- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
London cyclists at traffic lights (copyright Britishcycling.org_.uk).jpgGovernment to fall well short of target of doubling cycling trips by 2025
The Department for Transport (DfT) is set to miss a target of doubling the number of cycling journeys by 2025 because not enough is being spent on dedicated infrastructure, reports The Times.
The Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy, published in 2017, said it expected the number of journeys made by bike to rise from 800 million in 2013 to 1.6 billion by 2025.
> £1.2bn in funding as Government finally publishes cycling and walking investment strategy
However, according to National Travel Survey statistics, in 2017 some 991 million trips were made. Should that rate of growth continue in the coming years, the figure would increase to 1.27 billion.
The Times cited a recent government report that acknowledged that at the current level of funding, the target will not be met, with the blame put on local councils for not investing in cycling ingfrastructure.
Also, since the £1.2 billion funding for cycling and walking for the five years to 2020/21 is not ringfenced, councils are able to use it to on other services where they deem the money would be better spent.
A DfT spokesperson claimed that during the lifetime of the current Parliament, which should it run its full, five-year term will be in place until 2022, £2 billion was being spent on “active travel” which was double that spent in the previous five years.
Cycling UK, however, pointed out that investment is inconsistent across the country and that the huge sums being spent on cycling in cities such as Greater Manchester and London masked falls in spend in less populated areas.
Last year, it said that while the mayors of those two cities were spending £17 per person per year on cycling, in England outside London the average was just 72 pence.
> Flatlining cycling numbers and investment set to fall (+ interactive map)
The charity also called for a more inclusive approach to be taken, saying that cycling “is still seen as a male-dominated activity. We need better community projects if we are going to get, for example, more women and older people cycling.”
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- imajez 2 hours 39 min ago
Nothing new about zebra [or light controlled] crossing on roundabouts. Sheffield has had them for decades, possibly since the 1970s.
- David9694 4 hours 9 min ago
Herefordshire man fined after throwing parking ticket...
- OnYerBike 5 hours 30 min ago
I'm sure that sort of thing will come sooner or later. But presumably a key ingredient (and why you'd turn to a big brand like Fizik) is knowing...
- muhasib 5 hours 35 min ago
"the cost to rebuild the M25 junction 10/A3 Wisley interchange is £317 million. The project is expected to be completed in 2025. "
- mark1a 5 hours 58 min ago
I think they did, from memory back in the 70s/80s... haven't seen one for years though, our current milkman uses a standard van, albeit hybrid.
- kingleo 7 hours 13 min ago
I believe that straight forks that are used on carbon frames are more dangerous than the old steel forks because they are more rigid, the old steel...
- S.E. 7 hours 45 min ago
Yes, sleep apnea produces more CO... I'm not aware of any doping effect but what do I know....
- Gd29 9 hours 53 min ago
That's true enough. But doesn't address my point that the chainset you get as a replacement will not physically fit chainrings from the chain set...
- brooksby 10 hours 23 min ago
In all fairness, it almost certainly NEVER happened…
Add new comment
19 comments
I'm always intrigued how optimistic politicians are when it comes to getting people (the majority) out of cars onto public transport or bikes; the only way would be to make traffic congestion horrific or make it very expensive (tax, petrol, parking), which no politician would even dare attempt. Adopting cycling as a mode of transport (accepting that there will be occasions that you need to drive) takes a real mindset change. It doesn't help that the growth in UK cycling has come from sport cycling, as opposed to a mode of transport. I heard an interview with a Dutch man and during the week (ie getting about by bike) it was e-bikes all the way (on the lines of "it's a no-brainer; faster, less sweat; why would I not use an e-bike?") and weekends (ie sport cycling) it was full carbon with his local club. Suggest that combo to your average UK 'roadie/commuter'!
Pretty good justification for N+1
I'm already ahead of the game then.
A year of commuting and it affecting my enjoyment of my weekend fun, plus killing my bikes and I've gone e-bike. Fat tyres, sit up and beg, no need for lycra and i can hit every damn pothole and dropped kerb!
The increase in journeys is at odds with the info from last year which said that since the mid 00s journeys/numbers had remained static with just the miles going up a smidge, basically on average people going a bit further on their trips.
£1.2Bn is still pissing in the wind even IF it was actually a true figure to be spent and that's a big IF. As mentioned above a lot of it will be coughed up on over priced shite will not just not increase cycling but piss off everyone when people on bikes simply won't use it. Also money will end up being shared with active travel' but as per the Bedford turbo roundabout disgrace, money ends up being used to facilitate getting more motorists through with fewer 'obstructions'.
I've been asked to have input on a new housing development in our town and hopefully those in charge saying that active travel is at the top of the hierachy will keep their promises. After an extensive chat with them they seem to be on board with making sure cycling will be catered for, just hope that that's not the piecemeal shit we see all too often.
Be wary, very wary. I've been fed utter BS by very convincing planners which turned out to be nothing but wishes and dreams, and when push came to shove, there were a few token cycle facilities, but nothing like what they told me. Get it in writing, get senior management to sign it, get the council to agree with sanctions for failing, get it written into the plans. Not just expressions of wishes "we will incorporate provision for cyclists wherever possible" except that it won't be possible; "we intend to make this development cycle-friendly" but intentions have a terrible habit of not being carried out.
A wise man told me to believe what people do, not what they say.
And yes; I'm bloody cynical, with good reason.
Part of that is they have a very different interpretation on the vocabulary of cycling infrastructure,than most cyclists do. I remember reading a local council press release on a set of road improvements and it quoted some figure in miles of new traffic free cycleways they'd implemented. I contacted them to find out where these were as they sounded like they could be useful and applaud them for their actions. Only to find out what theyd done is just stuck a shared use bike path sign on an existing pavement alongside the road,that was your new 'traffic free' cycle way.
See also Norwich city councils 750k 'improvements' to make a roundabout safer by copying all the worst bits of the Bedford turbo roundabout https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/politics/fiveways-roundabout-changes-in-nor...
It's not actually down to the council, the land is owned by an organisation that were and have been a part of the founding of the town in the early 1900s so it's a bit different to most situations. The guy and lady I met really do seem to be on board with things and they do have a cycling strategy, something our local athority doesn't. They've even talked about starting from the new development as a springboard to doing the rest of the town and as are the primary landowners will have a huge influenece. the problem as always is the locla authoirty which has been Tory run for donkeys just like the local MP.
They can poo-poo what the LA want in many scenarios but haven't really done anything to date that's worth shit. I just hope that myself and others can actually propel things forward because we really need it (like everywhere) and our small town has been over-run with motors which causes massive issues for everyone.
I threw in what the founding father of the town wanted, housing and work for all, so I said the development should be prioritised for local people/people who work locally, especially the affordable housing.
Anybody surprised by this?
What _is_ slightly surprising is that they appear to even remember that they ever set a target in the first place. I thought the usual thing was to announce a 'target' and then fail to meet it but also never, ever mention it again. Just wait till everyone's forgotten and repeat the process.
I'm astonished...
DfT? Missing a target? How very unusual.
Oh no, wait a minute, it's standard for literally everything this Government has ever done or tried to do. Although the usual answer is simply to quietly move the goalposts and "revise" the target.
This government hasn't got a great track record of meeting any targets has it? This one's the least of their problems
I appreciate that the government has a full plate of problems, but I'm not sure that the continued poisoning of our air and the subsequent thousands of people dying is not really the 'least' of them.
I was being ironic
In fact the only thing this government is good at is missing targets.
I was being ironic
In fact the only thing this government is good at is missing targets.
Sorry - I didn't pick up on the irony - I thought you were dismissing it as being not important.
Well, given that pollution tends to be highest in areas where housing costs are lowest, it probably isn't really much of a problem for them. Most of them have second homes in leafy areas, well away from major roads, after all. Their children likewise probably go to schools that aren't in the high-pollution areas. Car pollution tends to be highly localised.
Also, to perversely make arguments from both sides. the general level of air pollution is lower than it used to be because of the move away from coal-fired power stations. Despite car pollution the overall situation is actually better than it was in past decades. So while it's still a negative of motor transport, there's reason not to get really gloomy about it in total.
Government? What government? I hadn't noticed one.
The great news is, that Boris the bus liar is favourite to take over from May, the most useless PM ever. Can you buy citizenship in an EU country? Any EU country will do; this one is bust.
It is not just about the amount of money (not) spent on cycling infrastructure, it is also about what that money is spent on - there needs to be clear national guidance on minimum standards, to ensure that money is not wasted on dangerous or stupid cycle routes.
There is a new segregated cycle lane in central Bradford. Unfortunately, it is about 20 meters long, operating as a contraflow in a one-way street, then abruptly ends with a bollard, leaving the cyclist nowhere to go except to dismount and walk their bike along the pavement. It cost £20k. You can see it on google streetview, where amusingly there is also a lorry parked in it (illegally)
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.7932817,-1.7516938,3a,75y,357.01h,61.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAYLXKqKF_TkOL1kKKiBhHg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
...making it a complete waste of time, and so typical of everything the last couple of governments have done: (1) announce and grant huge amount of money, (2) quietly say that its coming out of local funding not central, (3) blame the local authorities when it doesn't happen.
And don't ring fence it while cutting local authority funding so that it is inevitable that they will be forced to spend it on some duty that they have a legal liability to perform. Designed and guaranteed to fail, just like almost everything this government does. Apart from austerity, which was incredibly successful at making the tory millionaires a lot richer.