Major businesses urge party leaders to Choose Cycling ahead of general election

This is great news. The more businesses that get behind cycling publicly the better, to help broaden its appeal and - particularly - to increase its image among boroughs like Westminster who seem to view cyclists with utter contempt. It breaks down the traditional pro-business car vs anti-business cycling silos, which @CyclingWorks has had success in doing for the new superhighways.

If it benefits the businesses then so what? What's wrong with them getting benefits from doing something that is popular? They are representing their staff as well.

Words are cheap. Approaching my local councillors regarding 'space for cycling', two didn't reply, the one who did trotted out how short of money the council is for 'important' local issues, but stated how they have supported safer cycling by making all estate roads 20mph.
Perhaps it would, if despite the enormous cost of signage, it was ever enforced.
Seeing their photos in the recent election leaflets, some means of excersise would clearly benefit them all.
Thankfully the support of the councils sports development team and local schools has been completely the opposite of their elected representatives.
Once sufficient numbers of voters take to cycling and appreciate its health benefits, then I'm sure councillors will come on board to protect their elected status.

Several mentions above of facilities at work, I'd also like to mention the other end. Planning guidelines for new build houses should call for one bike storage space per bedroom. It should be in the house not in a secure bike park nearby, a) because getting on your bike needs to be as hassle free as possible, b) because secure bike parking is a target for bike thieves. Plus of course planning guidance should require cycle routes to any new development (eg with Section 106 money)

Considering one of the companies is Sky, you'd think they'd have the media clout to blanket tabloids with pro-cycling propaganda. After a few weeks of the sun telling people they should be cycling everywhere and that cyclists are the best people in the world, you'll have white van men and hairdressers queuing up at halfords and Evans' to buy a bike.

I can see advantages for the companies though, you can provide parking for maybe 10 or 20 cars or make a green statement and provide secure parking for a hundred bikes plus 5 spaces for upper management.

I'd argue it's a lot easier to build proper segregated infrastructure around out of town business parks than it is in town centres where you inevitably have to rob that space from somewhere.

This is good news. Feeling cynical today though so I'll believe it when I see it.

Hats off to all involved in this cycling works initiative great to see.
Whats needed now is showers and changing rooms at most work places and underground bike parks like they have in Japan.

Another step towards getting the main political
parties to put cycling at the heart of transport policy.
Cycling safety issues need to become an election issue.

Oh right and can these companies and their employees exist on pushbikes? And before the lobby makes an utter fool of itself, can I mention that 10% of journeys would need to be about 30 billion miles a year, carrying heavy loads and people at a faster speed than pushbikes can go?

The current mileage, apart from the tiny minority who commute, but don't have to, seems to be cyclists out on a jolly as a hobby.

But what happened to the £650 million a year that's just been granted?

Given that 99% of people don't cycle and that none actually need it, they should be demanding from their candidates that this money is cancelled.

Walkers? All our towns and cities already have ample pedestrian infrastructure and they do not need the carriageway as do cyclists. The only reason they are included is to give some sort of credibility to the cycle lobby. Walkers have more in common with drivers. Both need each other and society must have walkers and drivers. Why does it need cyclists at all? That's a pretty fair question that really needs an answer.

So perhaps cycling really is the new golf - my betting is that this is the effect of Chief Execs swapping clubs for bidons and not being willing to tolerate the current infrastructure and traffic risks they're doing something about it.

Wow! This is the sort of pressure they need but it has to be sustained to get the changes needed.

Surely the thrust of the argument is that its the infrastructure that needs to change so that it doesn't matter where an employer locates. This is by the same logic that they build new roads to service retail parks and business growth. Its all possible with the will.

I would agree that at the moment there are lots of employers in places where cycling is very unattractive to the workforce!

Good news, but I wonder if these companies will also consider cyclists when deciding where to site their offices etc

One of the major reasons for people driving to work is that out of town development parks are often hard to reach by any other means than driving.
It's all very well having secure parking and a shower but if the office is out of town on a busy dual carriageway, not many people will choose to cycle.

This is good. And these businesses are acting in their self-interest too, as better environments, fitter staff, etc will benefit them, and their customers too.