"First time in history" EU prioritises cycling in major overhaul of urban infrastructure

hawkinspeter wrote:

The Govt. just pushes the buck onto local councils who are mostly incompetent when designing infrastructure (there are exceptions).

That is a bold statement, what exceptions?

Grahamd wrote:

That is a bold statement, what exceptions?

There must be some - has Boardman put any in Manchester yet?

I was about to reply but the more I think the less confident I am. I'll have to go and survey the latest servings by Edinburgh council around the Picardy Place gyratory and down the tram route extension to make sure that they haven't made these self-defeating in the end. Unfortunately given the standard of the competition I can't claim this as a local speciality.

Norwich has one recent. Just one. But they just made a very expensive roundabout alteration which was 60% and is now 100% bicycle unfriendly.

The good (not protected but better): https://www.norwichcyclingcampaign.org/cycling-the-newmarket-road-cycle-...

The bad: https://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/traffic/grapes-hill-roundabout-reva...

I share your cynicism. You would think that cities like Athens would need little additional incentive to combat the already evident effects of climate change. Other than turning up the air conditioning.

IanMK wrote:

I share your cynicism. You would think that cities like Athens would need little additional incentive to combat the already evident effects of climate change. Other than turning up the air conditioning.

Athens needs an enormous kick up the @ss to do something about the traffic and traffic-related pollution issues that bedevil it. Athens has enormous 'car -is-king' problems that infuriate me daily. It's a horrible place to cycle; streets are jammed with inconsiderately-parked cars, pavements are impassible for the most part, the few cycle paths that exist are crumbling and used as off-street parking by entitled drivers, 90% of drivers openly use their mobile phones while driving and cyclists are next-to-invisible on the roads yet no-one acknowledges that there's a problem. Once outside the city the cycling in fantastic though, and drivers are usually more considerate. Besides which, the weather outside of July and August, along with the landscape, make up for the tribulations.

I'd love to see Athens forced into some action by the EU.

If this government lifted the fuel duty freeze it would only be to line their own pockets.

Porkie McSword wrote:

If this government lifted the fuel duty freeze it would only be to line their own pockets.

Now that's the kind of cynicism I can get behind.

I suspect that there's lots of interested motor lobbyists and "donations" that would make a fuel duty thaw impossible for politicians (likely not Green ones, I hope).

Porkie McSword wrote:

If this government lifted the fuel duty freeze it would only be to line their own pockets.

Not sure about that, unless by embezzlement, however they hardly need to raise fuel duty to do that as we have seen.

As HP points out it is perfectly believable that they line their own pockets by not raising fuel duty

In addition as taxes/duty has at least 2 supposed ends (raising funds and changing behaviour) it could be argued that 1 out of 2 ain't bad. For a working example see teh single-use carrier bag charge, where the fee goes to the retailer.

Porkie McSword wrote:

If this government lifted the fuel duty freeze it would only be to line their own pockets.

I'm not sure about lifting the fuel duty freeze. It obviously works if you simultaneously improve public and active travel otherwise it just hits the poorest the hardest. As we know the global issue is with the carbon footprint of the richest. An immediate ban of new cars with CO2 emissions > 130g/km potentially has a better impact and you can reduce this further year on year.
For what it's worth I would make outdoor heated swimming pools illegal. Massive carbon footprint and exclusively for a minute percentage of the the population.

IanMK wrote:

I'm not sure about lifting the fuel duty freeze. It obviously works if you simultaneously improve public and active travel otherwise it just hits the poorest the hardest. As we know the global issue is with the carbon footprint of the richest. An immediate ban of new cars with CO2 emissions > 130g/km potentially has a better impact and you can reduce this further year on year. For what it's worth I would make outdoor heated swimming pools illegal. Massive carbon footprint and exclusively for a minute percentage of the the population.

I saw an estimate that the freeze has "cost" the Treasury more than £100bn, so surely some of that money could have been used to help the poorest?

hawkinspeter wrote:

.....

I saw an estimate that the freeze has "cost" the Treasury more than £100bn, so surely some of that money could have been used to help the poorest?

or to improve public or active transport provision

Captain Badger wrote:

or to improve public or active transport provision

Well active transport provision pays for itself pretty quickly with improved population health, reduced pollution etc.

hawkinspeter wrote:

Captain Badger wrote:

or to improve public or active transport provision

Well active transport provision pays for itself pretty quickly with improved population health, reduced pollution etc.

Absolutement mon frere, mais il usually stymied par lack du l'argent pour cost upfront.

IanMK wrote:

Porkie McSword wrote:

If this government lifted the fuel duty freeze it would only be to line their own pockets.

I'm not sure about lifting the fuel duty freeze. It obviously works if you simultaneously improve public and active travel otherwise it just hits the poorest the hardest. As we know the global issue is with the carbon footprint of the richest. An immediate ban of new cars with CO2 emissions > 130g/km potentially has a better impact and you can reduce this further year on year. For what it's worth I would make outdoor heated swimming pools illegal. Massive carbon footprint and exclusively for a minute percentage of the the population.

The "but it will hit the poorest hardest" argument is worth examining.

Whatever changes are made normally hit those really struggling harder than those who aren't. Maybe we have two questions here then:

a) Do we need to make urgent changes around sustainability (and liveability)? If so we should start.

b) Given (a) how can we make the endpoint and the transition fair - indeed attractive? "Cake tomorrow and jam this afternoon" is more likely to motivate than handing out hair shirts.

There's nothing stopping us making a more equal society at any time. "The  rich are always with us"...

Our "poorest" are often rather priviledged compared to the global average in many ways. That obviously doesn't stop them being in a miserable position.  However if we need to look more globally at how much resources we use and how we distribute them this is important.

Finally - is this actually being used as an excuse to allow the better off to avoid any change which might reduce their living standards? We often see this from people who are not disadvantaged and normally don't seem to be terribly concerned to change the conditions of those who are. Bit like the sudden "selective concern" around LTNs / cycle lanes inconveniencing the disabled and blocking ambulances.

IanMK wrote:

Porkie McSword wrote:

If this government lifted the fuel duty freeze it would only be to line their own pockets.

I'm not sure about lifting the fuel duty freeze. It obviously works if you simultaneously improve public and active travel otherwise it just hits the poorest the hardest. As we know the global issue is with the carbon footprint of the richest. An immediate ban of new cars with CO2 emissions > 130g/km potentially has a better impact and you can reduce this further year on year. For what it's worth I would make outdoor heated swimming pools illegal. Massive carbon footprint and exclusively for a minute percentage of the the population.

Banning outdoor heated swimming pools would probably have little direct climate impact relative to a e.g. small squeeze on car use. (Worth a quick calculation though...) Going beyond that point it could have value as a political statement. I suspect the same reasons which lead to their widespread adoption would see some other potentially ecologically unsound fad appearing in their place though.

Youre joking right ?

I personally am loving this year's new series, guys! I I know some will say it's jumped the shark but I feel that now we've broken the fourth wall this can only get better.

nicmason wrote:

Youre joking right ?

The irony is that Fartage himself is vigorously opposed to active travel and his latest grift focuses very much on opposing cycle lanes.

Eton Rifle wrote:

The irony is that Fartage himself is vigorously opposed to active travel and his latest grift focuses very much on opposing cycle lanes.

You'll never guess who is on BBC's Question Time this week; again.

Nick Griffin?

Actually, Nick Griffin's appearance on QT revealed him for the thick racist that he is and destroyed what little was left of his reputation. Thing is, the other guests and the audience have to be free to challenge. That never happened with Fartage's appearances during Brexit. The frog-faced clown was on a dozen times or more and not a single pro-EU MEP got invited. 

Was there ever a Hitler parody of dimwit right wing populist Farage, like the excellent one which included similarly disposed Griffin?

wtjs wrote:

Was there ever a Hitler parody of dimwit right wing populist Farage, like the excellent one which included similarly disposed Griffin?

Isn't he already a self-parody?

chrisonatrike wrote:

Nick Griffin?

Nah, too reasonable, and less damaging.....

eburtthebike wrote:

Eton Rifle wrote:

The irony is that Fartage himself is vigorously opposed to active travel and his latest grift focuses very much on opposing cycle lanes.

You'll never guess who is on BBC's Question Time this week; again.

What's that? About his twentieth appearance, despite not even being an MP?

QT used to be a respected programme. Just a clown show these days.

Eton Rifle wrote:

What's that? About his twentieth appearance, despite not even being an MP?

QT used to be a respected programme. Just a clown show these days.

Mate, most things about Britain are a clown show these days, which is why I no longer live there!

MattieKempy wrote:

Mate, most things about Britain are a clown show these days, which is why I no longer live there!

I completely disagree with that - clown shows are often organised