Living the Dream

Wow, Ambassador! The DfT only handed out Digestives....

Firstly, I would like to thank all those who messaged me on this blog or emailed me privately expressing their support for the idea of an independent Cycling ‘Embassy’ for Great Britain. Whatever happens, it will be based upon the Cycling Embassy of Denmark as I believe we need the same model here in the UK. The ball has already started rolling and a volunteers forum will be starting up as an information exchange/meeting point. The URL has been confirmed and I shall release details shortly (thanks very much to a very willing and able volunteer. The first of many 🙂 ).

An early Mission Statement is as follows

An Embassy, free from the burden of history, legacy and ties, created to work in partnership with fellow organisations and charities in Great Britain, mainland Europe and around the World trading ideas and experiences in how to promote cycling and make cycling infrastructure work in urban and rural contexts.

To develop relations with private companies already committed to Green & Sustainable values and promote the truth that cycling can produce a fitter, healthier, happier workforce saving billions in ‘sick’ days to the British economy.

To lobby relevant Government Departments that cycling is a solution to transport congestion, noise pollution, carbon emissions, deaths and serious injuries on our roads, obesity and illnesses from more sedentary lifestyles, stress and expense.

To politely correct the Department for Transport that ‘Sustainable Transport’ actually means walking, cycling and public transport as opposed to spending further millions on expanding the road network which will only sustain more pollution, deaths & serious injuries and congestion, like the decades that preceded. The idea is to make something sustainable for future generations to inherit.  A bigger M25 isn’t it.

To redefine what Road Safety in the UK means by working with relevant groups; to highlight what the real dangers are, to enforce a duty of care to the most vulnerable and promoting prevention, rather than cure. This will be through a raft of measures including reduced speed limits in urban areas and changes in streetscape design to put community needs before those just travelling through them. We will strive to create an environment where helmets and other forms of protective wear are seen as unecessary as opposed to essential. We will strive to make riding a bicycle as easy as riding a bicycle.

To work with local authorities and relevant parties to redefine Cycling Infrastructure Design Standards in the UK and bring them in line with best practice in partner countries. ‘Hierarchy of Provision’, although well-meaning and correct in principle is too open to abuse or compromise by practitioners that know little about the requirements of cycling (or indeed walking) yet may wish to know more.

To encourage better communication with exchange of knowledge and ideas between architects, transport planners, designers & engineers as to how to get more people cycling [and walking] and improving access for all to town & city centres and transport interchanges. Also working out what makes decent cycle infrastructure work and how it benefits society as a whole.

To protect cycling proficiency for children and adults. It is an essential skill that did us very well in the past, as it can again in the future.

To have fun. It’s why we started cycling in the first place.

Obviously I now throw the floor open to suggestions as it’s now or never. As I look out across the still snowy South Downs, I acknowledge that this is going to be a quiet month as far as cycling news and blogging is concerned which gives us a chance over the Christmas period to reflect on the wonderful cycling experiences we’ve all had through the changing seasons of 2010 and set out the stall for 2011.

I am firmly of the belief that there needs to be new way in cycle campaigning; this is not to say that what has gone before has failed. It is simply outmanoeuvred by a car lobby that can market itself as green when accused of polluting and portray itself as a victim when attempts are made to call it to account over danger and subsidy. Cycling England, for all its faults, cost approximately £200,000 p.a. to run. Honda’s ‘Impossible Dream’ advert alone cost £5 million. They really want to sell cars, even if no-one can actually afford them right now.

It’s time to cast off the lycra and put on the charm. More plans follow and please feel free to join me for the ride which may be painfully short or wonderfully long. The doors of the Embassy will be opening shortly and you are welcome if you wish, fellow Diplomats. But don’t nick all my Fererro Rocher, I don’t care if it is Christmas.

Advertisements

Resolution

Clearly its the trees fault. Maybe if it had High-Viz wrapped around it and.....

 

Firstly, apologies to Lo Fidelity readers about not posting as frequently as I should recently but my laptop broke and I pick it up from Mr Apple Repair Man tomorrow.

In my last post I suggested that along with the DfT, the Department for Health should also be lobbied as encouraging cycling would be of massive benefit to the nation’s health from tackling obesity to increasing general wellbeing.

Yesterday the Health Secretary Andrew Lansley published a White Paper outlining the Governments Public Health Strategy to create healthier lives and people which was given the snappy title of ‘Healthy Lives, Healthy People: Our strategy for Public Health in England’.

Cycling is mentioned a massive 4 times in its 95 pages and I outline the excerpts below;

3.20 (Page 35) ……This year, the Government is supporting walking and cycling in schools through the Department of Health’s Living Streets ‘Walk Once A Week’ initiative and the Department for transport’s (DfT) funding for Bikeability cycle training. We are working towards every child being offered high-quality instruction on how to ride safely and confidently by the end of year 6 in school.

3.32 (Page 39) Active travel and physical activity need to become the norm in communities. The Department for Health will support local areas by providing good evidence on how to make regular physical activity and healthy food choices easier for their populations, for example by sharing learning from the experiences of nine ‘Healthy Towns’, as well as sustainable travel and cycle towns. Initial evidence from the first round of cycle towns showed that there was an increase in cycling across all social groups combined with a reduction in sedentary behaviour and single car use, when compared to people in similar towns.

Workplace Cycle Challenge (page 47)

CTC, the national cyclists organisation, has led a pilot project to encourage people to cycle to work in Swindon as part of its Cycling Champions programme.

The Cycle Challenge works by encouraging and supporting existing cyclists to persuade colleagues who rarely or never cycle to give it a try. The Challenge was a competition open to all organisations in the Swindon area to get most staff to cycle for just 10 minutes or more. Whole organisations and individual workplaces were encouraged to sign up via the Challenge website – individual cyclists within those organisations could log their personal details and record how much cycling they did.

Overall 853 participants cycled 37,180 miles between them, of which around 35,000 miles were for transport purposes (ie non-recreational travel). It is estimated that they saved 3,157 litres of fuel and £3,630 in reduced motoring costs and burnt about 35 million kilojoules of energy. (www.swindoncyclechallenge.org.uk)

All very nice but at no point does it address the real reasons why people don’t cycle in the first place. At no point does it address the fact that the motor car is a major hazard to public health, in both urban and rural areas and yet nothing is being done to curb its use. You can teach all the children you like to cycle, but if the roads look dangerous outside the school gates then it counts for nothing. You can declare all the urban areas you like to be ‘Cycle Towns’, but if the councils that run them remain as car-sick as they are at present and the roads to town centres and transport interchanges look dangerous, then it counts for nothing. You can create all the ‘Workplace Challenges’ you like, but we are now at the point where many, many adults in the UK have probably never known the joys of cycling, and without training or decent routes for them to learn a new skill with the added freedom that it brings then it all counts for nothing. If road safety isn’t correctly addressed and the car finally named as the chief culprit, then people will continue to fall ill and die from sedentary lifestyles and dangerous roads and it will all be for nothing. Government Cycle policy is a bit like offering the flu jab as a cure but with people continuing to die from influenza because they are afraid of needles.

It’s the councils that should be a primary concern as, like the Sustainable transport budget, this new public health budget is going to also be thrown to the regions with a new body (‘Public Health England’…..yes, it does sound a bit familiar doesn’t it?) overseeing the spend. Much more detail is required as the White Paper is big on rhetoric, but low on detail. As we have already seen, Sustainable Transport can be thrown open to all sorts of interpretation from charging points to electric vehicles to trunk road upgrades to ‘improve traffic flow’ and ‘reduce emissions’. Expect to see some fascinating and very artistic interpretations of the term ‘Public Health’ over the coming months. From a County Councils perspective it will probably mean more ‘Pavement Upgrades’ outside Hospitals and Health Centres, bless them.

I’m setting myself a couple of New Years Resolutions;

  1. I’m trading in my Mountain Bike and buying a Dutch Style Roadster because I had no idea that this shop was open in Brighton. How it slipped under the Lo Fidelity Radar, I’ll never know. I want to do Lo Fidelity cycling, appease the nagging of a certain Dutch Cycle fan & local campaigning friend of mine and write about my findings.
  2. I want to establish a Cycling Embassy of Great Britain, committed to forging partnerships with British & European partners, Architects & Urban Planners, attract funding from private companies and lobby all Government Agencies on how the benefits of cycling could save the country billions, make them look cooler and ‘well fit’ (if you talk that way) and make them feel better about themselves. I want to see the rule book on cycle infrastructure design guidance re-written as, although I believe the CTC is correct in principle on ‘Hierarchy of Provision’, it is too open to abuse by County Council Highways Departments. We have to adopt a more robust Dutch model that ‘disarms’ the motor car and creates a level playing field for walking and cycling (although the ‘20’s Plenty’ campaign is making great progress). I want to do this with increasing levels of help through the year as I have a day job, a wonderful wife and 7 month old son, and I would like it to stay that way.
  3. I would like to grow more vegetables and finally use that home brew kit I bought months ago.

The second resolution might be of interest to you. You can make it yours too if you like. If the Government can’t do joined up thinking for cyclists, then cyclists had better do it.

The Sound of Silence

If a tree falls in the middle of the forest, and no-one is around to hear it, it would still make more noise than the British cycle campaigning establishment

 

Being an only child, I was fairly used to quiet and solitude; the purr of a chain combined with birdsong whilst cycling along local bridleways or the wind through the trees where I used to occasionally sit and read anything by Enid Blyton or Roald Dahl. Now I’m older I seem to get increasingly nervy around silence; not hearing my son breathe or stir via the intercom at night for example and not hearing a peep from the Cycle Campaigning establishment since the furore regarding Cycling England a month or two ago also puts my teeth on edge.

About a month ago, it was declared that Cycling England would cease to be as of March 2011. Cycling blogs were alight with hot debate over why such a small concern should be abolished when it also became apparent that there would be no real provision for cycling within the Department for Transport. We learned that cycling was literally going to have to sing for its supper with funding thrown out to the provinces and the ‘Sustainable Transport Fund’. If you needed to feel even more nervous, it would appear that the parameters for what constitutes ‘Sustainable Transport haven’t been set by the Department for Transport and Philip ‘no clever funny middle name as he’s just a tosser’ Hammond MP. This means that the Council can make the same ridiculous interpretation as Central Government  – that adding lanes to a motorway can constitute ‘Sustainable Transport’ as it ‘improves traffic flow’ which reduces emissions (conveniently sidestepping the fact that it creates more traffic but that can be dealt with at a later date or preferably by a later generation). This is a bit like BP arguing that they have done the Gulf of Mexico a favour by releasing catastrophic amounts of oil into the eco-system; it ensures that only the fittest creatures survive thereby creating a stronger, more efficient Gulf of Mexico for future generations.

What I’ve found a little disturbing is the way that the wrath and fury seems to have subsided save a few handsome journalists and blog writers. I like to think that the major players are just recovering from the shock and are now in a room somewhere, with secret plans  being drawn up to produce an all new campaigning, lobbying, gnashing of teeth version of Cycling England built on sturdier foundations. Then again, I also have a direct debit for the National Lottery.

Shortly after Hammond’s statements, including the hilarious assertion that electric cars would be the way forward, well and truly putting the ‘car’ in carbon, the CTC and Cycle Nation held a conference in Edinburgh hosted by SPOKES (the Lothian Cycle Campaign). Lots of people spoke and gave presentations including the very nice Philip Darnton, Chairman of Cycling England. Notes of all the topics covered can be downloaded from the excellent Spokes website – at least, nearly all. Roger Geffen gave a chinwag on ‘The Segregation Debate – Reflections from Copenhagen’

The only notes of this segment were kindly compiled by a Spokes representative and reads as follows

Roger Geffen (CTC Right-to-Ride). Why is he sceptical of segregation, if it works in practice in parts of Europe like Denmark and Netherlands? CTC doesn’t reject it outright but supports the Government’s ‘hierarchy of solutions’: Traffic reduction and speed reduction; re-allocation of road space, junction re-design and other infrastructure; and segregation last – though it’s appropriate in some circs, eg inter-urban dual carriageway.

Problems of segregation in town – junctions more dangerous, need 270′ vision instead of 90′;cyclist/pedestrian conflict.

Success stories: Copenhagen, New York, Bogota. (Lo Fidelity Note: And Amsterdam, and Groningen and…)

Main issue is two legal framework differences – 1 driver liability, and 2 drivers give way to peds/cyclists when turning, even if have green light. Different legal framework leads to different driver behaviour. Needs lot of political will to change this in UK – possible strategy for future. Boris suggests allow cyclists to turn L at red light but this leads to cycle/ped conflict.

According to one source, it ended up as a slightly heated debate. The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club would have pointed out that the Governments ‘hierarchy of solutions’ are intrinsically car-centric and methods of traffic reduction and speed reduction, re-allocation of road space, junction re-design and other infrastructure always translates as ‘pinch points’, converted pavements, lethal on-road cycle lanes that terminate at parking bays and so on. Lest to say, none of CTC’s contribution has made their weekly emailed newsletters.

This post isn’t about the segregation/vehicular debate however (although like the Netherlands, the Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club believes that engineers should start properly designing out the private car from urban areas before looking at segregation instead of the UK method of tinkering around the edges so as not to annoy the ‘poor beleaguered motorist’). This post is about how we take cycle campaigning to a more coherent, robust level that can shout loud. And it will need to.

Let me say at this point that I love the CTC; I worked for them so know very well their passion for cycling. I love their proud heritage. Their legal assistance (free to members) has helped me successfully on the two times I was knocked off my bike by careless motoring. They have campaigned for the rights of cyclists through the years, be it on the road or off the road by allowing cyclists on to the bridleways. However, one niggling question always sits at the back of my mind; is the CTC, being a membership organisation representing predominantly touring cycling, the correct mechanism to represent and deliver the interests of all cyclists in the twenty first century?

If it is then at the moment it faces an open goal as no other cycling organisation would have the campaigning/lobbying nous to step into the breech come March. To do this though it would have to start listening to ideas that their membership may find unpalatable, and digest the fact that generations of potential cyclists are continuing to be lost to the pull of the motor car and the society that successive Governments are continuing to build around it.

This is conjecture pure and simple, but The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club would like to see the development of a privately funded (or part public/part private) lobbying group in the same dynamic as the Cycling Embassy of Denmark. It would be like the TfL’s Centre of Cycling Excellence, but this time with the Excellence. It could get companies with green credentials to put their money where their mouth is and lobby the Government directly about the merits of cycling and what Road Safety actually means. Partnerships should be struck with organisations in Britain, mainland Europe and Worldwide such as CTC, Fietsberaad, the Danish Cycling Embassy and New York City Transportation Planners for best practice (as I believe the argument goes way beyond just vehicular/segregated). Architects and engineers with an interest in transportation and urban design could be brought on board. The possibilities are endless if you look beyond the horizon of British cycle campaigning. Philip Darnton could Chair something that didn’t have foundations built on the shifting sands of a Quango.

By lobbying the Government, we need to question the Department for Transport why cycling is peripheral on their agenda, we have to lobby the Department for Health to keep reminding them that we have a solution to obesity, we need to let David Cameron know that he can save a couple of million pounds in happiness surveys by just getting everyone cycling.

Above all, we’ve got to do something. The sound of silence is starting to get deafening.

A Local Group for Local People

This never happens

WARNING: THIS POST CONTAINS OPTIMISM

On Wednesday night I attended a very productive Worthing Cycle Forum. It’s wonderful to see such cycling enthusiasm regardless of the loss of daylight hours and weather that has been inclement to say the least. What was also gratifying was the mix of people there; we had representatives from local council, the County Cycling Officer, campaigners, ‘civilian’ cyclists and even representation from Worthing’s Youth Council.

In this post I wish to outline how I went about re-establishing a cycle campaign group in Worthing (population: 100,000) and where we are now. The reason I wish to share this with you is that, with funding and knowhow for cycling (if there was any in the first place in the DfT) being thrown to the regions, it may inspire some Lo Fidelity Readers to try and get the ball rolling in their areas, or breathe new life into what’s already there. The money that’s potentially coming our way obviously doesn’t compare to Philip Hammond’s Big Money For Big Roads For Big Business Strategy That’s Very Big (or BMFBRFBBSTVB if you like) and could be hoovered up by bus companies and other ‘sustainable’ transport interests if we don’t get heard at a local level.

After moving  to Worthing in August 2007, I did a bit a bit of research into what local cycle campaign groups were about and found the website of one that hadn’t been updated since about 2001. I decided to establish a group called Worthing Revolutions. It was decided that we add an ‘s’ to make ‘Revolutions’ as ‘Revolution’ would sound a bit too, well, Revolutionary for Worthing. The inaugural meeting was in early 2008.

The person who created the original group turned out to be a very nice chap called Anthony Cartmell. The reason the original campaign group had fallen a bit by the wayside was due to work commitments and he was raising a young family (which ironically is where I’m at now). He is CTC through and through and even created their website. He was welcomed back on board (even doing a sterling job of creating our new website) along with others that were to form a core of regular volunteers. Amongst the volunteers were Sustrans and CTC representatives, but we were also fortunate to get the Borough Council Cycling Champion on board almost from the start (and has barely missed a meeting since).

Worthing Revolutions meets every month in a hotel bar with ample cycle parking outside. We wanted it to be an informal chat about cycling and a review of any cycling stories that had made the local press. That’s where our story could have ended but I didn’t want it to become another campaign group that just met up over a pint without being consulted on anything until it was too late.

We created the Worthing Cycle Forum in 2009 which I chaired. It was our ambition from the start to keep it open to the public. This was because [from experience] I had seen to many Forums disappear behind closed doors where councillors would listen and then ignore everything cyclists said but could now claim that at least they had ‘consulted’ with them. We wanted to keep accountability and transparency. This is where having a councillor on board from the start helped. We were able to not only get a regular booking in the Town Hall, but also awarded a small amount of Council funds to print leaflets and posters to promote the first event. We invited all agencies with an interest in cycling along; Sussex Police, local NHS Trusts, Schools and Town & County Councillors. The NHS couldn’t send anyone because their representative that dealt with such matters was off ‘long term sick’. I’ll let the irony of that sink in.

We now have consistent support from Worthing Borough Council and Simone Makepeace (ex-CTC employee and very knowledgeable West Sussex County Cycling Officer). We have developed a wish list of infrastructure we would like to see in the town and next year we will be holding monthly rides to conduct photo audits of things that work or don’t work (and why). These will end in a pub because I started the group and because I bloody well said so. Worthing Revolutions still meets every month and acts as a steering group for the Forum.

The point of all this is that The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club believes that it is imperative that cyclists of all disciplines and ages engage with all local agencies such as councillors, local NHS Trusts, School and the Police. Not only does it get a dialogue about cycling going, but it should become a two-way street, where cyclists should get consulted about future property and highways developments in their locality. It means cyclists will get a greater say in how Section 106 money is spent. With further spending cuts on the horizon, cyclists are going to have to learn to shout very loud at local level. It must be said that if there isn’t much in the way of local development in your area, there won’t be as much money floating around in the form of Section 106. We’re very lucky in Worthing to have large developments taking place where things like cycle parking and infrastructure are [I believe] part of the planning conditions. Above all, developers want to open a dialogue with our Cycle Forum as its pointless providing what they think are decent facilities that no-one uses.

It would be far more advantageous for a wider range of cycling views to get involved in local matters as opposed to the older gentleman of the vehicular persuasion (that normally turn up at cycle forums and into which age range I am rapidly heading). To be fair, they are dedicated people and their experience is needed. The problem is that through no fault of their own they don’t understand what the novice cyclist really wants and cycling levels won’t just pick up again as though the country has woken up from a long collective bout of amnesia. Above all, we must not be afraid to speak with local politicians and agencies. More often than not, they’re reasonable people and you are after all fighting for the same thing; a better place to live.

Phew! That’s my personal view on a local level. My National Plan will follow shortly…

Who Do You Think You Are Kidding Mr Hammond?

Don't Panic!

As the chilly Autumnal mists clear, the World of British cycle campaigning finds that not only have the goalposts been moved, but the playing field has been sold off as well.

Road.cc report can be found here

Yesterday I posted the initial DfT Press Release regarding the Spending Review. However, further detail seemed to emerge in the form of Annexes to the original statement (they may have come out at the same time in fairness, I don’t wish to speculate). Below are the key points that effect cycling;

Local Sustainable Transport Fund
We are establishing a £560 million local sustainable transport fund to challenge local authorities outside London to bid for funding to support packages of transport interventions that support economic growth and reduce carbon emissions in their communities as well as delivering cleaner environments and improved air quality, enhanced safety and reduced congestion.

This replaces a range of previous grants for sustainable forms of travel. It represents a significant increase in funding for sustainable travel, which the Government believes can both support economic growth and reduce carbon emissions.

Responding to calls from local government, the Fund will include a mix of £350m revenue and £210m capital funding over the next four years to maximise the toolkit of options available to local authorities

A small proportion of the fund will be allocated to provide continued funding for the successful Bikeability scheme, which offers high quality cycle training for young people. For the remainder of the funding, we will invite local authorities to develop packages of low cost, high value measures which best meet their local needs and effectively address local issues.

The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club deduces that, as opposed to cycle training being brought in-house as was inferred before, it is being cast out across the provinces, where car-centric Local Authorities are already having to make massive cuts to their own budgets. A harsh winter will ensure that any cycling budget will be swallowed up in pothole repair, which is exactly what happened to the West Sussex cycling budget before the spending cuts. Cycling projects won’t have any dedicated funding but be lumped together as ‘sustainable transport’ – we’re being told to sing for our supper basically.

It would be fair to conclude that ‘reducing emissions’ will mean clearing traffic bottlenecks with ‘improved engineering’ and shovelling cyclists off the roads on well-intentioned but appallingly designed infrastructure such as shared use pavements. Again.

Environment
….The functions of the Renewable Fuels Agency are being transferred to the Department for Transport. The DfT will work with the RFA to consider how best to achieve this transition and to ensure that potential administrative savings are realised.

This has allowed us to focus financial support on key priorities that will reduce transport emissions and support low carbon economy growth. These include:

– Making provision for over £400m for measures to promote the uptake of ultra-low carbon vehicle technologies. These include:

– supporting consumer incentives for electric and other low emission cars throughout the life of this Parliament. We will continue to monitor the most effective way to deliver this investment, with the first review of the Plug In Car grant in 2012;

– continued investment in electric vehicle recharging infrastructure (Plugged In Places);
– research and development.
– Supporting the key elements of the carbon-saving transport programmes that are delivered by the Energy Saving Trust and Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership, while working with both organisations to achieve efficiencies. Details will be confirmed shortly.

Believe it or not, the majority of us already own at least two modes of low carbon transport.  To locate the first, simply look down. Then you can use that low carbon form of transport to go and get another form of low carbon transport, your bicycle!  No mass building of power stations or carbon intensive construction of ultra low carbon cars with its required infrastructure necessary. If this country put its trust in walking and cycling for a change, at least this country won’t completely shut down in a power cut.  

Road Safety
As part of the simplification and radical devolution of local government finance, the Coalition Government will no longer be providing a specific ring-fenced grant to support road safety delivery and enforcement – including camera enforcement – at local level. This funding stream is being wrapped up into the wider local government funding settlement, and allocated by formula. These reforms will give greater autonomy and flexibility to local authorities in deciding how best to tackle their road safety problems. Additionally, the Local Sustainable Transport Fund will offer local authorities the opportunity to bid for funding for schemes offering safety as well as other local benefits.

Nationally, we are reducing the resources allocated to road safety research and marketing, distributing more of the available money instead for use in local targeted initiatives. We will reduce the THINK! budget by £12m per annum by 2014/15, so we will be focusing national marketing activity on those road users which represent the highest risks to others, and for whom a marketing approach is proven to be effective. We will also be making full use of lower cost mechanisms – such as social networking and the new educational courses – to target delivery cost-effectively and working closely with commercial partners to communicate key road safety messages. This approach has already proved successful; for example, 32,000 motorcyclists have joined a THINK! BIKER Facebook page launched earlier this year.

Motorised traffic isn’t a road safety problem in the eyes of DfT. If it can be said that ‘an Englishmans home is his castle’, it’s even more so with his motor car. All those that choose to joust with him on a bicycle will be expected to wear a full set of armour.

 The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club suggests that the DfT should embrace social media by repeatedly putting out the following message on Twitter, ‘Don’t look at this. Concentrate on the road’. That should help motorists. Until they get distracted by the radio.

It would be easy to write an apocalyptic conclusion from all this. The major cycling organisations have until March 2011 to work out where their cycling strategies go from here. However, cycling will never go away, as hard as Mr Hammond may try. We have to remain focussed on the DfT, and higher up with part-time cyclist David Cameron (to be fair it must be difficult to get out these days) until someone sees sense that cycling, walking and improved access benefits all as opposed to the macho big business posturing of High Speed Rail (which will only benefit larger towns and cities as opposed to the countryside it will machete through) or making roads even more unusable for those wishing not to travel by private car. 

In the spirit of private enterprise and franchising, the Low Fidelity Bicycle Club recommends that we invite Fietsberaad to take over sustainable transport infrastructure guidance as no-one in the DfT or Local Authorities can design anything properly.

Above all, stay happy and keep singing

..Ms Pendleton goes off to town on Reynolds 531
She does it ‘cos it’s quicker
and she’s knows it’s way more fun

So who do you think you are kidding Mr Hammond,
if you think old cycling’s done

(with sincere apologies to Bud Flannigan!)

Department for Transport – Spending Review 2010 Press Release

Over the course of the Spending Review period, The Department for Transport will reduce resource spending by 21% in real terms, and capital spending by 11% in real terms. The Department’s Administration budget will be reduced by 33%.

By making tough decisions now the Department can invest in vital transport infrastructure and greener technology to boost economic recovery.

Department of Transport          
           
      £ billion    
  2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Resource DEL1 5.1 5.3 5.0 5.0 4.4
Capital DEL 7.7 7.7 8.1 7.5 7.5
Total DEL 12.8 13.0 13.1 12.5 12.0
           
1 In this table, Resource DEL excludes depreciation

The Department will manage these reductions and support deficit reduction while maintaining high levels of investment by taking the following difficult but necessary decisions:

· Increasing regulated rail fares from the current RPI + 1% annual increase to RPI +3% for three years from January 2012. This fare increase will mean the government can deliver priority capacity improvements on the rail network to relieve overcrowding on routes into major cities. However, because Government recognises the impact this will have on passengers, particularly at a time of high inflation, this fare rise will be delayed until January 2012.

· Continuing with the previous government’s policy to link eligibility for concessionary bus fares to pension age changes and reform reimbursement, whilst maintaining the statutory entitlement for concessionary bus travel, ensuring that older people can maintain greater freedom and independence.

· Increasing charges for the Dartford Crossing. Subject to consultation, prices will increase from £1.50 to £2.00 in 2011, then to £2.50 in 2012. The Department and the Highways Agency are developing options to improve the crossing for motorists including: exploring a new additional crossing; using free flow charging to improve efficiency; and removing charges to aid flow when congestion is most severe. The increased charges will be used to fund this work.

· Reducing bus subsidies paid directly to operators by 20 percent will save over £300million by 2014/15 and Government will work with bus operators and local government to examine smarter ways of administering this subsidy to get better results for passengers and taxpayers.

· Strengthened scrutiny and transparency for Transport for London (TfL)’s investment programme, including benchmarking of London Underground costs, will help to support the efficiency and economy of these programmes. Whilst investment in the London Underground will be maintained, TfL will need to accommodate a 28% reduction to the remainder of their GLA transport grant by 2014/15.

By taking these tough decisions now, the Government will be able to pursue vital transport schemes across all regions to support economic growth and increase the sustainability of the country’s transport system. These include:

· Over £10 billion funding for the national and local road networks, and public transport schemes in Britain’s major cities. This will include widening the remaining section of the A11 to provide a continuous dual carriageway link between Norwich and the M11; improving the junction between the M4 and M5; easing congestion on the M1 between junctions 28 and 31; route extension and capacity increases on the Midland Metro; investing in the Mersey Gateway Bridge; improving the A23 Handcross to Warninglid; upgrading the Tyne and Wear Metro; improving the Tees Valley bus network for passengers; introducing a managed motorway scheme between junctions 25 to 30 of the M62; and improving accessibility to Leeds rail station. Significant cost reductions will be made across the programmes.

· £14 billion funding over the spending review period to Network Rail to support maintenance and investment, including major improvements to the East Coast Mainline, station upgrades at Birmingham New Street and network improvements in Yorkshire, and major signalling replacement programme around Newport and Cardiff and increased line speeds and network capacity on the Barry to Cardiff corridor, funding for Network Rail to proceed with investment to deliver faster journeys in the North West, and Government support for investment to improve journey reliability on Great Western Main Line services to Wales.

· Crossrail will proceed in its entirety, providing an additional 10 percent capacity to London’s rail network, while Government will continue to seek efficiency savings to maximise value for money.

· Spending on upgrading the London Underground network will be protected.

· A national charging infrastructure for electric vehicles and an incentive of up to £5000 for the purchase of ultra-low carbon cars, supporting both UK manufacturing and sustainable travel options.

· Subject to consultation the Government is proceeding with its plans to deliver a new high speed rail network, and will bring forward legislation during this Parliament to allow construction to proceed.

· The Government’s intention is to proceed with PFI projects, which will deliver sustained improvements in highways maintenance in Sheffield, Hounslow and the Isle of Wight and extend the Nottingham tram network with two new lines. The Government will work urgently with the four local authorities to establish how the projects can be delivered affordably in order to deliver the much needed benefits.

To ensure continued efficiencies across transport spending, the DfT will drive more fundamental reforms to how money is spent, including:

· Rail. Network Rail has already been tasked by the Office of Rail Regulation to deliver 21 percent of efficiency savings over the current regulatory period to 2013-14. The Government will be: promoting reform based on the evidence of the McNulty Review; making Network Rail more accountable to its customers; and enhancing competition through encouraging Network Rail to widen the pool of suppliers involved in infrastructure work.

· Public Bodies Reform: improving accountability, promoting efficiency and generating valuable savings to the taxpayer over the parliament by abolishing six of the department’s public bodies.

· Highways Agency: introducing immediate reforms to the performance management regime in the HA, including the appointment of a non executive chair, a clearer output specification and expert advice on benchmarking costs. Better management of contracts across the Highways Agency (HA) will save £240million by 2014-15. A review will follow to ensure that HA structure and governance give assurance of value for money.

In addition, fundamental reforms will be implemented to give local people more power to tackle their own transport priorities including:

· Simplifying Local Authority Grants to give power and greater financial autonomy to local authorities through a simplification of local transport funding, moving from just under 30 grant streams to just four. Local Authority resource grants will be reduced by 28 percent.

In addition to the above, the Department will be exploring a number of ideas suggested through the HMT Spending Challenge process, including:

  • Allowing the Highways Agency to charge back the cost of event traffic management; and
  • Reducing the fuel costs of Traffic Officers by running vehicles on LPG or sharing fuel depots with other contractors.

Transport Secretary Philip Hammond said:

“This Government inherited a financial crisis because we were spending more money than the country could afford. That has meant that we have had to look again at every pound that we spend to ensure we get value for money.

“Whilst we have had to make some difficult choices, I am confident that our focus on the long term will ensure that we can continue to build a transport system that supports economic growth and reduces carbon. We have secured investment to allow us to go ahead with important projects such as high speed rail, support for ultra-low carbon cars and major road building and public transport programmes.

“We have taken big steps forward in improving efficiency – making genuine savings of over 21% from our resource budget. We have also radically reformed the way decisions are made, ensuring that local people have more control over their priorities.”

The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club said:

‘What about cycling you wankers?’

I added that last bit but further comment shall follow.

Stay on Target

 

The Department for Transport (Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club Impression)

 

EDITED – THANKS MR BLOGS 🙂

In previous posts I put across an argument that the demise of Cycling England could be a good thing.  It could mean the reintegration of cycling within the Department for Transport, making it publically accountable and receiving a deserving share of the transport budget. Like the Highways Agency, cycling could be an ‘Executive Agency’. Cycling is after all part of the sustainable transport (and public health and wellbeing and climate change and energy conservation etc) solution.

As you have probably learned today, not only is Cycling England to be abolished from March 2011 but the future for cycling now looks far bleaker than anyone could have imagined. Now there will simply be a Local Sustainable Travel Fund with the mechanism for delivery still to be determined.

What’s worse is that, although Bikeability (Cycling Proficiency), is set to be protected under the Department for Transport, there is nothing to say it won’t be affected by the funding cuts to be announced on October 20th.

With cycling project funding cast out across the provinces, walking and cycling campaign groups will be left fighting for scraps while the DfT marches on, indifferent to the plight of those that prefer simpler, greener, more fun and effective forms of transport, or simply cannot afford a car. This is the Conservative tactic of ‘Divide and Conquer’ at its worst. There is some light at the end of the tunnel however; according to a press release brought to my attention by a Lo Fidelity Reader, ‘DfT is also considering establishing an expert panel on wider sustainable travel which would promote cycling as part of the wider green agenda’. I’d imagine some eco-car manufacturers may also be in the panel too.

As jolly nice and good looking cyclists and pedestrians, we must not be distracted by localism. We must remain fixed now on Phillip Hammond, Norman Baker and the Department for Transport; if a major transport scheme is planned, cycling has to be integrated from the beginning as opposed to fighting to get a crap cycle path running next to it or exposed Sheffield Stands.

 

'The Empire doesn't see small bicycles or pedestrians as a threat or it would have a tighter defence'

 

Above all Cycle Training in whatever form has to be retained or we lose yet another generation to the relentless pull of the sedentary lifestyle, leading to more dangerous roads.

Philip Hammond, Secretary of State for Transport, seems to think Sustainable Transport doesn’t incorporate the most sustainable forms of transport of all. Apparently we should all be using electric cars now. This is a man that clearly needs to be reshuffled at the first God given opportunity and the woefully car-centric Department for Transport needs to be reformed as it appears to be languishing decades behind in sustainability.

Whilst we work out what to do next, I’m off to dig out my Chas n Dave ‘Snooker Loopy’ EP, my florescent socks and look for a Sinclair C5 on ebay. I feel we are going back to the Conservative times of old.