FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.
Err no
They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?
Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.
Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.
They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
I find horse riders ok. Youre judging the mood of the horse not the rider so out in the sticks we always slow down and pass slowly. Roumd my area he horse riders always pull in at the nearest drive or layby and let traffic pass.
The only dnagerous ones are usually nervy horses or inexperienced riders. But L Plate riders are usually accompanied by an expeirenced adult.
I have an odd experience with that; when I am hiking, I often have my walking poles strapped to the side of my rucksack if I don't need them. Horses *really* don't like this, for some reason, and it seems to spook them. If I have the poles in my hands they seem fine, which is counter-intuitive. I chatted to a rider about this once, and she said that horses sometimes get spooked by rucksacks.
Flags on recumbent cycles or handcycles - they really spook horses.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
When I was in Connecticut early this month we stayed at an AirBnb in Branford which is on the coast a few miles outside New Haven. Semi-rural, no buses, a station but miles from the centre. My wife's folks live in a small house in New Haven so we spend a lot of time shuttling to and fro the 10 or so miles. For the first time we didn't hire a car but got the train down from Boston and relied on Uber when we got to CT which turned out to be (a) cheaper and (b) more convenient. Even in sleepy Branford, one was at your door within 5 minutes of ordering. They don't have Uber in Kent yet, but I saw the future.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
That is a disgraceful comment.
Why? Or are you saying accidents are always fully the responsibility of the non-cyclist?
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected.
Ahh. I get it. While pounding the roads on your bike in all weathers you developed an enduring and intense dislike and resentment of the motorists passing you all the time.
If indeed you did travel four miles to the local Spar by bike for a curly wurly.
I'm regularly held up by car drivers when cycling round Edinburgh. They should stop being so selfish and leave the car at home.
We lived in Fairmilehead and my daily journey to St Andrews Square was by bus
Even today cycling to and from work to Fairmilehead would be unrealistic, unless you are a tour de France cyclist
It's 5 miles. That's about 20mins to 30 mins on a bike.
It's roughly the same by car.
It maybe if it was flat, but it is far from that especially past the Braids all the way to Fairmilehead
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected.
Ahh. I get it. While pounding the roads on your bike in all weathers you developed an enduring and intense dislike and resentment of the motorists passing you all the time.
If indeed you did travel four miles to the local Spar by bike for a curly wurly.
I'm regularly held up by car drivers when cycling round Edinburgh. They should stop being so selfish and leave the car at home.
We lived in Fairmilehead and my daily journey to St Andrews Square was by bus
Even today cycling to and from work to Fairmilehead would be unrealistic, unless you are a tour de France cyclist
Google maps right now: Car 32 mins. Bike 26 mins. Bus 41 mins.
Only a fool wouldn't cycle that.
Electric boosted cycle with decent gears; it's hardly Mont Ventoux. The worst part is presumably from the Canny Man up to Wrichtshooses but otherwise it's a fairly steady gradient overall.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.
Err no
They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?
Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.
Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.
They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
Sorry but that's as about as representative as @Alanbrooke post regarding cyclists "mowing people down" in his village. Most horse riders don't want to be on the road for a particularly long time and are only doing it out of a necessity to get to another field or hacking ground. We could probably find anecdotal tales of inconsiderate mobility scooter use too.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
To what road safety benefit on rural roads?
The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.
The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.
Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.
Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
Spreading out increases overtaking distance and is more dangerous.
The speed limit does not apply to cyclists.
Cycling has fallen by 8x since the 1950s.
The vast majority of cyclists hold driving licences and have insurance (usually through their home insurance).
100% of your post was nonsense.
Cyclists regularly mowing down pedestrians does sound bad though.
Sure. But that's also nonsense.
Between 2005 and 2018, 542 pedestrians on pavements were killed by drivers. 6 by cyclists.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected.
Ahh. I get it. While pounding the roads on your bike in all weathers you developed an enduring and intense dislike and resentment of the motorists passing you all the time.
If indeed you did travel four miles to the local Spar by bike for a curly wurly.
I'm regularly held up by car drivers when cycling round Edinburgh. They should stop being so selfish and leave the car at home.
We lived in Fairmilehead and my daily journey to St Andrews Square was by bus
Even today cycling to and from work to Fairmilehead would be unrealistic, unless you are a tour de France cyclist
It's 5 miles. That's about 20mins to 30 mins on a bike.
It's roughly the same by car.
It maybe if it was flat, but it is far from that especially past the Braids all the way to Fairmilehead
Google maps right now: Car 32 mins. Bike 26 mins. Bus 41 mins.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected.
Ahh. I get it. While pounding the roads on your bike in all weathers you developed an enduring and intense dislike and resentment of the motorists passing you all the time.
If indeed you did travel four miles to the local Spar by bike for a curly wurly.
I'm regularly held up by car drivers when cycling round Edinburgh. They should stop being so selfish and leave the car at home.
We lived in Fairmilehead and my daily journey to St Andrews Square was by bus
Even today cycling to and from work to Fairmilehead would be unrealistic, unless you are a tour de France cyclist
Google maps right now: Car 32 mins. Bike 26 mins. Bus 41 mins.
Only a fool wouldn't cycle that.
So those unable to cycle due to mobility or even confidence are 'fools'
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.
Err no
They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?
Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.
Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.
They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
I find horse riders ok. Youre judging the mood of the horse not the rider so out in the sticks we always slow down and pass slowly. Roumd my area he horse riders always pull in at the nearest drive or layby and let traffic pass.
The only dnagerous ones are usually nervy horses or inexperienced riders. But L Plate riders are usually accompanied by an expeirenced adult.
I have an odd experience with that; when I am hiking, I often have my walking poles strapped to the side of my rucksack if I don't need them. Horses *really* don't like this, for some reason, and it seems to spook them. If I have the poles in my hands they seem fine, which is counter-intuitive. I chatted to a rider about this once, and she said that horses sometimes get spooked by rucksacks.
Our dog reacts to stuff on or above people's head: head torch, umbrella, large hat. Not a big issue. He just barks, but remains friendly, although if you don't know him that isn't obvious so we are always apologetic.
I note with the exception of @TOPPING there seems to be an anti cyclist theme. My experience is cyclists are normally considerate and friendly. I am always. Of course you get the odd jerk. You always will.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
Lol, when was the last time you rode a bike on the roads. Most car drivers pass safely - but on a ride you'll get maybe a few tens to thousand cars passing (Depending on ride length of course). If say 1% pass too closely it'll be the bike ending worse off if the car comes in too quickly after the pass or one of the rider/drivers hits a pothole. It's guaranteed to be pretty much always the drivers fault tbh.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.
Err no
They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?
Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.
Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.
They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected.
Ahh. I get it. While pounding the roads on your bike in all weathers you developed an enduring and intense dislike and resentment of the motorists passing you all the time.
If indeed you did travel four miles to the local Spar by bike for a curly wurly.
I'm regularly held up by car drivers when cycling round Edinburgh. They should stop being so selfish and leave the car at home.
We lived in Fairmilehead and my daily journey to St Andrews Square was by bus
Even today cycling to and from work to Fairmilehead would be unrealistic, unless you are a tour de France cyclist
Google maps right now: Car 32 mins. Bike 26 mins. Bus 41 mins.
Only a fool wouldn't cycle that.
So those unable to cycle due to mobility or even confidence are 'fools'
Disabled people have lower rates of car access than the general population.
For those disabled people who do have a car, the best thing for them is for able-bodied folk to stop needlessly clogging up the roads.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
"Some, might" vs "many, no doubt" certainly communicates an assumption.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
To what road safety benefit on rural roads?
The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.
The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
Yep. Plus camber gets a fair few.
The mad design of road humps is an issue.
Often they are those “mound” ones - which are always place to encourage drivers to swerve out of their lane.
Many humps are so sharp that they penalise small cars, mopeds and bikes severely. Way back, when I was living in Hampstead, a nasty outbreak of such bumps led all the rich people to start buy giant American c
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
To what road safety benefit on rural roads?
The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.
The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.
Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.
Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
Spreading out increases overtaking distance and is more dangerous.
The speed limit does not apply to cyclists.
Cycling has fallen by 8x since the 1950s.
The vast majority of cyclists hold driving licences and have insurance (usually through their home insurance).
100% of your post was nonsense.
Cycling registration will happen, but not for these reasons.
While I was away, there was a collision between a rider of a souped up electric bike and a child on a bike, locally. Head on in a segregated bike lane. Child is ok. Electric bike rider left the scene. According to eye witnesses, he was exceeding 20mph, and had been pulling wheelies.
Since there will be all kinds of games played registering everything on 2 wheels will be the simple answer.
The "souped up electric bike" is a motorcycle or moped, and already subject to registration, insurance and the rider wearing prescribed safety gear such as an approved motorcycle helmet.
An interesting point is that taking it outside the pedal cycle definition (ie assistance at >15.5mph) means that the rider has lost the liability insurance cover from which the vast majority of cyclists benefit under their home insurance policy.
For two wheelers more widely, the DFT - even under our recent run of nutty Transport Ministers - is clear that it will not happen; they have said so to the Parliamentary Transport Select Committee - immediately after Grant Shapps was tickling the Daily Mail's crotch with the idea during last summer's silly season.
In the end, there is little benefit and a huge cost.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
Any Tory who whines about an anti-car narrative is channelling Conservative HQ at the moment, whether this is intentional or not. The next step is to stop all spending on cycle ways and active stuff because cyclists are a bunch of selfish kamikaze woke types. Or so the narrative is shaping out.
On the topic of “Is the state evil or just indifferent?”
The problem is, I think, the Mass State.
Something that is interesting, is how close to the ground sensible rulers were in past times. Medieval kings used to hear petitions from peasants and serfs on a regular basis.
Now we live in the age of “90% of 9 million people are OK. So all good here.”
In the age of the Mass State, you are a statistic. And the rulers and operators of the Mass State are innumerate.
So a percentage of people are wrongly sent to prison by corrupt policing. A percentage of people are denied banking at the drop of a hat. “But 97% are ok!”
Some politicians have wobbled about being like John Lewis. What they are actually, dimly, referring to, was a policy and training by John Lewis of their staff. Which was to be generous to customers & never leave them hanging - the infamous “no more I can do”
What this is about is creating a “tree” of outcomes. Each leaf is a resolution for the customer. No one is left hanging.
Changing to such a consumer focused State would require a massive cultural and structural change. But it is what people thing they deserve in the 21st cent.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
Until you can summon a self driving electric car within a minute even in the most rural areas people will still have cars, even if self driving electric vehicles are the way in cities and suburbs
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected.
Ahh. I get it. While pounding the roads on your bike in all weathers you developed an enduring and intense dislike and resentment of the motorists passing you all the time.
If indeed you did travel four miles to the local Spar by bike for a curly wurly.
I'm regularly held up by car drivers when cycling round Edinburgh. They should stop being so selfish and leave the car at home.
We lived in Fairmilehead and my daily journey to St Andrews Square was by bus
Even today cycling to and from work to Fairmilehead would be unrealistic, unless you are a tour de France cyclist
Google maps right now: Car 32 mins. Bike 26 mins. Bus 41 mins.
Only a fool wouldn't cycle that.
So those unable to cycle due to mobility or even confidence are 'fools'
Disabled people have lower rates of car access than the general population.
For those disabled people who do have a car, the best thing for them is for able-bodied folk to stop needlessly clogging up the roads.
You do not need to be clinically disabled to be unable to use a bicycle
I think if you came to our area you would be very surprised how few cyclists there are on our roads
Without doubt, the most inconsiderate road users are travellers in traditional, horse-drawn caravans going up the A65 to Appleby horse fair. No chance to overtake between Skipton and Settle as they move at 5mph.
On Sunak’s oil bonanza, isn’t the point to put a wedge between Labour and the Greens/LDs/Corbynites when Starmer gives an ambiguous response? Chatting to my offspring who are Labour members, the failure to drop the two-child limit on child benefit has put them on the brink of staying at home for the GE: “what’s the point if it’ll just be another Tory government if Starmer wins”. I tried to make the point that there are no circumstances where it is better to be in opposition that government.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
Any Tory who whines about an anti-car narrative is channelling Conservative HQ at the moment, whether this is intentional or not. The next step is to stop all spending on cycle ways and active stuff because cyclists are a bunch of selfish kamikaze woke types. Or so the narrative is shaping out.
The flip side is when Labour do get in, we can claim that people voted for:
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
Any Tory who whines about an anti-car narrative is channelling Conservative HQ at the moment, whether this is intentional or not. The next step is to stop all spending on cycle ways and active stuff because cyclists are a bunch of selfish kamikaze woke types. Or so the narrative is shaping out.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.
Err no
They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?
Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.
Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.
They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
Sorry but that's as about as representative as @Alanbrooke post regarding cyclists "mowing people down" in his village. Most horse riders don't want to be on the road for a particularly long time and are only doing it out of a necessity to get to another field or hacking ground. We could probably find anecdotal tales of inconsiderate mobility scooter use too.
Saw a fair amount of that when I was in Yarmouth a couple of years ago.
Without doubt, the most inconsiderate road users are travellers in traditional, horse-drawn caravans going up the A65 to Appleby horse fair. No chance to overtake between Skipton and Settle as they move at 5mph.
On Sunak’s oil bonanza, isn’t the point to put a wedge between Labour and the Greens/LDs/Corbynites when Starmer gives an ambiguous response? Chatting to my offspring who are Labour members, the failure to drop the two-child limit on child benefit has put them on the brink of staying at home for the GE: “what’s the point if it’ll just be another Tory government if Starmer wins”. I tried to make the point that there are no circumstances where it is better to be in opposition that government.
IT'll have interesting effects in Scotland where SLAB is already out of step with Labour HQ over various things - Brexit, Trident, etc. etc. It risks losing voters to the Greens or SNP.
We live in a small town; very small. In fact, there’s a bit of a row about whether it’s a town or a village! We have one small supermarket, which is away from the centre. I can no longer drive, and using a cycle went a couple of years ago, due to ageing issues. The only way my wife can get a weekly shop in is by using the car since she too is elderly and can’t carry heavy bags very far. We are thinking of using the supermarkets delivery service!
Without doubt, the most inconsiderate road users are travellers in traditional, horse-drawn caravans going up the A65 to Appleby horse fair. No chance to overtake between Skipton and Settle as they move at 5mph.
On Sunak’s oil bonanza, isn’t the point to put a wedge between Labour and the Greens/LDs/Corbynites when Starmer gives an ambiguous response? Chatting to my offspring who are Labour members, the failure to drop the two-child limit on child benefit has put them on the brink of staying at home for the GE: “what’s the point if it’ll just be another Tory government if Starmer wins”. I tried to make the point that there are no circumstances where it is better to be in opposition that government.
Of course the horse drawn vehicle was around long before the car, and looks set fair still to be there, along with Appleby fair, well after its demise.
Surely the issue is over regulation. AML and similar makes opening any account, or even simply changing signatories a drawn out pain in the arse, as I am finding out as Trustee of my church.
Like so much of our regulation, I remain unconvinced that the benefit outweighs the harm.
It used to be so much easier. A friend of mine in the Eighties opened an account with a high St bank in the name of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov just for a laugh with the chequebook.
In Broxtowe I once tried to move my home branch to a local one, from the London branch where I'd set it up 30 years earlier. I was pretty well-known to the branch (partly through being their MP) but they strongly advised against it, and produced voluminous paperwork that would be needed for little real benefit. I gave in, and still bank in s branch where I've not been for decades.
On the topic of “Is the state evil or just indifferent?”
The problem is, I think, the Mass State.
Something that is interesting, is how close to the ground sensible rulers were in past times. Medieval kings used to hear petitions from peasants and serfs on a regular basis.
I think you mean something like "In medieval times it was possible for subjects to petition the Crown and even peasants and serfs sometimes used it."
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
No. It’s a perfectly fair comment unless you think cyclists can never be to blame for the accidents they are involved in and it is always the car drivers at fault.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
To what road safety benefit on rural roads?
The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.
The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.
Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.
Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
A couple of cyclists I know in clubs around here tell me that their fellow members consider using a bell to be effete.
A fucking "bell"? You might as well have tassels on the end of the handlebars.
Competitive cycling is very elitist and that's the way we like it. I've seen people derided in vociferous terms for riding with anything other than red (ie zero float) SPD-SL cleats in their shoes.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
Any Tory who whines about an anti-car narrative is channelling Conservative HQ at the moment, whether this is intentional or not. The next step is to stop all spending on cycle ways and active stuff because cyclists are a bunch of selfish kamikaze woke types. Or so the narrative is shaping out.
Sorry but that is the other extreme
16 million is being spent on a dedicated cycle track between Llandudno Junction and Betws y Coed and that is the way to go
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
Any Tory who whines about an anti-car narrative is channelling Conservative HQ at the moment, whether this is intentional or not. The next step is to stop all spending on cycle ways and active stuff because cyclists are a bunch of selfish kamikaze woke types. Or so the narrative is shaping out.
The flip side is when Labour do get in, we can claim that people voted for:
Doesn't affect Sunak of course - he has his helicopter.
In England, more precisely: but those are pretty conventional policies up here too, and it all adds to the debate. Though it would be silly if Mr Murray got voted in again in defence of the Morningside MRAP.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.
Err no
They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?
Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.
Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.
They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
I find horse riders ok. Youre judging the mood of the horse not the rider so out in the sticks we always slow down and pass slowly. Roumd my area he horse riders always pull in at the nearest drive or layby and let traffic pass.
The only dnagerous ones are usually nervy horses or inexperienced riders. But L Plate riders are usually accompanied by an expeirenced adult.
I have an odd experience with that; when I am hiking, I often have my walking poles strapped to the side of my rucksack if I don't need them. Horses *really* don't like this, for some reason, and it seems to spook them. If I have the poles in my hands they seem fine, which is counter-intuitive. I chatted to a rider about this once, and she said that horses sometimes get spooked by rucksacks.
Our dog reacts to stuff on or above people's head: head touch, umbrella, large hat. Not a big issue. He just barks, but remains friendly, although if you don't know him that isn't obvious so we are always apologetic.
I note with the exception of @TOPPING there seems to be an anti cyclist theme. My experience is cyclists are normally considerate and friendly. I am always. Of course you get the odd jerk. You always will.
Part of the trouble is that "cyclist" covers everything from lycra-clad racers to Orwell's old maid on her way to Holy Communion. Apart from the vehicle being somewhat similar, those really are two different categories of road user.
The other part is the whole tragedy of the commons thing. My car driving is useful and pleasurable, everyone else's creates congestion. (And there's very little evidence that you can create enough road capacity to deal with that- it always fills up, and kills towns and cities as you add road and parking space.)
Collectively, life works better for all of us if we do more of our business locally, and walk or cycle the short distances to do that. If we do that, small shops are more sustainable and don't have to charge such premium prices. (Musing on this at the moment, becuase our neighbourhood butcher looks like it's closing for good.)
Same for public transport into town- if we all use it when we can, it's more likely to be viable to run a quality service. That isn't to say "don't use cars"; it's about using the right tool for the right job.
Unfortunately, the path from gaining the freedom to use a car to losing the freedom to not have one is very smooth and has no boundaries. So something that starts as a good thing oozes into something bad.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
Any Tory who whines about an anti-car narrative is channelling Conservative HQ at the moment, whether this is intentional or not. The next step is to stop all spending on cycle ways and active stuff because cyclists are a bunch of selfish kamikaze woke types. Or so the narrative is shaping out.
Sorry but that is the other extreme
16 million is being spent on a dedicated cycle track between Llandudno Junction and Betws y Coed and that is the way to go
By that nice Mr Drakeford, though. Not the Tories.
"I'll be flying as I normally would" - Rishi on the way to Scotland.
From 'Fuck Business' to 'Fuck The Planet'. What are the Conservatives actually *for*? Must check the manifesto they were elected with...
While this plays with a loud minority who would be voting Tory anyway, I don't see this new stridently pro-pollution outlook actually winning the voters they need to reach, outside of some tactical seats where the wider narrative will help the local candidate.
The only vaguely clever thing about it is that it will expand the Green vote on Labour's vulnerable tactical left - however I dare say this will end up hurting the Tories just as much, if not more - we've seen a lot of Blue-Green switching in rural councils.
Mad as it may seem, cyclists often drive cars as well. And many people who drive cars also work in the public sector and want a decent pay rise and/or strongly support Net Zero and/or back speed reduction measures and/or voted Remain and so on. The Tories’ Uxbridge-induced pivot to standing up for “the motorist” is, as Sunak’s Tweet of himself in Mrs T’s Rover strongly suggests, very much about appealing to a small sub-set of older, already right-leaning, voters who like to see themselves as victims. As a result, it’s highly unlikely to shift the electoral dial.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
To what road safety benefit on rural roads?
The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.
The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.
Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.
Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
A couple of cyclists I know in clubs around here tell me that their fellow members consider using a bell to be effete.
A fucking "bell"? You might as well have tassels on the end of the handlebars.
Competitive cycling is very elitist and that's the way we like it. I've seen people derided in vociferous terms for riding with anything other than red (ie zero float) SPD-SL cleats in their shoes.
We live in a small town; very small. In fact, there’s a bit of a row about whether it’s a town or a village! We have one small supermarket, which is away from the centre. I can no longer drive, and using a cycle went a couple of years ago, due to ageing issues. The only way my wife can get a weekly shop in is by using the car since she too is elderly and can’t carry heavy bags very far. We are thinking of using the supermarkets delivery service!
Good morning OKC
We have had a weekly delivery from Asda for years and it is excellent and would recommend you do take the opportunity of home deliveries
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
To what road safety benefit on rural roads?
The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.
The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
Yep. Plus camber gets a fair few.
The mad design of road humps is an issue.
Often they are those “mound” ones - which are always place to encourage drivers to swerve out of their lane.
Many humps are so sharp that they penalise small cars, mopeds and bikes severely. Way back, when I was living in Hampstead, a nasty outbreak of such bumps led all the rich people to start buy giant American c
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
To what road safety benefit on rural roads?
The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.
The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.
Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.
Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
Spreading out increases overtaking distance and is more dangerous.
The speed limit does not apply to cyclists.
Cycling has fallen by 8x since the 1950s.
The vast majority of cyclists hold driving licences and have insurance (usually through their home insurance).
100% of your post was nonsense.
Cycling registration will happen, but not for these reasons.
While I was away, there was a collision between a rider of a souped up electric bike and a child on a bike, locally. Head on in a segregated bike lane. Child is ok. Electric bike rider left the scene. According to eye witnesses, he was exceeding 20mph, and had been pulling wheelies.
Since there will be all kinds of games played registering everything on 2 wheels will be the simple answer.
The "souped up electric bike" is a motorcycle or moped, and already subject to registration, insurance and the rider wearing prescribed safety gear such as an approved motorcycle helmet.
An interesting point is that taking it outside the pedal cycle definition (ie assistance at >15.5mph) means that the rider has lost the liability insurance cover from which the vast majority of cyclists benefit under their home insurance policy.
For two wheelers more widely, the DFT - even under our recent run of nutty Transport Ministers - is clear that it will not happen; they have said so to the Parliamentary Transport Select Committee - immediately after Grant Shapps was tickling the Daily Mail's crotch with the idea during last summer's silly season.
In the end, there is little benefit and a huge cost.
Registering everything on two wheels is far, far from a simple answer anyway. And solves nothing.
A lot of the mopeds masquerading as bikes are simply illegal and shouldn't be available to buy.
Mad as it may seem, cyclists often drive cars as well. And many people who drive cars also work in the public sector and want a decent pay rise and/or strongly support Net Zero and/or back speed reduction measures and/or voted Remain and so on. The Tories’ Uxbridge-induced pivot to standing up for “the motorist” is, as Sunak’s Tweet of himself in Mrs T’s Rover strongly suggests, very much about appealing to a small sub-set of older, already right-leaning, voters who like to see themselves as victims. As a result, it’s highly unlikely to shift the electoral dial.
Oh, was that the car he was in? I had no idea. He was grinning in a way that reminded me of how I used to in Dad's Austin Mini with my plastic play steering wheel with a sucker on the end to fix to the windscreen.
"I'll be flying as I normally would" - Rishi on the way to Scotland.
From 'Fuck Business' to 'Fuck The Planet'. What are the Conservatives actually *for*? Must check the manifesto they were elected with...
While this plays with a loud minority who would be voting Tory anyway, I don't see this new stridently pro-pollution outlook actually winning the voters they need to reach, outside of some tactical seats where the wider narrative will help the local candidate.
The only vaguely clever thing about it is that it will expand the Green vote on Labour's vulnerable tactical left - however I dare say this will end up hurting the Tories just as much, if not more - we've seen a lot of Blue-Green switching in rural councils.
The more Faragist Sunak goes, the more he cements anti-Tory tactical votes.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
Any Tory who whines about an anti-car narrative is channelling Conservative HQ at the moment, whether this is intentional or not. The next step is to stop all spending on cycle ways and active stuff because cyclists are a bunch of selfish kamikaze woke types. Or so the narrative is shaping out.
Sorry but that is the other extreme
16 million is being spent on a dedicated cycle track between Llandudno Junction and Betws y Coed and that is the way to go
By that nice Mr Drakeford, though. Not the Tories.
Actually the 16 million is coming from The UK government
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
Any Tory who whines about an anti-car narrative is channelling Conservative HQ at the moment, whether this is intentional or not. The next step is to stop all spending on cycle ways and active stuff because cyclists are a bunch of selfish kamikaze woke types. Or so the narrative is shaping out.
Sorry but that is the other extreme
16 million is being spent on a dedicated cycle track between Llandudno Junction and Betws y Coed and that is the way to go
By that nice Mr Drakeford, though. Not the Tories.
That's still going ahead?
We should note that it is - I think - that is 80% UK Government money from when before they cut the active travel budget off at the ankles, to pay for freezing the tax on petrol for about a month.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
Any Tory who whines about an anti-car narrative is channelling Conservative HQ at the moment, whether this is intentional or not. The next step is to stop all spending on cycle ways and active stuff because cyclists are a bunch of selfish kamikaze woke types. Or so the narrative is shaping out.
Sorry but that is the other extreme
16 million is being spent on a dedicated cycle track between Llandudno Junction and Betws y Coed and that is the way to go
By that nice Mr Drakeford, though. Not the Tories.
Actually the 16 million is coming from The UK government
No, it's not - it's coming from taxpayers and the bank lenders. Ultra vires money, too, breaching the devolution legislation.
"I'll be flying as I normally would" - Rishi on the way to Scotland.
From 'Fuck Business' to 'Fuck The Planet'. What are the Conservatives actually *for*? Must check the manifesto they were elected with...
While this plays with a loud minority who would be voting Tory anyway, I don't see this new stridently pro-pollution outlook actually winning the voters they need to reach, outside of some tactical seats where the wider narrative will help the local candidate.
The only vaguely clever thing about it is that it will expand the Green vote on Labour's vulnerable tactical left - however I dare say this will end up hurting the Tories just as much, if not more - we've seen a lot of Blue-Green switching in rural councils.
Given the presence of Australian gurus on the Conservative campaign team, you would have thought that they would be more aware of the risk of losing teal-minded voters.
"I'll be flying as I normally would" - Rishi on the way to Scotland.
From 'Fuck Business' to 'Fuck The Planet'. What are the Conservatives actually *for*? Must check the manifesto they were elected with...
While this plays with a loud minority who would be voting Tory anyway, I don't see this new stridently pro-pollution outlook actually winning the voters they need to reach, outside of some tactical seats where the wider narrative will help the local candidate.
The only vaguely clever thing about it is that it will expand the Green vote on Labour's vulnerable tactical left - however I dare say this will end up hurting the Tories just as much, if not more - we've seen a lot of Blue-Green switching in rural councils.
Greens and Lab are just as much Fuck the Planet as the Cons. By their actions shall you know them. No one, not on here, for example, is thinking of any serious privation when it comes to oil and gas-derived products or those that use such products.
We live in a small town; very small. In fact, there’s a bit of a row about whether it’s a town or a village! We have one small supermarket, which is away from the centre. I can no longer drive, and using a cycle went a couple of years ago, due to ageing issues. The only way my wife can get a weekly shop in is by using the car since she too is elderly and can’t carry heavy bags very far. We are thinking of using the supermarkets delivery service!
Good morning OKC
We have had a weekly delivery from Asda for years and it is excellent and would recommend you do take the opportunity of home deliveries
Thanks; difficulty is that my wife is a ‘traditional’ shopper and likes to see what she is buying, and browse similar items to see if they give her ideas.
Mad as it may seem, cyclists often drive cars as well. And many people who drive cars also work in the public sector and want a decent pay rise and/or strongly support Net Zero and/or back speed reduction measures and/or voted Remain and so on. The Tories’ Uxbridge-induced pivot to standing up for “the motorist” is, as Sunak’s Tweet of himself in Mrs T’s Rover strongly suggests, very much about appealing to a small sub-set of older, already right-leaning, voters who like to see themselves as victims. As a result, it’s highly unlikely to shift the electoral dial.
Oh, was that the car he was in? I had no idea. He was grinning in a way that reminded me of how I used to in Dad's Austin Mini with my plastic play steering wheel with a sucker on the end to fix to the windscreen.
Surely he always grins that way, regardless of where he is and what he is doing.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
To what road safety benefit on rural roads?
The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.
The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.
Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.
Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
A couple of cyclists I know in clubs around here tell me that their fellow members consider using a bell to be effete.
A fucking "bell"? You might as well have tassels on the end of the handlebars.
Competitive cycling is very elitist and that's the way we like it. I've seen people derided in vociferous terms for riding with anything other than red (ie zero float) SPD-SL cleats in their shoes.
The People's Peleton.
Proper cycling, done the continental way, involves sitting bolt upright in one's work clothes on a basic contraption with a basket at the front and laptop bag slung over the shoulder, and pottering along wide dedicated cycle lanes through a nice flat city from one's 19th century apartment in the fashionable old textile workers' quarter to the small city centre office in time for morning coffee, occasionally terrorising an unsuspecting Anglo Saxon tourist who steps out without looking.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
Any Tory who whines about an anti-car narrative is channelling Conservative HQ at the moment, whether this is intentional or not. The next step is to stop all spending on cycle ways and active stuff because cyclists are a bunch of selfish kamikaze woke types. Or so the narrative is shaping out.
Sorry but that is the other extreme
16 million is being spent on a dedicated cycle track between Llandudno Junction and Betws y Coed and that is the way to go
By that nice Mr Drakeford, though. Not the Tories.
Actually the 16 million is coming from The UK government
No, it's not - it's coming from taxpayers and the bank lenders. Ultra vires money, too, breaching the devolution legislation.
Correcting my previous note, it is money from a bid to the Levelling-Up fund.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
It's a completely asinine suggestion. You can get vehicles you can summon today, they're called taxis. People don't generally want them unless they can't afford their own vehicle, are inebriated, or for extreme circumstances.
I got a train for the first time in about five years recently, to take my family to the airport. Taxi to get to the train station. Was far cheaper than spending £250 on parking at the Airport.
In those circumstances I'll take a taxi, but why the hell would I want one in normal circumstances? That's what Leon doesn't grasp.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
To what road safety benefit on rural roads?
The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.
The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.
Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.
Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
A couple of cyclists I know in clubs around here tell me that their fellow members consider using a bell to be effete.
A fucking "bell"? You might as well have tassels on the end of the handlebars.
Competitive cycling is very elitist and that's the way we like it. I've seen people derided in vociferous terms for riding with anything other than red (ie zero float) SPD-SL cleats in their shoes.
The People's Peleton.
Proper cycling, done the continental way, involves sitting bolt upright in one's work clothes on a basic contraption with a basket at the front and laptop bag slung over the shoulder, and pottering along wide dedicated cycle lanes through a nice flat city from one's 19th century apartment in the fashionable old textile workers' quarter to the small city centre office in time for morning coffee, occasionally terrorising an unsuspecting Anglo Saxon tourist who steps out without looking.
Just as proper motoring involves driving a 2CV across a ploughed field, wearing a top hat and with a box of eggs on the passenger seat.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.
Err no
They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?
Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.
Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.
They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
I find horse riders ok. Youre judging the mood of the horse not the rider so out in the sticks we always slow down and pass slowly. Roumd my area he horse riders always pull in at the nearest drive or layby and let traffic pass.
The only dnagerous ones are usually nervy horses or inexperienced riders. But L Plate riders are usually accompanied by an expeirenced adult.
I have an odd experience with that; when I am hiking, I often have my walking poles strapped to the side of my rucksack if I don't need them. Horses *really* don't like this, for some reason, and it seems to spook them. If I have the poles in my hands they seem fine, which is counter-intuitive. I chatted to a rider about this once, and she said that horses sometimes get spooked by rucksacks.
Our dog reacts to stuff on or above people's head: head torch, umbrella, large hat. Not a big issue. He just barks, but remains friendly, although if you don't know him that isn't obvious so we are always apologetic.
I note with the exception of @TOPPING there seems to be an anti cyclist theme. My experience is cyclists are normally considerate and friendly. I am always. Of course you get the odd jerk. You always will.
I'm not anti-cyclist. It'd be hard for me to be, as I cycle. I'm not anti-car or anti-pedestrian either, for similar reasons.
All users of roads or paths need to be considerate of others. I see inconsiderate cycling all the time; then again, I live near Cambridge which probably has far more cyclists than other areas. I also see inconsiderate driving all the time as well.
This applies to cyclists as much as it does pedestrians or drivers.
We live in a small town; very small. In fact, there’s a bit of a row about whether it’s a town or a village! We have one small supermarket, which is away from the centre. I can no longer drive, and using a cycle went a couple of years ago, due to ageing issues. The only way my wife can get a weekly shop in is by using the car since she too is elderly and can’t carry heavy bags very far. We are thinking of using the supermarkets delivery service!
Good morning OKC
We have had a weekly delivery from Asda for years and it is excellent and would recommend you do take the opportunity of home deliveries
Thanks; difficulty is that my wife is a ‘traditional’ shopper and likes to see what she is buying, and browse similar items to see if they give her ideas.
I still pop in and pickup items, but the convenience of having your weekly items delivered especially those that are virtually repeated weekly is very much appreciated by us and you can return anything at the door if it is poor quality or an unsuitable substitute
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
The word for at least half is "most" not "many".
If you're going to be a grammar Nazi, try to get it right at least.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
It's a completely asinine suggestion. You can get vehicles you can summon today, they're called taxis. People don't generally want them unless they can't afford their own vehicle, are inebriated, or for extreme circumstances.
I got a train for the first time in about five years recently, to take my family to the airport. Taxi to get to the train station. Was far cheaper than spending £250 on parking at the Airport.
In those circumstances I'll take a taxi, but why the hell would I want one in normal circumstances? That's what Leon doesn't grasp.
Doesn't it depend on price? The reason taxis are quite expensive, I'd assume, is less the cost of the vehicle and fuel, and more the cost of the chauffeur.
Thanks; difficulty is that my wife is a ‘traditional’ shopper and likes to see what she is buying, and browse similar items to see if they give her ideas.
One of the "joys" of supermarket delivery is you get "similar items" regularly...
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Wenn I lived in the English countryside 4 miles from the nearest shop without any money I went everywhere without a car. It kept me fit and active and connected. Obviously this isn't possible for many, but the sad truth is that driving tends to make people selfish, unhealthy, aggressive, and disconnected. As well as imposing harm on others.
Also, the last time I looked road accidents were the leading cause of death among 5-18 year olds in the UK, and current traffic imposes a kind of permanent semi lockdown on millions of children.
With respect I utterly reject your observations about car drivers and indeed this is an anti car narrative that is developing mainly from cyclists and none of my grandchildren have any kind of lockdown
If there is a "war" between drivers and cyclists, then drivers are winning comprehensively.
16,000 cyclists were injured or killed last year.
I do not see it as a competition and many cyclists will no doubt have been responsible for the outcome themselves
Pretty horrible comment.
Why unless you think all these accidents are the car drivers fault
You did say 'many', clearly indicating - intentionally or otherwise - that a high proportion of the accidents - at least half, say - were the cyclist's fault.
I have no idea the statistics and certainly I do not accuse anyone of intentionally causing an accident, but cyclists do contribute to accidents and to infer it is car drivers who are all at fault is unfair
Any Tory who whines about an anti-car narrative is channelling Conservative HQ at the moment, whether this is intentional or not. The next step is to stop all spending on cycle ways and active stuff because cyclists are a bunch of selfish kamikaze woke types. Or so the narrative is shaping out.
Sorry but that is the other extreme
16 million is being spent on a dedicated cycle track between Llandudno Junction and Betws y Coed and that is the way to go
By that nice Mr Drakeford, though. Not the Tories.
Actually the 16 million is coming from The UK government
No, it's not - it's coming from taxpayers and the bank lenders. Ultra vires money, too, breaching the devolution legislation.
Correcting my previous note, it is money from a bid to the Levelling-Up fund.
This actually highlights an issue: it is being referred to as a 'cycle path', but it is actually a "shared-use walking and cycling path". It is not just for cycling. That's an important distinction, especially for the idiots who will want to use it as a velodrome (I'd assume horse riders can also use it, but cannot find information).
"I'll be flying as I normally would" - Rishi on the way to Scotland.
From 'Fuck Business' to 'Fuck The Planet'. What are the Conservatives actually *for*? Must check the manifesto they were elected with...
This pro pollution and climate crisis pivot is obviously a core voter turnout strategy.
They know it's all over and just want to save the furniture.
It savours so much of a desperate politician looking at the one bright speck in his dismally dim panorama, and thinking "Let's go overboard on people's love of their cars".
I'm in my early 30s. I'm looking at the current stats - ice loss in the arctic, sea temperatures in the Atlantic, rising global temperatures beating new records, Sicily and Rhodes on fire and losing electricity due to melting infrastructure. The AMOC could fail in my lifetime. I have no belief that I'll retire, get a pension, that by the time I'm in my 60s or 70s food stability will be a thing.
And the PM seems to be saying he'll invest in fossil fuels and design the country for more car use out of spite.
If this is how the Tories want to continue, they will go the way of the dodo. The next generation of voters care about having a habitable planet (unsurprisingly) and the turn towards climate antagonism if not outright climate change denial will go down like a lead balloon with a lot of middle class suburbanites who look at the world and what is happening and start thinking about their kids.
The material reality is that we will have to significantly change our infrastructure and the organisation of society to try to prevent and to react to climate catastrophe. That will include sacrifices from many people, but we can (and should) put the greater burden on those who can afford it. An economic change on par with WW2 or the New Deal is the only real solution. We need a government that accepts that and starts preparing now.
We live in a small town; very small. In fact, there’s a bit of a row about whether it’s a town or a village! We have one small supermarket, which is away from the centre. I can no longer drive, and using a cycle went a couple of years ago, due to ageing issues. The only way my wife can get a weekly shop in is by using the car since she too is elderly and can’t carry heavy bags very far. We are thinking of using the supermarkets delivery service!
WRT town and village; the difference has little relation to size. Towns, however small - they can be 2000 people in rural northern England - are significant local centres for a wide area and all day to day life can be conducted without going outside it, though not brain surgery or a degree in Elamite cuneiform.
Villages don't achieve this, but can have 20,000 people in them.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
It's a completely asinine suggestion. You can get vehicles you can summon today, they're called taxis. People don't generally want them unless they can't afford their own vehicle, are inebriated, or for extreme circumstances.
I got a train for the first time in about five years recently, to take my family to the airport. Taxi to get to the train station. Was far cheaper than spending £250 on parking at the Airport.
In those circumstances I'll take a taxi, but why the hell would I want one in normal circumstances? That's what Leon doesn't grasp.
It's completely price elastic, as the early years of Uber when it was heavily subsidised showed. Particularly in the US young people were starting to use Uber as their primary means of transport because it was so cheap and available. These days that doesn't work because it's a. too expensive for daily use, b. too unreliable.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
It's a completely asinine suggestion. You can get vehicles you can summon today, they're called taxis. People don't generally want them unless they can't afford their own vehicle, are inebriated, or for extreme circumstances.
I got a train for the first time in about five years recently, to take my family to the airport. Taxi to get to the train station. Was far cheaper than spending £250 on parking at the Airport.
In those circumstances I'll take a taxi, but why the hell would I want one in normal circumstances? That's what Leon doesn't grasp.
Doesn't it depend on price? The reason taxis are quite expensive, I'd assume, is less the cost of the vehicle and fuel, and more the cost of the chauffeur.
As if drivers will be gone any time soon. And no, not just that.
Even if a taxi were the same price, I'd far, far prefer my own vehicle, with my own equipment, my own booster seats in it, my own settings in it etc, available on demand than someone else's random other one.
I'm in my early 30s. I'm looking at the current stats - ice loss in the arctic, sea temperatures in the Atlantic, rising global temperatures beating new records, Sicily and Rhodes on fire and losing electricity due to melting infrastructure. The AMOC could fail in my lifetime. I have no belief that I'll retire, get a pension, that by the time I'm in my 60s or 70s food stability will be a thing.
And the PM seems to be saying he'll invest in fossil fuels and design the country for more car use out of spite.
If this is how the Tories want to continue, they will go the way of the dodo. The next generation of voters care about having a habitable planet (unsurprisingly) and the turn towards climate antagonism if not outright climate change denial will go down like a lead balloon with a lot of middle class suburbanites who look at the world and what is happening and start thinking about their kids.
The material reality is that we will have to significantly change our infrastructure and the organisation of society to try to prevent and to react to climate catastrophe. That will include sacrifices from many people, but we can (and should) put the greater burden on those who can afford it. An economic change on par with WW2 or the New Deal is the only real solution. We need a government that accepts that and starts preparing now.
Rishi thinks there are votes in denying reality and following the easy path. He would have been in the appeasement wing of the Tory party in the 1930s.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
It doesn't. In London, you only very occasionally need a car - i.e. where you travel somewhere out of town on a trip at the weekend, or need to carry heavy luggage and ferry friends - whereas everywhere else you use a car several times every day: to drop off the kids, drive to work, go shopping, pick up the kids, and then to head out to the gym later. Maybe drop stuff at the tip too.
You thus want one on the drive all the time with all your stuff in it, and the kids car seats, ready to use at any time - so you get your own.
It may be on a PCP or hire-purchase, rather than owned outright, but it's definitely "your" car and that's the model 90%+ of the country uses and will continue to use.
I'm in my early 30s. I'm looking at the current stats - ice loss in the arctic, sea temperatures in the Atlantic, rising global temperatures beating new records, Sicily and Rhodes on fire and losing electricity due to melting infrastructure. The AMOC could fail in my lifetime. I have no belief that I'll retire, get a pension, that by the time I'm in my 60s or 70s food stability will be a thing.
And the PM seems to be saying he'll invest in fossil fuels and design the country for more car use out of spite.
If this is how the Tories want to continue, they will go the way of the dodo. The next generation of voters care about having a habitable planet (unsurprisingly) and the turn towards climate antagonism if not outright climate change denial will go down like a lead balloon with a lot of middle class suburbanites who look at the world and what is happening and start thinking about their kids.
The material reality is that we will have to significantly change our infrastructure and the organisation of society to try to prevent and to react to climate catastrophe. That will include sacrifices from many people, but we can (and should) put the greater burden on those who can afford it. An economic change on par with WW2 or the New Deal is the only real solution. We need a government that accepts that and starts preparing now.
Sounds terrifying. If everyone thought about it as you do then we would solve our problem. The UK would as from tomorrow stop using all that fossil fuel stuff and we would have at least a chance of saving ourselves.
War footing is the only way to do this, I absolutely agree.
Can you please share with us a suggested draft of the manifesto, before of course you go dark and switch off your computer for the common good.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.
Err no
They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?
Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.
Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.
They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
I find horse riders ok. Youre judging the mood of the horse not the rider so out in the sticks we always slow down and pass slowly. Roumd my area he horse riders always pull in at the nearest drive or layby and let traffic pass.
The only dnagerous ones are usually nervy horses or inexperienced riders. But L Plate riders are usually accompanied by an expeirenced adult.
I have an odd experience with that; when I am hiking, I often have my walking poles strapped to the side of my rucksack if I don't need them. Horses *really* don't like this, for some reason, and it seems to spook them. If I have the poles in my hands they seem fine, which is counter-intuitive. I chatted to a rider about this once, and she said that horses sometimes get spooked by rucksacks.
Our dog reacts to stuff on or above people's head: head torch, umbrella, large hat. Not a big issue. He just barks, but remains friendly, although if you don't know him that isn't obvious so we are always apologetic.
I note with the exception of @TOPPING there seems to be an anti cyclist theme. My experience is cyclists are normally considerate and friendly. I am always. Of course you get the odd jerk. You always will.
I'm not anti-cyclist. It'd be hard for me to be, as I cycle. I'm not anti-car or anti-pedestrian either, for similar reasons.
All users of roads or paths need to be considerate of others. I see inconsiderate cycling all the time; then again, I live near Cambridge which probably has far more cyclists than other areas. I also see inconsiderate driving all the time as well.
This applies to cyclists as much as it does pedestrians or drivers.
I know you are not @JosiasJessop. My second para about cyclists was in reply to everyone. The reason I replied to you was because of my first para about dogs and horses reacting to odd things we carry.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
To what road safety benefit on rural roads?
The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.
The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
Yep. Plus camber gets a fair few.
The mad design of road humps is an issue.
Often they are those “mound” ones - which are always place to encourage drivers to swerve out of their lane.
Many humps are so sharp that they penalise small cars, mopeds and bikes severely. Way back, when I was living in Hampstead, a nasty outbreak of such bumps led all the rich people to start buy giant American c
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
To what road safety benefit on rural roads?
The road safety focus is overwhelmingly on people driving motor vehicles because that group, which I imagine includes nearly all of us on PB, is overwhelmingly the group that injures and kills on our roads.
The FATAL5 linked to road danger that are the police safety focus are careless driving, mobile phone use when driving, drink and drug driving, not wearing a seatbelt, and speeding.
The benefit is to get cyclist attuned to respecting the laws we have.
Cyclists round me quite regularly come through in bunches which will mow pedestrians down, yelling at the last moment instead of slowing down and using a bell, In some places where the speed limit is 20mph for cars they dont think it applies to them. And on one local stretch of road which is up hill and round corners they could at least spread out to let cars pass but instead hog the width of the road so everyone is doing 15 mph and drivers in a hurry get frustrated and do daft things.
Cyclists need to be trained on road use since we have so many more of them on the road and theyre no longer people going to work.. I dread when the Tour de France starts as they all come out and think theyre Bradley Wiggins.
Spreading out increases overtaking distance and is more dangerous.
The speed limit does not apply to cyclists.
Cycling has fallen by 8x since the 1950s.
The vast majority of cyclists hold driving licences and have insurance (usually through their home insurance).
100% of your post was nonsense.
Cycling registration will happen, but not for these reasons.
While I was away, there was a collision between a rider of a souped up electric bike and a child on a bike, locally. Head on in a segregated bike lane. Child is ok. Electric bike rider left the scene. According to eye witnesses, he was exceeding 20mph, and had been pulling wheelies.
Since there will be all kinds of games played registering everything on 2 wheels will be the simple answer.
The "souped up electric bike" is a motorcycle or moped, and already subject to registration, insurance and the rider wearing prescribed safety gear such as an approved motorcycle helmet.
An interesting point is that taking it outside the pedal cycle definition (ie assistance at >15.5mph) means that the rider has lost the liability insurance cover from which the vast majority of cyclists benefit under their home insurance policy.
For two wheelers more widely, the DFT - even under our recent run of nutty Transport Ministers - is clear that it will not happen; they have said so to the Parliamentary Transport Select Committee - immediately after Grant Shapps was tickling the Daily Mail's crotch with the idea during last summer's silly season.
In the end, there is little benefit and a huge cost.
“little benefit and a huge cost”
So it’s guaranteed to happen.
This is because policing the small, but growing numbers, of DIY electric mopeds/motorcycles would require discretionary policing.
Much easier from the State point of view to put a license plate on everything.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
When I was in Connecticut early this month we stayed at an AirBnb in Branford which is on the coast a few miles outside New Haven. Semi-rural, no buses, a station but miles from the centre. My wife's folks live in a small house in New Haven so we spend a lot of time shuttling to and fro the 10 or so miles. For the first time we didn't hire a car but got the train down from Boston and relied on Uber when we got to CT which turned out to be (a) cheaper and (b) more convenient. Even in sleepy Branford, one was at your door within 5 minutes of ordering. They don't have Uber in Kent yet, but I saw the future.
Seems to me that the political parties are providing cover from those who really, really want to do something about the imminent climate catastrophe but actually, are going to do fuck all apart from vote for a party that *says* it is going to undertake all these actions but in reality either a) wont'; or b) will find substitutes and it will be situation no change.
Simply, no political party is going to jeopardise economic growth in the name of green policies.
Just that with Labour we will all be paying slightly more to import Venezuelan oil and gas, or wherever it comes from.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
It doesn't. In London, you only very occasionally need a car - i.e. where you travel somewhere out of town on a trip at the weekend, or need to carry heavy luggage and ferry friends - whereas everywhere else you use a car several times every day: to drop off the kids, drive to work, go shopping, pick up the kids, and then to head out to the gym later. Maybe drop stuff at the tip too.
You thus want one on the drive all the time with all your stuff in it, and the kids car seats, ready to use at any time - so you get your own.
It may be on a PCP or hire-purchase, rather than owned outright, but it's definitely "your" car and that's the model 90%+ of the country uses and will continue to use.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.
Err no
They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?
Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.
Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.
They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
I find horse riders ok. Youre judging the mood of the horse not the rider so out in the sticks we always slow down and pass slowly. Roumd my area he horse riders always pull in at the nearest drive or layby and let traffic pass.
The only dnagerous ones are usually nervy horses or inexperienced riders. But L Plate riders are usually accompanied by an expeirenced adult.
I have an odd experience with that; when I am hiking, I often have my walking poles strapped to the side of my rucksack if I don't need them. Horses *really* don't like this, for some reason, and it seems to spook them. If I have the poles in my hands they seem fine, which is counter-intuitive. I chatted to a rider about this once, and she said that horses sometimes get spooked by rucksacks.
Our dog reacts to stuff on or above people's head: head torch, umbrella, large hat. Not a big issue. He just barks, but remains friendly, although if you don't know him that isn't obvious so we are always apologetic.
I note with the exception of @TOPPING there seems to be an anti cyclist theme. My experience is cyclists are normally considerate and friendly. I am always. Of course you get the odd jerk. You always will.
I'm not anti-cyclist. It'd be hard for me to be, as I cycle. I'm not anti-car or anti-pedestrian either, for similar reasons.
All users of roads or paths need to be considerate of others. I see inconsiderate cycling all the time; then again, I live near Cambridge which probably has far more cyclists than other areas. I also see inconsiderate driving all the time as well.
This applies to cyclists as much as it does pedestrians or drivers.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.
Err no
They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?
Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.
Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.
They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
I find horse riders ok. Youre judging the mood of the horse not the rider so out in the sticks we always slow down and pass slowly. Roumd my area he horse riders always pull in at the nearest drive or layby and let traffic pass.
The only dnagerous ones are usually nervy horses or inexperienced riders. But L Plate riders are usually accompanied by an expeirenced adult.
I have an odd experience with that; when I am hiking, I often have my walking poles strapped to the side of my rucksack if I don't need them. Horses *really* don't like this, for some reason, and it seems to spook them. If I have the poles in my hands they seem fine, which is counter-intuitive. I chatted to a rider about this once, and she said that horses sometimes get spooked by rucksacks.
Our dog reacts to stuff on or above people's head: head torch, umbrella, large hat. Not a big issue. He just barks, but remains friendly, although if you don't know him that isn't obvious so we are always apologetic.
I note with the exception of @TOPPING there seems to be an anti cyclist theme. My experience is cyclists are normally considerate and friendly. I am always. Of course you get the odd jerk. You always will.
I'm not anti-cyclist. It'd be hard for me to be, as I cycle. I'm not anti-car or anti-pedestrian either, for similar reasons.
All users of roads or paths need to be considerate of others. I see inconsiderate cycling all the time; then again, I live near Cambridge which probably has far more cyclists than other areas. I also see inconsiderate driving all the time as well.
This applies to cyclists as much as it does pedestrians or drivers.
Cycling is treated too much as a pastime in Britain rather than simply a means of getting from A to B. It's become the preserve of people who either want to get fit, or emulate the Tour de France, or save the planet. Rather than simply being a way of getting to the shops and back. That leaves it open to political and tribal capture.
It seems to be more the case outside London. One of the better things about our social attitudes to transport in the capital is that most people will happily drive, cycle, take the tube or bus without feeling that one mode belongs exclusively to a particular segment of society (contrast that with taking a bus in NYC). My colleagues with bikes in the North all seem to use them to go off doing etapes around the Pennines with their mates at the weekend.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
It's equally about how and when we use them. I find that in normal daily life I cycle and walk perhaps twice as much as I drive; for journeys of less than a mile the proportion is higher.
Of course before long your e-car, when you have one, could be part of your off grid. Friends I know who explored the issue used to think of the grid as a seasonal battery store, and balance it over the year.
As a country which is 85% urbanised we need attractive alternatives in urban areas. We have hardly invested in anything else other than facilities for private motor vehicles for 60-70 years (I'm dating it to about 1965); the balance needs to be pushed back a hell of a long way.
Rural roads tend to simply be too dangerous for other modes than motor vehicles. Deaths on rural roads are much higher per mile travelled than urban roads - 60% of all fatalities occur on country roads. That brings me back to my main campaigning issue - people locked out of the network of public footpaths and bridleways.
As ever, the big need is to reform behaviour of drivers who put others (and themselves) at risk.
My rural roads are packed with urban cyclists at the weekends. Since cyclists have become prime road users based on the latest highway code. its time they were registered, taxed and made to sit a training course before being let loose on our roads.
Bit harsh. Those rural cyclists are proficient, quiet, efficient, usually polite, and are gone before you know it. Plus they bring custom to rural enterprises.
Err no
They are usually middle class professionals with attitude. They hog the roads and are more likely to ram in to walkers using the same road space. And why can they never use a bell ?
Typical is a peloton of cyclists coming down a hill and threatening one of our local farmers because his cows were the crossing at milking time and they had to stop. Apparently he shouldnt have had them on the road ( and they might sue him ) despite signs either side of his farm warning road users that cows crossing the road was a hazard.
Not seen this and is the exception I have no doubt.
I have lived in my village for 30 years and quite frankly the cyclist problem has been getting steadily worse. Mostly its one of attitude as they think they have priority over other users.
Horse riders are the worst imo, often side-by-side, chatting, oblivious to their surroundings, or on their mobiles, texting or talking. Or leading one or two other horses over which they seem to have little control.
They act as if they own the road and everyone else is an annoying inconvenience.
I find horse riders ok. Youre judging the mood of the horse not the rider so out in the sticks we always slow down and pass slowly. Roumd my area he horse riders always pull in at the nearest drive or layby and let traffic pass.
The only dnagerous ones are usually nervy horses or inexperienced riders. But L Plate riders are usually accompanied by an expeirenced adult.
I have an odd experience with that; when I am hiking, I often have my walking poles strapped to the side of my rucksack if I don't need them. Horses *really* don't like this, for some reason, and it seems to spook them. If I have the poles in my hands they seem fine, which is counter-intuitive. I chatted to a rider about this once, and she said that horses sometimes get spooked by rucksacks.
Our dog reacts to stuff on or above people's head: head torch, umbrella, large hat. Not a big issue. He just barks, but remains friendly, although if you don't know him that isn't obvious so we are always apologetic.
I note with the exception of @TOPPING there seems to be an anti cyclist theme. My experience is cyclists are normally considerate and friendly. I am always. Of course you get the odd jerk. You always will.
I'm not anti-cyclist. It'd be hard for me to be, as I cycle. I'm not anti-car or anti-pedestrian either, for similar reasons.
All users of roads or paths need to be considerate of others. I see inconsiderate cycling all the time; then again, I live near Cambridge which probably has far more cyclists than other areas. I also see inconsiderate driving all the time as well.
This applies to cyclists as much as it does pedestrians or drivers.
Cycling is treated too much as a pastime in Britain rather than simply a means of getting from A to B. It's become the preserve of people who either want to get fit, or emulate the Tour de France, or save the planet. Rather than simply being a way of getting to the shops and back. That leaves it open to political and tribal capture.
It seems to be more the case outside London. One of the better things about our social attitudes to transport in the capital is that most people will happily drive, cycle, take the tube or bus without feeling that one mode belongs exclusively to a particular segment of society (contrast that with taking a bus in NYC). My colleagues with bikes in the North all seem to use them to go off doing etapes around the Pennines with their mates at the weekend.
Ain't no one (@kamski and a tiny minority excepted) going to go and "do the shopping" in rural areas on a bike.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
It's a completely asinine suggestion. You can get vehicles you can summon today, they're called taxis. People don't generally want them unless they can't afford their own vehicle, are inebriated, or for extreme circumstances.
I got a train for the first time in about five years recently, to take my family to the airport. Taxi to get to the train station. Was far cheaper than spending £250 on parking at the Airport.
In those circumstances I'll take a taxi, but why the hell would I want one in normal circumstances? That's what Leon doesn't grasp.
Doesn't it depend on price? The reason taxis are quite expensive, I'd assume, is less the cost of the vehicle and fuel, and more the cost of the chauffeur.
As if drivers will be gone any time soon. And no, not just that.
Even if a taxi were the same price, I'd far, far prefer my own vehicle, with my own equipment, my own booster seats in it, my own settings in it etc, available on demand than someone else's random other one.
I agree they won't disappear. My point is that your comparison with taxi services is not apt if the cost is significantly lower than that of a taxi. If the cost is competitive then a fair number of people will take it up as an alternative to car ownership, your booster seat notwithstanding.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
It doesn't. In London, you only very occasionally need a car - i.e. where you travel somewhere out of town on a trip at the weekend, or need to carry heavy luggage and ferry friends - whereas everywhere else you use a car several times every day: to drop off the kids, drive to work, go shopping, pick up the kids, and then to head out to the gym later. Maybe drop stuff at the tip too.
You thus want one on the drive all the time with all your stuff in it, and the kids car seats, ready to use at any time - so you get your own.
It may be on a PCP or hire-purchase, rather than owned outright, but it's definitely "your" car and that's the model 90%+ of the country uses and will continue to use.
Well said!
The fact the anti car obsessives miss is that their city and non car life is that of a tiny proportion of the country. Outside London less people proportionately take the train to work, or live in cities, than vote Liberal Democrat. But they think they're normal, and engage in a circle jerk of backslapping that convinces themselves they're normal too.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
It doesn't. In London, you only very occasionally need a car - i.e. where you travel somewhere out of town on a trip at the weekend, or need to carry heavy luggage and ferry friends - whereas everywhere else you use a car several times every day: to drop off the kids, drive to work, go shopping, pick up the kids, and then to head out to the gym later. Maybe drop stuff at the tip too.
You thus want one on the drive all the time with all your stuff in it, and the kids car seats, ready to use at any time - so you get your own.
It may be on a PCP or hire-purchase, rather than owned outright, but it's definitely "your" car and that's the model 90%+ of the country uses and will continue to use.
It's quite possibly a prescription for the future in large cities, which house a significant and growing proportion of the world's population. Even in suburbanised Britain London is about 15% of the population - add similarly built up zones of the other major cities plus well serviced towns like Oxford and Cambridge, Brighton, Bath etc and it's a decent number of people who could be living like that. Then consider somewhere like Japan where almost everyone lives in a city and people rarely go on long drives, and it makes some sense.
I'm in my early 30s. I'm looking at the current stats - ice loss in the arctic, sea temperatures in the Atlantic, rising global temperatures beating new records, Sicily and Rhodes on fire and losing electricity due to melting infrastructure. The AMOC could fail in my lifetime. I have no belief that I'll retire, get a pension, that by the time I'm in my 60s or 70s food stability will be a thing.
And the PM seems to be saying he'll invest in fossil fuels and design the country for more car use out of spite.
If this is how the Tories want to continue, they will go the way of the dodo. The next generation of voters care about having a habitable planet (unsurprisingly) and the turn towards climate antagonism if not outright climate change denial will go down like a lead balloon with a lot of middle class suburbanites who look at the world and what is happening and start thinking about their kids.
The material reality is that we will have to significantly change our infrastructure and the organisation of society to try to prevent and to react to climate catastrophe. That will include sacrifices from many people, but we can (and should) put the greater burden on those who can afford it. An economic change on par with WW2 or the New Deal is the only real solution. We need a government that accepts that and starts preparing now.
Rishi thinks there are votes in denying reality and following the easy path. He would have been in the appeasement wing of the Tory party in the 1930s.
We live in a small town; very small. In fact, there’s a bit of a row about whether it’s a town or a village! We have one small supermarket, which is away from the centre. I can no longer drive, and using a cycle went a couple of years ago, due to ageing issues. The only way my wife can get a weekly shop in is by using the car since she too is elderly and can’t carry heavy bags very far. We are thinking of using the supermarkets delivery service!
Good morning OKC
We have had a weekly delivery from Asda for years and it is excellent and would recommend you do take the opportunity of home deliveries
Thanks; difficulty is that my wife is a ‘traditional’ shopper and likes to see what she is buying, and browse similar items to see if they give her ideas.
Some online supermarkets (Asda being one, I think) have a "view the shelf" button under each item when you search for something which shows you, notionally, the things on the same shelf. So you can do more of a browsing of options style shop (without the actual physical poking and prodding, of course!).
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
Indeed, not everybody has access to the tube.
Nearest bus stop to me is a 1.4 mile walk.
Even for an idealist like myself who would like to go totes off grid, it's almost impossible to live rurally in this country without a car.
Surely the real green issue is not about having cars? It's how we power them.
Good morning
I believe this forum has a strong London representation and of course with the tens of billions spent on its transport infrastructure it, in common with other large cities, provides the means to travel without a car and indeed why would anyone want to drive into cental London
However, move out of London and the country is very much car dependent, and the idea we can walk and cycle everywhere is not the case and in our area there are not many cyclists on the road anyway and of course cycle tracks are being built to separate them from cars, though some cyclists still use the roads
The move to ev's will be a long drawn out one as new ICE vehicles will be available throughout Europe until 2035, ( expect the UK to move the 2030 date to match Europe) and this does give space for the provision of the infrastructure needed plus hopefully a huge drop in their prices, as being green at present certainly is a wealthy person's domain
I notice the government have confirmed the granting of hundreds of oil and gas licences in the North Sea and this will be a challenge for Starmer, especially in Scotland, if he maintains his objection to these new licences, though this may be number 35 reverse of policy from him
Yet 9 years ago they told us the oil and gas had run out and suddenly it has been found again, typical Tories lying through their teeth.
Good morning Malc
Hope you and your family are well
As a matter of interest do you support the granting of the new licences
Morning G, yes all well though July weather has been depressing , hope all well with you and family. For an independent Scotland , YES. Sending more money to Westminster to squander whilst we continue to decline NO. They are ripping us off on renewables now as well and next they will come for our water, absolute parasites.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
It's a completely asinine suggestion. You can get vehicles you can summon today, they're called taxis. People don't generally want them unless they can't afford their own vehicle, are inebriated, or for extreme circumstances.
I got a train for the first time in about five years recently, to take my family to the airport. Taxi to get to the train station. Was far cheaper than spending £250 on parking at the Airport.
In those circumstances I'll take a taxi, but why the hell would I want one in normal circumstances? That's what Leon doesn't grasp.
Doesn't it depend on price? The reason taxis are quite expensive, I'd assume, is less the cost of the vehicle and fuel, and more the cost of the chauffeur.
As if drivers will be gone any time soon. And no, not just that.
Even if a taxi were the same price, I'd far, far prefer my own vehicle, with my own equipment, my own booster seats in it, my own settings in it etc, available on demand than someone else's random other one.
But this will become like “owning a horse”. People still have horses now. For pleasure and exercise, for status and sport. They tend to be wealthier
But for everyone else, a horse is a ridiculous indulgence, utterly impractical - and pointless
Cars as we know them will be autonomous self-driving vehicles that you can summon with an app. They will show up, hop in, drop you off: that’s it
You won’t have to worry about parking, insurance, driving, learning to drive, MOTs, drink driving, any of it. All that space in cities occupied by horrible car parks and concrete drives can and will go. Replaced with greenery. And - maybe more importantly - no one will die in road accidents
It will be an incredible moment: a massive boost for towns and cities. Eventually it will spread even to deeply rural places. Maybe the hideous redbrick semi exurbs occupied by the likes of @BartholomewRoberts will be the last. But even they will go
This is something that will take decades however. So you can enjoy your driving for a while
I'm in my early 30s. I'm looking at the current stats - ice loss in the arctic, sea temperatures in the Atlantic, rising global temperatures beating new records, Sicily and Rhodes on fire and losing electricity due to melting infrastructure. The AMOC could fail in my lifetime. I have no belief that I'll retire, get a pension, that by the time I'm in my 60s or 70s food stability will be a thing.
And the PM seems to be saying he'll invest in fossil fuels and design the country for more car use out of spite.
If this is how the Tories want to continue, they will go the way of the dodo. The next generation of voters care about having a habitable planet (unsurprisingly) and the turn towards climate antagonism if not outright climate change denial will go down like a lead balloon with a lot of middle class suburbanites who look at the world and what is happening and start thinking about their kids.
The material reality is that we will have to significantly change our infrastructure and the organisation of society to try to prevent and to react to climate catastrophe. That will include sacrifices from many people, but we can (and should) put the greater burden on those who can afford it. An economic change on par with WW2 or the New Deal is the only real solution. We need a government that accepts that and starts preparing now.
Rishi thinks there are votes in denying reality and following the easy path. He would have been in the appeasement wing of the Tory party in the 1930s.
FPT - I see @Leon once again totally fails to comprehend anyone who lives outside London by predicting no-one will have cars by 2050.
People will always have cars.
I believe @leon was predicting self driving electric vehicles that you summon when you need one (I could have just made that all up). That isn't London centric prediction but applies everywhere. It seems a reasonable prediction for the future and a comparison with the end of the use of the horse seems apt. Doesn't mean it will happen, but reasonable.
It doesn't. In London, you only very occasionally need a car - i.e. where you travel somewhere out of town on a trip at the weekend, or need to carry heavy luggage and ferry friends - whereas everywhere else you use a car several times every day: to drop off the kids, drive to work, go shopping, pick up the kids, and then to head out to the gym later. Maybe drop stuff at the tip too.
You thus want one on the drive all the time with all your stuff in it, and the kids car seats, ready to use at any time - so you get your own.
It may be on a PCP or hire-purchase, rather than owned outright, but it's definitely "your" car and that's the model 90%+ of the country uses and will continue to use.
It's quite possibly a prescription for the future in large cities, which house a significant and growing proportion of the world's population. Even in suburbanised Britain London is about 15% of the population - add similarly built up zones of the other major cities plus well serviced towns like Oxford and Cambridge, Brighton, Bath etc and it's a decent number of people who could be living like that. Then consider somewhere like Japan where almost everyone lives in a city and people rarely go on long drives, and it makes some sense.
For the miniscule minority who live in cities, maybe.
Comments
Between 2005 and 2018, 542 pedestrians on pavements were killed by drivers. 6 by cyclists.
Only a fool wouldn't cycle that.
If some people think the tennis balls at Wimbledon are green, what colour do they think the grass is?
I note with the exception of @TOPPING there seems to be an anti cyclist theme. My experience is cyclists are normally considerate and friendly. I am always. Of course you get the odd jerk. You always will.
For those disabled people who do have a car, the best thing for them is for able-bodied folk to stop needlessly clogging up the roads.
An interesting point is that taking it outside the pedal cycle definition (ie assistance at >15.5mph) means that the rider has lost the liability insurance cover from which the vast majority of cyclists benefit under their home insurance policy.
For two wheelers more widely, the DFT - even under our recent run of nutty Transport Ministers - is clear that it will not happen; they have said so to the Parliamentary Transport Select Committee - immediately after Grant Shapps was tickling the Daily Mail's crotch with the idea during last summer's silly season.
In the end, there is little benefit and a huge cost.
The problem is, I think, the Mass State.
Something that is interesting, is how close to the ground sensible rulers were in past times. Medieval kings used to hear petitions from peasants and serfs on a regular basis.
Now we live in the age of “90% of 9 million people are OK. So all good here.”
In the age of the Mass State, you are a statistic. And the rulers and operators of the Mass State are innumerate.
So a percentage of people are wrongly sent to prison by corrupt policing. A percentage of people are denied banking at the drop of a hat. “But 97% are ok!”
Some politicians have wobbled about being like John Lewis. What they are actually, dimly, referring to, was a policy and training by John Lewis of their staff. Which was to be generous to customers & never leave them hanging - the infamous “no more I can do”
What this is about is creating a “tree” of outcomes. Each leaf is a resolution for the customer. No one is left hanging.
Changing to such a consumer focused State would require a massive cultural and structural change. But it is what people thing they deserve in the 21st cent.
I think if you came to our area you would be very surprised how few cyclists there are on our roads
On Sunak’s oil bonanza, isn’t the point to put a wedge between Labour and the Greens/LDs/Corbynites when Starmer gives an ambiguous response? Chatting to my offspring who are Labour members, the failure to drop the two-child limit on child benefit has put them on the brink of staying at home for the GE: “what’s the point if it’ll just be another Tory government if Starmer wins”. I tried to make the point that there are no circumstances where it is better to be in opposition that government.
LTNs
ULEZ
Cycling provision
15- minute cities
20mph speed limits
Wider pavements
Congestion charging
Trams
Owls
Venison Burgers
Doesn't affect Sunak of course - he has his helicopter.
Whereas the LDs gave Labour a largely free run in Selby and Ainsty and Uxbridge and Labour gave the LDs largely a free run in Somerton and Frome
The only way my wife can get a weekly shop in is by using the car since she too is elderly and can’t carry heavy bags very far.
We are thinking of using the supermarkets delivery service!
Competitive cycling is very elitist and that's the way we like it. I've seen people derided in vociferous terms for riding with anything other than red (ie zero float) SPD-SL cleats in their shoes.
16 million is being spent on a dedicated cycle track between Llandudno Junction and Betws y Coed and that is the way to go
https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/construction-multi-million-pound-north-26059416
The other part is the whole tragedy of the commons thing. My car driving is useful and pleasurable, everyone else's creates congestion. (And there's very little evidence that you can create enough road capacity to deal with that- it always fills up, and kills towns and cities as you add road and parking space.)
Collectively, life works better for all of us if we do more of our business locally, and walk or cycle the short distances to do that. If we do that, small shops are more sustainable and don't have to charge such premium prices. (Musing on this at the moment, becuase our neighbourhood butcher looks like it's closing for good.)
Same for public transport into town- if we all use it when we can, it's more likely to be viable to run a quality service. That isn't to say "don't use cars"; it's about using the right tool for the right job.
Unfortunately, the path from gaining the freedom to use a car to losing the freedom to not have one is very smooth and has no boundaries. So something that starts as a good thing oozes into something bad.
"Sunak unveils expansion of North Sea oil and gas drilling - BBC News" https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-66357043
From 'Fuck Business' to 'Fuck The Planet'. What are the Conservatives actually *for*? Must check the manifesto they were elected with...
While this plays with a loud minority who would be voting Tory anyway, I don't see this new stridently pro-pollution outlook actually winning the voters they need to reach, outside of some tactical seats where the wider narrative will help the local candidate.
The only vaguely clever thing about it is that it will expand the Green vote on Labour's vulnerable tactical left - however I dare say this will end up hurting the Tories just as much, if not more - we've seen a lot of Blue-Green switching in rural councils.
We have had a weekly delivery from Asda for years and it is excellent and would recommend you do take the opportunity of home deliveries
A lot of the mopeds masquerading as bikes are simply illegal and shouldn't be available to buy.
We should note that it is - I think - that is 80% UK Government money from when before they cut the active travel budget off at the ankles, to pay for freezing the tax on petrol for about a month.
FT this morning: "Does what3words know where it's going?"
https://www.ft.com/content/036e9470-97cd-4e7f-84d7-4262e457d17b?accessToken=zwAAAYmrBk0Pkc8DbpRwl81Of9OE10Ji5FfRew.MEUCIQCp5wSWfBe2VeocVazECWhoZwZJv7lMKpCb3CyLc1kXmgIgSyM5tijGSUBHAW3KWJZwiEa0sLs4gk4AMvQj-fiDjwk&segmentId=e95a9ae7-622c-6235-5f87-51e412b47e97&shareType=enterprise
Not even the greenest of green PB contributors.
https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/construction-multi-million-pound-north-26059416
I got a train for the first time in about five years recently, to take my family to the airport. Taxi to get to the train station. Was far cheaper than spending £250 on parking at the Airport.
In those circumstances I'll take a taxi, but why the hell would I want one in normal circumstances? That's what Leon doesn't grasp.
In many ways I miss the old times.
They know it's all over and just want to save the furniture.
All users of roads or paths need to be considerate of others. I see inconsiderate cycling all the time; then again, I live near Cambridge which probably has far more cyclists than other areas. I also see inconsiderate driving all the time as well.
This applies to cyclists as much as it does pedestrians or drivers.
If you're going to be a grammar Nazi, try to get it right at least.
And the PM seems to be saying he'll invest in fossil fuels and design the country for more car use out of spite.
If this is how the Tories want to continue, they will go the way of the dodo. The next generation of voters care about having a habitable planet (unsurprisingly) and the turn towards climate antagonism if not outright climate change denial will go down like a lead balloon with a lot of middle class suburbanites who look at the world and what is happening and start thinking about their kids.
The material reality is that we will have to significantly change our infrastructure and the organisation of society to try to prevent and to react to climate catastrophe. That will include sacrifices from many people, but we can (and should) put the greater burden on those who can afford it. An economic change on par with WW2 or the New Deal is the only real solution. We need a government that accepts that and starts preparing now.
Network Rail's next five year plan for railway infrastructure (Control Period 7).
https://scotlandsrailway.com/assets/site/Scotland-CP7-Strategic-Business-Plan.pdf
Villages don't achieve this, but can have 20,000 people in them.
https://twitter.com/anandMenon1/status/1685923575478259712
https://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/23689674.claire-wright-roots-richard-foord-become-honiton-sidmouth-mp/
Even if a taxi were the same price, I'd far, far prefer my own vehicle, with my own equipment, my own booster seats in it, my own settings in it etc, available on demand than someone else's random other one.
Liz Truss seemed more right wing to me, particularly on taxation policies.
You thus want one on the drive all the time with all your stuff in it, and the kids car seats, ready to use at any time - so you get your own.
It may be on a PCP or hire-purchase, rather than owned outright, but it's definitely "your" car and that's the model 90%+ of the country uses and will continue to use.
War footing is the only way to do this, I absolutely agree.
Can you please share with us a suggested draft of the manifesto, before of course you go dark and switch off your computer for the common good.
TIA.
So it’s guaranteed to happen.
This is because policing the small, but growing numbers, of DIY electric mopeds/motorcycles would require discretionary policing.
Much easier from the State point of view to put a license plate on everything.
You really are a soothsayer.
Simply, no political party is going to jeopardise economic growth in the name of green policies.
Just that with Labour we will all be paying slightly more to import Venezuelan oil and gas, or wherever it comes from.
Certainly not Major or Cameron. Not Johnson.
If you want a more right-wing Conservative PM, you need to make a case for May or Truss. Not sure either of those is easy.
It seems to be more the case outside London. One of the better things about our social attitudes to transport in the capital is that most people will happily drive, cycle, take the tube or bus without feeling that one mode belongs exclusively to a particular segment of society (contrast that with taking a bus in NYC). My colleagues with bikes in the North all seem to use them to go off doing etapes around the Pennines with their mates at the weekend.
If he just played solely and softly for the waverers he might get no votes at all.
The fact the anti car obsessives miss is that their city and non car life is that of a tiny proportion of the country. Outside London less people proportionately take the train to work, or live in cities, than vote Liberal Democrat. But they think they're normal, and engage in a circle jerk of backslapping that convinces themselves they're normal too.
But for everyone else, a horse is a ridiculous indulgence, utterly impractical - and pointless
Cars as we know them will be autonomous self-driving vehicles that you can summon with an app. They will show up, hop in, drop you off: that’s it
You won’t have to worry about parking, insurance, driving, learning to drive, MOTs, drink driving, any of it. All that space in cities occupied by horrible car parks and concrete drives can and will go. Replaced with greenery. And - maybe more importantly - no one will die in road accidents
It will be an incredible moment: a massive boost for towns and cities. Eventually it will spread even to deeply rural places. Maybe the hideous redbrick semi exurbs occupied by the likes of @BartholomewRoberts will be the last. But even they will go
This is something that will take decades however. So you can enjoy your driving for a while
Most Britons live in towns, not cities though.