's all motor vehicle focussed. Here's just one example, but Streetview for Crawley will show this is common. Somehow someone cycling along this dual carriageway has to occupying the outside lane in order to access the cycle lane ahead.

Not cycled in Crawley for a long while, but it looks as if those particular cycle lanes are indicating a path to the ASL boxes at the relevant traffic lights. Useful if / when the traffic is static (due to the level crossing just up the road)?
I suspect that, in Denmark and Holland, it's the 30kph speed limit + presumed liability if you do hit a vulnerable road user that makes the difference: but I'm no psychologist

I haven't cycled in Crawley for a while either although it's not to far away and is spreading its tentacles even further east and west with all design built for motor transport. However much of it is flat or flattish and would be ideal for Dutch type conversion, but West Sussex can only think in terms of motor traffic for road layouts and transport. WSCC does "encourage and promote cycling" as their literature repeatedly says. But of course nothing is done to enable and provide for cycling. Adjoining local authorities also think along similar lines. It's a mindset problem by people who can't think outside a tin box and don't cycle.

Presumed liability is just an insurance issue; nothing really to do with safety or blame. Safety needs to be implemented at a design stage for roads.

squeaker wrote:I suspect that, in Denmark and Holland, it's the 30kph speed limit + presumed liability if you do hit a vulnerable road user that makes the difference

Not according to this thread on Twitter which Chris Boardman retweeted:

https://twitter.com/AsEasyAsRiding/status/1074300283080110080