Chris Boardman slams Government “apathy” on cycling & calls for “commitment” to goals

'If I was Chris B I would start by building even stronger ties with Breeze and Mum's Net'

Having anything to do with any of the nutters on Mumsnet is one of the best ways he could lose all credibility in an instant...

Chris Boardman is a brilliant spokesman for cycling. He nearly always talks sense, and he is persistent.

However, he can't bring about change on his own. I believe it's up to the rest of us to do all we can to improve conditions for cyclists. The government and local authorities won't do it unless they feel forced to.

Anyone who cares should keep up the pressure on ministers, MPs, and councils - keep pestering them on national and local cycling issues, and in the end we may get some meaningful change.

The 'positive apathy' quote is apt. It's the classic 2nd stage deflection councils and politicians use.

1. You publicly acknowledge the problem and empathise with the solution.
2. You throw a little cash at it at it in a noisy way - forgetting to mention that the funding is pennies compared with the funding of what you consider the prolitically profitable user sector to be. In this case cars and lorries.
3. Under sustained pressure you eventually agree a bigger budget but most of it is siphoned away by marketing groups, quangos and poorly planned projects based on what the marketing and quangos agree might not upset the main user sector. - rather than attempting to change national mindset.

The truth is the government's preferred citizen is a thin smoker and drinker who dies suddenly at 66. This citizen pays the most tax on their addictions, doesn't burden the NHS with their weight related illnesses, and gains little back from what's left of the state pension. In the absence of this model citizen on mass the government will always aim to pacify the biggest voter group . At present it's people who don't want to benefit the NHS and prefer to remain lazy.

The solution is two fold:

1. Blanket 20mph limits in all residential and urban areas. Nothing would save lives, change the sense of entitlement of the UK motorist and encourage more people to risk cycling than this.

2. Women are the key. On mass they cannot be argued with by government and they are the group government fear most. Blokes arguing on forums and sending e-petitions are so much chaff in the air to Westminster.

If I was Chris B I would start by building even stronger ties with Breeze and Mum's Net to force national change on speed limits. I would also ask him on a local level to get involved across the water from his house on the Wirral and make sure Liverpool council build a meaningful N-S cycle commuter route - rather than his current support for the moronic idea of 1,000 Boris bikes for a city with no use for them. The £2.5 million free funding ring-fenced for installing them could be better spent on infrastructure.

Motor transport generates an income for the treasury, sure, but all of that and more goes back into maintaining and expanding the road network, picking up the pieces from traffic accidents, or dealing with the health consequences of lack of daily exercise in many people's lives.

The real problem is that cycling isn't seen as a factor in economic growth in the same way that motor vehicles or HS2 are. It's the same reason the government are championing ridiculous technologies like fracking, rather than telling people to insulate their homes and put on a jumper.

+1 onyourbikeinlondon.
It's the 60% who want to cycle that need to get the benefit of spending. It needs to be joined up, safe, convenient and accessible and not a contact sport requiring armour - all points Chris Boardman has made.
Target short journeys (school run anyone?) commutes, trips to shops. Work on attitudes to car (why are you unnecessarily polluting the neighbourhood ?).
None of this means that cars must be excluded but it does mean that the bike needs to be seen as the common sense mode of transport for short journeys at the very least.

The government needs to be reminded how much money/jobs/taxes are brought in by the consuming cyclist population...billions per year!

'Airzound' might be trolling with those words.

However, he/she may have illustrated a point about the income from taxation on the transport industry. Without VED, fuel duty, VAT on cars, fuel, parts, insurance, servicing and the vast range of ancilliary industries that surround our road network and its motorised users - everything from roadstone quarries to sat-nav sales - the Exchequer would be a lot poorer.

While there may be some benefits of doing without these - NHS costs, the spending on road building, repair and maintenance for starters - but I suspect these don't match the income.

So would they seek to pull it in from elsewhere or would they cut services? Or both?

For any commitment to work the guaranteed spending on cycling would have to be matched by intent. So no more stupid, disjointed or disconnected cycle lanes and pathetically ineffective on-road provision. It would require a complete overhaul of how urban space in particular is allocated. We know it can be done but virtually no-one in a real position of influence really wants it to happen.

“A statement from the government saying ‘we want cycling and walking to be our preferred means of transport in the UK. We will legislate, design infrastructure and spend accordingly’.

Government won't make such a statement. If they did it would be an outright lie. Whilst we measure economic sucess in terms of car sales and 'big business' (in this case motor and oil industies) has such influence over poloitcal process it simply will not happen.

I agree Chris, unfortunately no one in government cares about a commitment to cycling. Politicians will pay lip service to populist sentiments, but continue to act in the best interests of themselves and their lobbying friends.

Such common sense puts politicians into never getting to the point mode. They will never give answers, only speak speak.

The Government, which happens to be the nasty party at the moment, the Tories, DGAF about cyclists. The reason is because cyclists don't pay road tax therefore do not have to pay the Treasury anything to use the roads, where as motorised vehicles do, so cars, vans, trucks and buses keep politicians and bureaucrats in the manner they have become accustomed to. End of.

Sensible targets need to be set along with penalties for missing them. Without penalties, nothing ever gets done... Look at the infrastructure that was put in place for the Olympics, that got done ahead of time because there were serious deadlines with hefty finacial penalties for missing them.

A cynic might think UK politicians are just nicely educated frontmen for the various Drug, Food, Oil, Finance etc companies.

We'll done to CB a brilliant advocate, he's got my vote.

His comments are sacrosanct beautifull but like politicians words, are exactly that.

They always tend to pay lip service when required, I feel it is the lack of a proper unified policy throughout the country and I don't expect it to change any time soon.

We'll at least that's 35000 less fat twats in cars off the road every year!
Always look on the bright side!

The biggest improvement the Tory pratts could make to my cycling life would be to repair some of the roads. At present they're more dangerous than any other road users, and that is saying something.
PS we're lucky to have such an informed and committed spokesperson in CB

Can someone please give this man a job please?
Preferably one that takes the burden of responsibility of running the country away from the nasty, privileged, ex public school boys who are currently doing it.

Nailed it once again. More than anyone else, he highlights the total bullshit that flows from Westminster because it is stuffed full of non achievers that would not have the first clue about the graft that goes into his success or anyone else's.
The reality is this Chris, I will vote for you regardless of party affiliation because as soon as we representatives who are achievers in place, we might have hope. Good luck.

Well put!

CB should be King of the world

That being said, the second last line says it all, if the Gov was committed this would be so much easier, and we as a country weren't so apathetic to voting or politics in general, we may in fact have a voice