- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Louise Haigh, Labour shadow transport secretary (credit - Cycling UK)Is Labour’s shadow transport secretary cycling’s latest convert? Louise Haigh says e-bikes “make all the difference”, months after backlash over controversial cycling comments
Just over three months since cyclists, campaigners, and road safety figures roundly criticised her controversial comments on active travel, Labour’s shadow transport secretary Louise Haigh has finally got round to travelling through her Sheffield constituency by e-bike, which she says has the potential to “make all the difference” in encouraging even those wary of the city’s hills to cycle more.
Earlier this month, Haigh, the MP for Sheffield Heeley, joined some of her constituents, representatives from Cycling UK, and three-time Olympic gold medallist and South Yorkshire’s active travel commissioner Ed Clancy for a ride up some of the city’s steepest climbs, as well as through its bus gates and school streets.
Before the cycle, Haigh – the politician likely to be tasked with heading the next government on issues of transport – was also briefed by Cycling UK on a recent report by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), which made the case for greater investment in cycling and walking infrastructure to help “unlock” several health, well-being, economic, and environmental benefits.
The IPPR’s report also noted the current “chronic underfunding” of active travel in the UK, highlighting that just two per cent of the transport budget in England goes towards cycling and walking infrastructure, and that between 2016 and 2021 £24 per head was spent each year in London, but just £10 in England outside the capital (a figure that has now plummeted to £1 per head, according to recent estimates). Meanwhile, spending on roads in England is equivalent to £148 per person per year.
The shadow transport secretary’s eagerness to cycle around her constituency – where almost one in three households do not own a car – also comes in the wake of her controversial comments concerning cycling in November.
During an interview with the Independent, Haigh was asked if she cycled, to which she responded: “God no, have you been to Sheffield?”, a comment she has since described as a “light-hearted joke” based on her “being unfit and the size of Sheffield’s hills”.
Despite her attempt to brush it off, one social media user responded to Haigh’s joke by asking, quite prophetically it turns out, “For God’s sake can an e-bike manufacturer please make sure everyone in government or future government has actually tried one and found out for themselves how great they are and how cheap to run?”
And just three months later, the Labour MP now appears to have changed her tune on cycling, and her ability to ride a bike in Sheffield, arguing – like the social media user from November – that the use of e-bikes could in fact help motivate people to cycle more.
“Sheffield is known for its hills and that may be a barrier for some people who might be thinking of choosing cycling to get around,” she said.
“It was great to be out with Cycling UK and to see how much easier it is to cycle when you have an extra boost from an e-bike, it makes all the difference.”
Haigh also praised Cycling UK’s ‘Making cycling e-asier’ initiative, which provides free one-month-long e-cycle loans to people in Sheffield and other locations across England, while also offering skills and confidence training.
7,000 have taken part in either the e-bike loan initiative or the charity’s community ride-based Big Bike Revival schemes over the past 12 months in Sheffield alone. The initiatives, Cycling UK notes, also help encourage underrepresented groups to take up cycling – 53 per cent of participants are female, 15 per cent are from a black or ethnic minority background, and 25 per cent were from the city’s most economically deprived areas.
“It’s great that residents now have the opportunity to try an e-bike before they buy one, making cycling more accessible for all,” Haigh said.
Meanwhile, Tom Collister, a Heeley constituent and coordinator of Sheffield Cycling 4 All, which provides adapted cycles and organised rides for people with disabilities, added: “E-cycling has opened up the option of cycling in Sheffield for many people who previously wouldn’t have been able to cycle.
“It was great that Louise Haigh could experience for herself just how much difference the e-assist makes.
“Hopefully this insight will enable her to better advocate for improved infrastructure and more e-cycle loan and low-cost purchase schemes. Hills no longer need to be a reason for not cycling in Sheffield.”
> "A light-hearted joke": Labour shadow transport secretary addresses backlash over cycling comments
In November, as noted above, Haigh was criticised by active travel campaigners for her less than effusive remarks about cycling and other traffic calming measures during her Independent interview.
These included claiming that prime minister Rishi Sunak had “demeaned himself” by saying the Labour Party would pursue a war on motorists, arguing that many of the most-criticised 20mph and low traffic neighbourhood schemes were implemented by Conservative-run local authorities, and stating that if elected there would be no Labour Party diktat that people should walk or cycle more.
After a backlash on social media, which saw Dr Robert Davis, the Chair of the Road Danger Reduction Forum, argue that Haigh’s comments, if true, “would make Labour less responsible than [Boris] Johnson’s government” on active travel, Haigh addressed this criticism, insisting in an interview with the Star that active travel is “essential for economic growth” and “every pound invested delivers a huge return in benefits”.
She also clarified her stance that Labour “believes it is for local communities to decide” if certain active travel schemes are suitable, something the Conservatives have wanted to “dictate to local communities”.
“The prime minister wants to dictate to local communities where they should and shouldn’t have schemes that boost active travel,” she said.
“Labour believes it is for local communities to decide and Westminster should be there to support sensible decisions on boosting active travel, reducing congestion, and improving communities.”
Following the shadow transport secretary’s spin around Sheffield this month, Sarah Mitchell, Cycling UK’s CEO, said: “We were so pleased to meet Louise and discuss the many benefits cycling brings as outlined in a recent report by the Institute for Public Policy Research – not just in terms of health, well-being and the climate, but also boosting economic growth, creating green jobs, and making our streets safer.
“E-cycles open those benefits up to even more people, especially in hilly places like Sheffield, and make getting around fun. What’s needed is for more people to have the option to choose walking or cycling for shorter journeys, and that requires investment in infrastructure, including separated cycle lanes.
“As the General Election draws nearer, we hope to hear all of the main political parties commit to enabling more people to move actively, and to realise all the benefits that brings.”
After obtaining a PhD, lecturing, and hosting a history podcast at Queen’s University Belfast, Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.
Latest Comments
- Bungle_52 1 hour 51 min ago
In case anyone missed it in yesterdays blog here are the two pevious articles. The second one contains the testimony from the driver....
- bensynnock 1 hour 55 min ago
My understanding is that you have to sue for some crazy amount or you won't be taken seriously.
- David9694 2 hours 10 sec ago
The old role was appointed at the Mayor's pleasure; is in addition to the permanent staff of the Combined Authority. I'm not sure if Adam was an...
- chrisonabike 2 hours 5 min ago
Ah... but which civilisation? If arguing from precedent (or even "moral ground") - with the benefit of almost no political, historical knowledge...
- WillPage 3 hours 25 min ago
Nothing says "welcoming environment" like uniformed thugs, umm I mean "security patrols " roaming the area.
- galibiervelo 4 hours 43 min ago
That is class news. Super bikes and vision. Bet there will be no stand at the Taiwan bike show next year! Big luck to all the team
- Destroyer666 5 hours 25 min ago
Pretty clearly stated several times in the text that the issue was not related just to his son. And besides, everybody watching the races could see...
- Rendel Harris 5 hours 41 min ago
All Fizik and Selle Italia saddles (though not all their other products) are made in Italy I believe, and their 3D printed models definitely are.
- chrisonabike 6 hours 7 min ago
If you're not on the road with a car, I bet its driver is much less likely to swerve into your space *. Because you're not "in the way"! (Any...
- mdavidford 6 hours 23 min ago
The problem with this argument, though, is that it's just not true....
Add new comment
15 comments
She doesn't look that large in the photos. Anyway, she is Transport Secretary now. Let's see what she does for cycling.
Riding an Islabikes eJanis there, very fitting.
Is Labour’s shadow transport secretary cycling’s latest convert?
Is she bollocks. Pull the other one it's got bells on.
Hopefully, this heralds a change in Labour's thinking and they'll finally sign up to funding Active Travel. That hope might be misplaced given their reverse ferret on the £38bn green funding.
Haigh also praised Cycling UK’s ‘Making cycling e-asier’ initiative, which provides free one-month-long e-cycle loans to people in Sheffield and other locations across England, while also offering skills and confidence training.
Brilliant, but why is that being done by a charity, not a combination of the DfT and Health ministries, and all over the country? Oh, I've just realised that if the DfT had anything to do with it costs would skyrocket and the failure rate too. But then, it would still be better value than building more roads.
The government did have a scheme several years ago where they subsidised 40% of the purchase of an eCargo bike. The Mayor of London had something similar. The problem with e-bikes (and I know as I have several and have had about 10 in total) is storage, especially in London. You need somewhere very safe to lock them when not in use. So the top three concerns with e-bikes (in my experience working with business and public) are; storage, cost, infrastructure.
They are expensive - but very quickly they recoup their cost as they are incredibly versatile; they save time, and save the cost of running a car or using public transport.
E-bikes alone are not the answer.
Well designed and maintained infrastructure will get more people cycling rather than e-assist, even in hilly Sheffield.
As Dan Walker can testify from cycling around the city, the biggest issue is poorly thought out, or non-existant infrastructure.
Until that changes cycling levels will never exceed the the minimal 2% it has been for decades.
True, but it doesn't need to be one or the other.
And I don't think you can under-estimate the value of e-bikes when it comes to encouraging those wary of the hills, or their own fitness, to give cycling a go. Same for those who don't want to turn up to work a sweaty mess, or whose commute involves a lot of otherwise frustrating stop-start, or cycling into a strong head-wind.
And it's also a helpful retort to those who insist investment in cycling infrastructure is a waste in hillier parts of the country.
Congratulations to Haig for swallowing her pride and giving cycling a go. And well done to Cycling UK for encouraging her to do so, and hopefully educating her in the ways of cycling, and not just the benefits of b-bikes. Hopefully her words of encouragement extend beyond the press release and she'll support local cycling groups and campaigns.
Well I don't want to detract from your general point (why not both), but if what we're aiming for is more than a say percentage point more journeys cycled than currently * then the infrastructure part (of sufficient quality, giving a convenient and safe network of routes) is absolutely necessary, if not sufficient. That's indicated by what's happened elsewhere as well as in the UK.
Arguably the "ebike" part is not necessary. It hasn't been in the past, or in other places. We're not the only place to have hills. However if it does help then good. And with everyone less accustomed to moving under their own power than ever plus the need for any change to accommodate both "can I make money off it" and "how will it allow me to demonstrate my status" (like cars) then I suspect this is the case.
* 1% to 2% - we doubled cycling! Bike boom!
As I see it, decent separated infrastructure helps to solve the "danger" issue with traffic (also the not wanting to tangle with traffic as it's nasty issue). E-bikes solve a different set of issues - the effort/fitness/speed ones. As I recall, most people state that it's the traffic danger that is the main obstacle to them starting to cycle places.
The sniffiness from many regular cyclists towards e-bikes is creating an obstacle to their take-up. Too many still talk about them as if using an e-bike is cheating, and too often I hear phrases from cycling advocates along the lines of 'OK for the elderly, I suppose'.
It's all very well wanting to get more attention onto improving cycling infrastructure, but if we want more people cycling, it's unhelpful when discussions about the benefits of e-bikes are hijacked by people wanting to talk about infrastructure instead and adds to the vibe that e-bikes, and those who would be encouraged to cycle with one aren't valid.
Being cynical, it's likely this MP only went for the trip for the photo opportunity and so she can talk about it the next time she's challenged on her cycling credentials. However, there is a chance that she, along with others who give cycling a go because there was the opportunity to use an e-bike, and it will now open her eyes to the problems face by all cyclists.
If we want more resources (political and financial) allocated to good cycling infrastructure then every ally counts, and being able to point out that the infrastructure can be used by as wide a group as possible is important. That might be the elderly or disabled, but the people I know who use e-bikes are almost all commuting longer distances (sometimes with hills and/or strong head-wind), and people with bad knees. Most were regular cyclists, but would not be cycling so much now if they didn't have a bit of assistance.
I agree with your general points, but I don't think most people (i.e. non-enthusiast cyclists) particularly care if some cyclists look down on them for "cheating". Personally, I'm all for e-bikes though I haven't ridden one yet (I'm happy enough on my acoustic version) but am more than happy to see people zooming around on them (it can be fun trying and failing to catch up to them). Here in Bristol, there's lots of illegal e-bikes (e.g. gliding up hills without pedalling) and I think they're a much better alternative than yet more cars on the roads.
Mrs HawkinsPeter has recently been trying out the TIER e-bikes for commuting and she loves them. She was previously doing a mix between occasional driving (she hates traffic though), catching the train and using the VOI e-scooters (VOI were the company running them before TIER took over). She used to cycle, but fell off the wagon and is hoping to build her fitness with e-bikes so she can get back on her bike (I bet she ends up buying an e-bike instead).
Now the advantage of pushing for separated infrastructure is that it helps with all the e-scooters and e-bikes as well. I think most people find those fun to use, so it's more a case of making them easily accessible (as it is in Bristol with the TIER ones) than having to put a lot of resources into promoting them. When people see a lot of them zooming around, they get curious about them. Does seem to be mainly the younger demographic though.
However, I do want to see mainstream media outlets pushing the case for EVs that aren't car shaped, but their strings are being pulled by big businesses and only ever promote big heavy car ones. It would help if the government wasn't completely useless in pushing for Active Travel.
Aren't you supposed to sit on the bike and tow the wagon, rather than the other way around?
I took it to mean she was cycling on top of a wagon, but that requires a very big wagon or a very short ride!
I agree with your general points, but I don't think most people (i.e. non-enthusiast cyclists) particularly care if some cyclists look down on them for "cheating"
True- I am guilty myself but, fortunately, I have found that nobody pays any attention to my opinions and those people chatting as they overtake me on hills don't know what they are
Some truth here. And while I think I espouse "much better than driving" and "excellent to help some people cycle / keep cycling" it seems there's still a part of me which isn't fully in favour. I noticed this when looking at an article on the new Dutch figures where it's apparent that essentially there is modal shift not from driving to cycling but within cycling. Essentially the amount of cycling has stayed static but there's now a significant and apparently still growing fraction done on eBikes.
To quote your latter point here:
All things remaining equal I think the effect of eBikes on the number of trips switched to cycling by those who don't currently cycle - while welcome - will be small. Hence ...
I understand - and we can do more than one thing - but again (for reasons above) if you want more people cycling "it's the infra" (and parking, and reducing driving) above everything else (policing, driver training ...).
EDIT wonder if your comment about "hijacked" could be turned on its head? "Has this discussion which could be about facilitating people cycling by giving them safe and convenient spaces in which to do so, or slowing / reducing motor traffic - been diverted from tackling the big issue (taking from driving to give to active travel) or hijacked by 'we can sell more expensive things / look 'new tech' and it's 'clean' "?
Consider - people have been able to buy e-bikes for at least a decade in the UK (yes - they've improved massively and also become more salient...) Has this lead to a "bike boom"?
For the small numbers involved, I would agree that perhaps "perception" is a thing. Currently people may still tend to feel like they're "joining a tribe / out group" if they take up cycling. So if that group isn't welcoming to e.g. ebikers that's a turn off.
But is that more off-putting than just mainstream everyone decrying cyclists as at best odd?
Agreed to the latter part, very much. It's not about "cyclists" it's about active travel and independent mobility (and can be an improvement over "but those with disabilities can / need to drive").