Forum Topic

Cycling numbers falling, admits The Guardian!

Well, what a surprise. Since lockdown cycling numbers have dropped dramatically in the UK. Maybe that massive amount of public money could be better spent elsewhere. Even the usually rabid pro-cycling Guardian has to concede the fact that for most people it’s a leisure pursuit, not a regular mode of transport!https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/01/number-of-people-cycling-in-england-falls-a-year-after-2bn-plan

Simon Hayes ● 1105d28 Comments

My potted take on cycling.I don’t pay to cycle, it’s free. However, I would happily pay for a registration plate so I & all cyclists can be identified.That way cyclists can be fined in the same way as motorists.They , cyclists shout, scream, dictate segregated lanes.There are more cars as people prefer & need them, it’s far far easier carrying goods.Due to that buffoon Khan & TFL anti car policy, they rile motorists & use them as cash cows.For some reason the cycle brigade feel it’s their right to take over & some deliberately cycle 2 abreast & obstruct drivers.Road space as it’s limited needs to be shared by all, not try to force one groups view on another - by that I mean penalise & constantly harass motorists

Peter Yale ● 1103d

But they aren’t spending on walking, are they? The pavements are a disgrace in Ealing. So all the money is spent on cycling, which less than one percent of the population uses regularly. There are plenty of other things that could be funded that would benefit people more.It’s all about exercise Paul. Here’s a quote for you from the NHS:‘Everyone benefits from active travel. For each individual, it boosts physical and mental health, for our health service it reduces the heavy burden of treating preventable illnesses and of course businesses see the benefit of a healthier workforce.’Except that it doesn’t, since you have to do some fairly vigorous cycling to burn off the calories from a pizza or a couple of pints of beer.The transport mode point is moot. Fine for some people but not for many others. Which you know but can’t accept. A great number of people just don’t enjoy cycling. You know that’s true.And 40 miles a day? Hope you don’t have to share an office when you get there.

Simon Hayes ● 1103d

>It’s not even a particularly good form of exercise over the short distances we are told constitute local journeys. Calorie burn is low.Eh, cycling isn't about excercise, it's about getting you and stuff from one place to another. Exercise is normally a side effect.>But then you are probably a professional standard rider so that doesn’t apply to you.I have two bikes, a road bike I used to use for commuting (20 miles each way a day), and a dutch shopping bike, which I use for shopping>Spending billions of pounds of public money isn’t really acceptable on the spurious advice if vested interests. Even more so now.You're wrong here, spending money on cycling (and walking) pays back in spades, so much so it's considered an investment.

Paul James ● 1104d

No Paul, you are wrong. Building cycle lanes won’t massively increase cycling in the population because of a host of other factors. It’s not even a particularly good form of exercise over the short distances we are told constitute local journeys. Calorie burn is low.But then you are probably a professional standard rider so that doesn’t apply to you.Spending billions of pounds of public money isn’t really acceptable on the spurious advice if vested interests. Even more so now.

Simon Hayes ● 1104d

It was entirely expected though, I've been saying it for a long time now, if local authorities don't get in quick and introduce changes to make cycling easier and safer it will die back as cars take over again.The government said this three years ago now.https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/making-traffic-regulation-orders-during-coronavirus-covid-19/traffic-regulation-orders-guidance-on-the-traffic-orders-procedure-coronavirus

Paul James ● 1104d

No Paul. You are such a one eyed twit when it comes to this topic, it’s hard to take you seriously.The fact is, cycling levels have fallen despite the enormous amounts spent and the huge effort to force people to take to two wheels. Giving bikes away doesn’t mean a thing if they don’t get used. Even you know that. Plenty will probably get sold on.You have to admit that you’ve lost this particular point.

Simon Hayes ● 1104d

Ah, just stooping to personal abuse from you again. Nice. You want to know who that makes the loser? :D

Paul James ● 1104d

Because you are a loser Paul, since your obsession makes you particularly odious. And probably odorous too, unless you are the only cyclist who doesn’t sweat.Active travel isn’t just cycling, or did you miss the ‘walking’ references. You don’t understand that cycling is a minority activity. Just because the LCC zealots have pushed the cycling agenda over everything else in London first made it right.They took the LTNs out, didn’t they. That makes you a loser. Loser.

Simon Hayes ● 1104d

"Boston Road" "quiet way" for cycling coming. How do you make roads quiet for cycling? :DLosing :D :D

Paul James ● 1104d

How many bikes are Ealing Council giving out in Southall? A thousand?That's a thousand more people to ask for better cycling infrastructure Simon.Losing! :DHow many more school streets by 2026, 50 I think?Losing  :D :D :D

Paul James ● 1104d

>Face it Paul, you are a loser here!TFL get £80 million a year to improve active travel.Active travel England set up to oversee provision of active travel infrastructure to ensure it meets standards.Protected cycle track on Uxbridge Road between Southall and Hanwell and Southall and Heathrow.Council pledging to more.Government says no intention of ever bringing in cyclist registration (and hence speed limit enforcement)If this is what losing is like Simon :D

Paul James ● 1104d

Paul, we don’t live in those places. But it is a minority activity compared to other types of transport.In London they have to roll cycling in with walking to boost the percentages. Take the pedestrians out if the equation and it’s a really small number of regular cyclists. Yet they don’t spend anywhere near the sums on improving pavements that they waste on poorly designed cycling infrastructure.Face it Paul, you are a loser here!

Simon Hayes ● 1104d

>They are a blight, You're a cyclist Peter. Are you a blight? Which cyclists are you talking about here if not yourself? Me?

Paul James ● 1104d

>it will only ever be a minority activity and mostly for leisure at that.It's certainly not a minority activity in Paris Amsterdam and Copenhagen so your premise that it can never be anything but that is utter nonsense.

Paul James ● 1104d

>They are a blight, cyclists should pay to use road.What do you think you should pay when you cycle Peter?

Paul James ● 1104d

They are a blight, cyclists should pay to use road.Pavements must be a cycle lane too, amount who ride on them

Peter Yale ● 1104d

The report is pretty clear that the increase in cycling numbers was due to people having more time on their hands. Purely a leisure activity, nothing to do with safety. Now that people are working again the numbers have dropped to pre-pandemic levels.What a surprise that the one eyed lobbyists try to spin it another way. Build all the cycle lanes you want, it will only ever be a minority activity and mostly for leisure at that.And as you like to state Paul, the ‘real’ cyclists don’t like the lanes anyway.

Simon Hayes ● 1104d

>There’s plenty of bike lanes everywhereNot in Ealing there isn't.We've got some that aren't joined up with others, others that are just paint and some are downright dangerous, others are often full of parked cars (although it only takes one).Uxbridge Road remains an anathema to safety.More are coming though thankfully.

Paul James ● 1104d

They drive as it’s easier & more comfortable & for thousands of reasons.Only downside is foolhardy schemes which luckily the democratic public ousted.There’s plenty of bike lanes everywhere, so shouldn’t be a problem rather than the luvvies wanting more more more

Peter Yale ● 1104d

>And what exactly are cyclists so scared of.Wrong question.Why are people that want to or would want to cycle for some trips not cycling them and driving them instead.The answers are many, but a fair few will say "I don't feel it's safe enough to do so".

Paul James ● 1104d

There were still plenty of cars, people felt safer driving in a solitary zone rather than public transport.The ltns really properly mucked up traffic (as I proved to you during petrol shortage).And what exactly are cyclists so scared of.It seems right I what Mr Havelock says. If they had rudimentary road skills or some form of test, they might not cause themselves so much harm

Peter Yale ● 1104d

What happened (and this is an oversimplification of course) is without all the cars around during lockdowns people found they felt safe cycling.Now the cars are back in ever bigger numbers, so people don't want to cycle as they don't feel safe and in many cases choose to drive instead.It's not rocket science what's going on here.

Paul James ● 1104d

Not so easy if you don’t have changing and shower facilities in the workplace. Let’s just say that sweaty cyclists in an office environment don’t make for a pleasant experience!

Simon Hayes ● 1104d

Have to say I am surprised and particularly that the uptake in lower flatter areas is very low.But it's all demographics.  Here it's very middle class and trendy and a great many jobs are simply administrative office type jobs or don't involve equipment. distance travel and differing locations or outdoor work.Easy use a bike if all you carry are your sandwiches and a small device.  Not so easy if you log 10 kilos of kit or fragile or high value precision equipment.

Raymond Havelock ● 1104d

I wonder how long before London secedes from the UK and is proclaimed a Peoples Republic and aligned fully with North Korea?  😁

Rosco White ● 1104d

Tfl are also useless at managing our money. I've lost count of the number of Piccadilly line stations that have the platform lights on during really sunny days. They don't give a toss because it is our money, let alone the effect on the environment. Khan is a t&%t, pure and simple. Councils like Ealing and Hounslow love him because he is the face of the anti-car movement

Peter King ● 1104d

Almost sick of saying all this, but it’s like banging head against wall.Sadiq khan/TFL are anti car.They are so biased & hypocritical it’s sickening, along with the blatant lies & figures they bandy about citing pollution.For starters khan drives in a convoy past local parks to one he prefers, to walk dog.Cycle lanes put in at great expense, with a negative effect to traffic, cause congestion & pollution. TFL could eliminate some congestion (bus stops opposite each other) as one example.Those who know, Chiswick High  Road, what a farce.Vehicles are needed, no one drives for fun.Motorists are cash cows.I get pollution & the green agenda, but it’s so blinkered in set up- if you got the ££££, drive anywhere.I forgot fumes can’t travel from one area to another!!!!It’s sickeningly biased anti car every journey matters tripe.Yes, except cars.I could go on a massive rant but it’s all been said.The brainwashed can spout now, cue Ben Owen/Paul Richard James.Even when it’s waved in front of their face, proved to them, they are in denial

Peter Yale ● 1104d

The Grauniad?! Oh, the Lycra Louts won't like that news. At all. VERY hard for them to put a spin on it & refute, it's Gospel written in their Bible.      😂

Rosco White ● 1104d