MP: 2-speed cycle lanes would get more women riding – and let them avoid “Lycra clad mad cyclists”

Being a lycra clad lady I actually find that many women (the kind with baskets) couldn't give a dam about anyone on the road but themselves

I'm generally more afraid of the giant metal automobiles 'whizzing past' than the squishy shiny lycra people - can we properly sort that out first? So little of London comes with any sort of safe, usable cycle lane as it is... With some sharper elbows (with regards to road allocation) and proper financial commitment, we could get pretty much EVERYONE cycling more, of any age, gender, whatever. That would be a real achievement.

At least she's actually THINKING about cycling and not just making reactionary, inflammatory comments in response to external pressure.

Slightly puzzling comments. At first hearing it sounds like someone who doesn't really know what they are talking about, but does have good intentions in relation to cyclists.

Which, I suppose, is a step up on what we often get - someone who doesn't know what they are talking about and doesn't like cyclists.

No issue with discussing 2 speed cycle lanes but to differentiate by sex is wrong. I am a female cyclist, cycle to work in lycra and get changed and showered at work. I do NOT pootle and in fact pass several male cyclists on my journey. This is not 1935 and Call The Midwife with all women on sit up & beg bikes in tweed skirts wearing high heels. Ridiculous.

MP Meg Hillier is one of the best allies we have in Parliament. Actually cares, and actually works at getting improvements rather than certain members who blow a lot of hot air.

She may need a trip to Holland to check out the bakfiets to transport kids, shopping, whatever, and that everyone just uses whatever clothes they own to cycle in.

Why doesn't Hillier just visit the Netherlands or Denmark? Then she will properly understand what it takes to get PEOPLE cycling.

There is no need to split the needs of cyclists into either genders or speeds. We don't do that for pedestrians or motorists so why cyclists?

Why do so many MPs express their views on cycling when it is quite clear that they haven't got a clue what they are talking about?

Did Hillier *really* say this?

“One of the big things is… that women don’t want the “muck sweat” of cycling. There are some fashion designers around Hackney and east London now which are designing cycling friendly fashion, but not enough yet."

It’s a fact, women are too lazy too cycle…

God help us if people like ever get their way, its the same old Danish dream which will never work or happen within the UK.

A two-tier system (anyone know of anywhere that has tried this kind of solution and, if they have, whether it's effective?) somehow lends itself to the the notion of first and second class users (customers) and possibly a pay barrier before one or both could be used.

In reality it's just more wishful thinking from someone for whom the current state of cycling - and cycling infrastructure - in the UK is unappealing and doesn't work, and who clearly hasn't looked to where good infrastructure has not only been built, but also works quite well in attracting users of all ages, genders and needs.

I can't see this idea doing anything to encourage mass cycling so I'm out.

Not sure about the need to divide the cycling world in two. Unlike motor vehicles, pretty much all of which are capable of easily exceeding all speed limits and therefore all travel at the speed limit, cyclists travel at a wide range of different speeds. As such, any decent cycle provision should cater for the need for cyclists to overtake other cyclists.

Who decides what a 'normal pace' is? On my commute it's probably around 15-20mph. I'll be faster on downhills and slower on uphills. That also is normal for me.

UK cycling strategy - design roads which require fast, assertive cycling. Then claim that fast, assertive cyclists put others off.

I don't know if Hillier appreciates this, but a "two-speed" cycle lane doesn't have to mean a two lanes (in one direction).

Basically I would suggest this just means a cycle lane wide enough for some overtaking to take place - ie NOT the laughably thin strips we get in the UK.

Cyclists don't require strict lane discipline like cars do, any more than pedestrians need a fast lane for brisk walkers and joggers. Just take a look at any of Wagenbuur's videos - the latest is here - to see cyclists riding two abreast and overtaking with no problems.

Similarly cyclists don't require traffic lights - it's just the motor traffic which make them necessary.

So whether she realises it or not, I think Hillier just wants wider facilities dedicated solely to cycling, which I imagine many of us would agree with.

I'd always assume that the faster riders would just be on the road. I use a couple of stetches of road where the cycle path is fine for pootling along (and indeed I sometimes do just that), but not to go fast. I'm usually on the road with the rest of the traffic.

MP to Advisor, "I want to make a cycle friendly statement, but avoiding some of the 'thorny' and controversial areas that get other people into trouble"

Agree with both the comments above. I'd also take exception to the phrase "Lycra clad mad cyclists". Why does someone who wants to use their bike to get somewhere as fast as they can, and wears appropriate clothing to do so, need to be described as "mad" as if they're doing something wrong? It's only a short step away from "lycra louts" and I'd expect better from the vice-chair of APPCG.

I don't know whether to cheer or cry.

Given the present state of infrastructure, she's ambitious, i'll give her that much.

Maybe we can concentrate on getting more general fit-for-purpose cycle lanes before we start on specialist 2 lane arrangements, eh? Surely that will have a greater impact for everyone - men, women and children?