- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Cyclist next to an LTN planter (image: Adwitiya Pal)“Reasonably balanced or needlessly confrontational?” New BBC Panorama episode about low-traffic neighbourhoods raises concerns over stirring culture war
A new BBC Panorama episode, titled “Road Wars: Neighbourhood Traffic Chaos” to be broadcast later tonight on BBC One, explores the conflicts around low-traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) that have “set neighbours against neighbours”, and features stories and accounts from both sides of the debate; but it has already raised concerns about whether the show will offer a nuanced take or deepen the rift between both sides.
In the episode, BBC’s climate editor Justin Rowlatt visits Oxford’s LTN schemes, that have been the hotbed for several previous incidents of vandalism as well as cultural and ideological clashes lately, and in the process investigating if they are really helpful in reducing traffic and mitigating climate change.
The programme, which has previously been criticised for its investigations into "Britain's killer roads" and "Cars v Bikes", will feature interviews with Oxford residents who are campaigning in favour of the traffic restrictions as well as those who are campaigning against them.
It also looks to feature segments with LTN academic and expert Dr Rachel Aldred from University of Westminster, along with former actor, now COVID and climate change denier Laurence Fox.
> Review: Panorama – Road Rage: Cars v Bikes
Run over, beaten, bent, burnt and stolen - is this Britain’s most abused bollard?
Road Wars: Neighbourhood Traffic Chaos is on @BBCiPlayer now and on @BBCOne at 8pm tonighthttps://t.co/HxvuqijnR8 pic.twitter.com/jPeQ5mWzi9
— BBC Panorama (@BBCPanorama) April 17, 2023
A balanced approach by the BBC?
Richard Parnham is a resident who is campaigning against traffic restrictions in the city with a local pressure group called Reconnecting Oxford. He says the schemes have “torn the city apart” and are “setting neighbour against neighbour”.
Such claims and allegations against LTNs have been used long since the schemes were just beginning to be put in place, with many communities like Reconnecting Oxford forming in London to oppose them.
One such group from London, called OneEaling, claims “Ealing Council has divided our community by installing CCTV cameras, bollards and placing planters in an unsafe and undemocratic manner”.
Bollards seem to be a focus for the latest Panorama episode, with a new article on BBC’s website spotlighting the trials and tribulations of a plastic bollard on Howard Street in east Oxford which was installed last year, and labelling it as “probably the most abused bollard in the UK”.
> Vandals target LTN bollards and planters less than 24 hours after trial is introduced
Rowlatt writes: “I’ve been to meet locals there who believe the scheme will reduce congestion and pollution - and others who want the freedom to drive wherever they want.”
The article also has a small clip which sees the bollard being run over, bent, burned and then stolen. But it’s really nothing new, considering vandals have targeted not just bollards, but also planters, setting fire to them and overturning them, as well as other infrastructure to promote cycling and walking such as cycle lanes and bike racks in many places.
Oxford has introduced Low Traffic Neighbourhoods to enhance people's quality of life. But there's a small group of antisocial men who resent any restraint on where they can drive. Their tactics have become ever more extreme. Last night they resorted to arson. pic.twitter.com/zSSzhWjStw
— George Monbiot (@GeorgeMonbiot) July 4, 2022
Rowlatt also talks to Theo Hopkins, a 79-year old “human bollard” — one of the many residents who have stepped in to block the road themselves, sometimes provoking violent reactions, in tonight’s episode.
Mr Hopkins says that he has been hit twice during confrontations with angry drivers, with a car pushing him off the road one time.
> Teesside pop-up bike lanes abandoned after theft and vandalism
Another resident Zuhura Plummer, who has campaigned for the city's LTNs as part of a group called Oxfordshire Liveable Streets, has a starkly different view, claiming that these measures enable the residents to cycle safely and breathe cleaner air.
The programme also intends to explain the larger government initiatives around LTNs, such as the increased spending after lockdown to promote active travel, and how it ended up enraging even more drivers, slapping them with fines for violating the rules.
Additionally, Prof Rachel Aldred, who has been behind numerous academic papers, reports and research investigating LTNs and their effects, is also set to be a part of the show to counter the claims of drivers and residents complaining that LTNs just push the problem from side roads to main roads.
Her studies have found that the average increase in traffic flows on boundary roads is just over one per cent, with recorded traffic on the boundary roads increasing in half the LTNs she has studied - and going down in the other half.
> Study finds London's Mini-Hollands are encouraging more cycling - and especially, walking
Finally, the show is set to take a look at the conspiracy theories against traffic reduction schemes that have found their way from the dark corners of social media all the way to the Parliament, with MPs now on the bandwagon as well.
In February, conspiracy theorists and far-right groups attended a protest in Oxford against the planned 15-minute cities scheme, which aim to create neighbourhoods where residents can walk or cycle to the nearest shop, cafe, school, or any essential necessity in a short period of time.
The protest was joined by racist and neo-Nazi group Patriotic Alternative, Heritage Party founder David Kurten, climate change denier and anti-vaccine activist Piers Corbyn, and other like-minded people. Among those present was also former actor and conspiracy theorists’ darling Laurence Fox, who also spoke at the event.
Fox is also speaking to Rowlatt on tonight’s Panorama, about how 15-minute cities are somehow part of a sinister desire by the government “to control our movement, speech, everything”.
…or rabble-rousing for views?
BBC, long-known for its balanced coverage of the news (historically, even on topics like climate change), seems to be going for another investigative documentary on its night-time show that is at most times well-reputed for being truthful. But as transport journalist Carlton Reid pointed out, the title seems “leading and needlessly confrontational”.
> Podcast: Why is the 15-minute city attracting so many conspiracy theories?
On the plus side the prog looks to feature specialist academic expert @RachelAldred It also looks to feature anti-vaxxer Laurence Fox and the Astro-turf org Tax Payers’ Alliance.
— Carlton Reid (@carltonreid) April 17, 2023
In 2021, we reported that a BBC News report on LTNs was criticised by a Labour peer from All Party Parliamentary Group on Cycling and Walking for ignoring evidence and “perpetuating concerning falsehoods”, as well that the broadcaster has “embarked on its own journey to stir up a manufactured culture war”.
The TV report, which was also fact-checked by Reid to be false, was fronted by… Justin Rowlatt, who was BBC Newsnight’s ‘ethical man’ for living green and with low carbon impact in 2006, and says on his Twitter profile that he reports “from the front line of climate change - how it’s going to affect our lives and what we can do about it”.
Rowlatt, in the 2021 report had brought up the fact of fines on drivers for cutting through LTNs, and claimed that they “raised almost half a million quid” within weeks — an issue that’s going to be discussed once again by him tonight.
He had also admitted that after the piece titled “Local traffic changes ‘more divisive than Brexit’” went live, his inbox was “already filling up”.
Further, last year Panoramas' investigation of “Britain’s Killer Roads” was under fire for questioning if a reduction in police numbers, breath tests and speed cameras were to blame for the rising death rates on the UK roads, rather than holding those behind the wheel responsible.
And in November, Panorama broadcast “Road Rage: Cars v Bikes”, a curious title for a TV programme that if anything showed just how vulnerable people riding bikes are with motorists who overtake them too closely; or failed to see them altogether, as in one case highlighted in the episode that we reported on at the time.
So is the latest Panorama title provocative only to reel in more viewers, or will it actually be stirring the pot in an already heated cultural landscape?
“Road Wars: Neighbourhood Traffic Chaos” airs on BBC One at 8 PM tonight (8:30PM in Wales), and is also available to watch on BBC iPlayer right now.
Adwitiya joined road.cc in 2023 as a news writer after graduating with a masters in journalism from Cardiff University. His dissertation focused on active travel, which soon threw him into the deep end of covering everything related to the two-wheeled tool, and now cycling is as big a part of his life as guitars and football. He has previously covered local and national politics for Voice Wales, and also likes to writes about science, tech and the environment, if he can find the time. Living right next to the Taff trail in the Welsh capital, you can find him trying to tackle the brutal climbs in the valleys.
Latest Comments
- Zebra 24 min 54 sec ago
One thing which will influence me next time I buy new wheels is the noise which the freehub makes - how loud it is. I have tinitus and am quite...
- David9694 1 hour 13 min ago
More notice needed for Remembrance Sunday road closures...
- chrisonabike 1 hour 54 min ago
This is an impressive new way of avoiding work by the police! Several crimes here (eg. phone use) - so is the new game "if we can identify *one*...
- HeadDown 2 hours 17 min ago
Which explains a lot. I reckon the standard of driving in the UK has noticeably decreased in the last 5-10 years. A host of factors no doubt, but I...
- Keykey1985 2 hours 52 min ago
He wasn't brake-checking me, he was trying to get me to stop. Nothing good would have come from me stopping.
- PRSboy 3 hours 10 min ago
It was designed around 28mm tyres but there's lots of clearance and could certainly take bigger tyres.
- Cugel 3 hours 13 min ago
A dinosaur version is shurely for the kiddies. Myself I'd like The Hindenburg. There may be The Freisian, filled with methane rather than hydrogen,...
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 27 min ago
When I see SLOW HORSES I always think ah, so this is where the ones I bet on are kept...
- chrisonabike 4 hours 8 min ago
No great mystery in either case, surely? Both US politician and the motor trade say "choose us and your life will be better and easier!" And other...
- stonojnr 6 hours 20 min ago
theres an attitude I encounter alot locally, and demonstrated in bucket loads by drivers on my commute home tonight, that cyclists shouldnt be on...
Add new comment
61 comments
When the word "respect" is used in the context of cyclists sharing road space with drivers the cyclist would like the common courtesy of not being put at risk of injury and death by incompetent and occasionally downright malign driving, whereas the drivers think respect is for cyclists to refrain from doing things which are absolutely legal such as cycling 2 abreast, cycling on the road instead of a nearby cycle path, cycling whilst wearing lycra, cycling while not wearing hi viz lycra, cycling too fast, cycling too slow or in many cases just cycling on the road at all. Furthermore, many drivers seem to think that cyclists using cameras to record the daily abuse and danger they are put in by drivers is demonstrating a lack of respect.
It is very one sided and not helped by certain MSM characters who make a living out of creating division against an ever dwindling list of protected characteristic targets.
If you think this article is unbalanced read the Dail Mail.
Please don't
I really don't think articles like this are of benefit to anyone. I used to be a member of the Alliance of British Drivers, but their position, with respect to cyclists (of which I am one), was seriously antagonistic and, as a result of that, and their leaders not being prepared to make the effort to understand cyclists' positions, I quit.
This article is pretty much the same as the cr@p they came out with, but in the opposite direction. The reference to "climate change denier" is an ad hominem attack that benefits no one, but panders to a particular audience and shows ignorance on behalf of the author who even expresses a "distaste for cars" in his profile.
In reality, the best way to address the current situation in relation to cars vs bikes is for drivers and cyclists to have more respect for the others. I drive, and cycle, and both 'sides' are a pain in the @rse towards the others.
As it is, if this ends up in the comments, fine, if not, fine. I'm cancelling my account on road.cc; I have better things to do than struggle with that sort of negativity.
That's a jolly long comment for someone who has better things to do.
Firstly - thanks for posting this. I disagree with your take but I'm interested in why you think differently. I haven't actually watched this - I'm just responding on what you have criticised in this article.
I've read it and although I've not yet seen the program it seems to be a basic summary of the contents, plus a look at some criticism. If that's not of benefit to anyone then journalism as a whole is pointless - just go and watch the program, right? The article just quotes people. You could disagree with those quotes they've highlighted and those whose criticism they've picked up on in the second half but aside from "choice of what to report" this is hardly "editorial", no?
Or are you saying road.cc have made something up here?
Bravo! Genuinely - it's not an easy thing to say "I don't agree with this group any more". I could be very wrong but - at least from the leadership - the ADB doesn't seem to be a broad church and the pronouncements from the top don't seem particularly "measured".
Like the best defense against libel - if it's true, what's your complaint?
I would say this is also relevant for this kind of article. One of the reasons understood by all sides is that these kind of traffic interventions are partly intended to address motor vehicle emissions. Both directly (less driving through the LTNs) and also indirectly (it makes it easier to persuade people to walk or cycle as they're not dealing with so many cars passing through).
I'd say that makes this a relevant comment - whether you approve of LTNs or not and whether you accept the reality of human-generated climate change or not.
"Why can't we all get along / share the road!" That would be great if it worked. Unfortunately this like saying "the best way to reduce 'accidents' is for people to stop being careless". If it could happen like that, it would have.
When I'm cycling I am a vulnerable road user. Whether a collision is caused "by chance", by someone's carelessness or even a moment of aggression - in a collision I'm going to bear the costs. If I am confrontational and / or careless while cycling I might increase my own chances of injury slightly, but almost nothing I can do personally can reduce my chances of this much. (I'm already at least as aware when cycling as when driving).
There is one intervention which has been shown to "reduce the other side being a pain in the arse". However it involves political will, time, quite a bit of change and not just exhortations to our "better natures"...
The Respect thing is interesting. Quite often what they mean is that cyclists should be deferential to drivers.
My retort is why should I respect those that don't respect the highway code.
Of course we all makes mistakes but in my experience when I have politely pointed out a drivers mistake I've, more often than not, been met with abuse or idiotic lack of HC knowledge. Of course the respectful response would be "sorry" or "I'll make sure I re-read the HC".
Really? I drive and cycle about 7000 miles a year each. I can't remember the last time a cyclist was a pain in the arse to me as a driver.
What are you doing to upset them? or are you just impatient, and conside a cyclist being in front of you and causing a minor delay to be a pain in the arse?
In my opinion the best way to adress the issue of on group of road users endangering the other is not to say "both sides are bad" but to address the danger.
Could it be.........
I'm not ready to claim my £5 just yet. I wonder if the promised account deletion will actually happen?
Clear example here of a cyclist being a pain in the arse
https://twitter.com/tony_eh/status/1648351599880699906
"Had to wait behind me for a whole 8 seconds!"
Indeed and yet if it were 8s or even 30s behind a horse, a learner, a tractor, a milk float (do they even still exist?) the bin lorry, waiting to get around a parked car, or even 30 minutes lost in motorway congestion because someone drove like a tit, they would be perfectly capable of re-calibrating their expectations of travelling at the speed limit (or above) at all times.
For some reason this acceptance of inevitable delays being part of using a busy road system completely disappears when bikes are involved.
Honestly if someone recorded all the delays in their journeys over a year I doubt time lost behind bicycles would account for more than 1%. Time lost because too many people are trying to move around in big metal boxes is probably the largest pie slice, followed by accidents, then inconsiderate parking causing an obstruction.
Cyclists travelling well below the speed limit of a public road can indeed be a 'pain in the arse' to motorised traffic using that road; this is not to say that cyclists can't legally use the road, as that is another matter entirely.
Unless traffic rules are radicaly different in the UK as compared to where I am, the speed limit gives the MAXIMUM allowable speed. Most drivers seem to think it relates to some minimum speed to be maintained under any circumstances.
This.
I'm sure I'm not the only one that's been confronted by an angry drivist yelling at me that "if you can't do 30 you shouldn't be on the f*cking road!"
Says it all really. Driver has to slow down due to the road conditions (which include "hazards" like cyclists going uphill,) gets frustrated and the red mist quickly descends due to a lack of self-regulation. The frustration in this situation is, as my teenage daughters would say, "a you problem" - it's in your power to control and simply accept the circumstances presented to you by chance & deal with it rationally. BUT rather than do so, which would involve admitting that they are the problem, the angry drivist will reach for any convenient target to justify their own inadequacies & project their frustrations on to.
It's definitely getting worse - when driving at the speed limit I find that I'm being subjected to more & more light flashing, horn beeping, arm waving & pointless overtaking from other drivists too. It's a really sad indictment of the state of road safety in this country that so many operators of motor vehicles just cannot comprehend that the reason why you have to be licenced to operate one on a public highway is because of the potential threat you pose to others if something goes wrong. The speed limits are surely only put there by "the man" / " the woke liberal snowflakes" to restrict their personal freedoms? Nothing to do with safety.
LTNs vs. criminals should have been the title.
In London (I don't know for Oxford) in most of the boroughs the majority of households do not own a car. Which means that a small minority of a minority are screaming conspiracy because local authorities are trying to make cities more liveable. And if one actually counts what the changes are - they are very small in comparison to the dual carriageways, A roads, shopping malls, hyper store car parks, roads, roads, roads that are the overwhelming experience in the urban environment.
They seem to be demanding ("withaht any CoNsuLTayShUn)":
It's so laughable that the usual culture war dependent "commentators" have jumped on the 15 minute city concept, twisted what it actually is and requires beyond any recognition or semblance of reality, and spewed it out to the frothing lemmings. You'd think they were only doing it for the publicity to prolong some semblance of their own relevance.
There's definite paranoia being stoked amongst motorists. The phrase 15 minute cities distinguishes convenience. Not some walled off, hunger games sub-district dystopia.
These motorists need to get a grip. What's KH's expertise in this matter???
It's almost like working with worry was a great way to manipulate people. Fear AND anger - a good way to get people out on the streets.
Of course, I might be paranoid. Maybe huge multinational concerns who would bend politicians and influence the public for their own gain are just things I've seen in dystopian fictions. Yeah, I guess I could just be imagining things - after all politicians are sensible enough not to stoke this kind of public mood and then ride the tiger, right?
Still if it's KH and Mr. Fox leading the charge cock-up does seem more likely than conspiracy...
Some discord is inevitable.
But you shouldn't forget. Cycling and walking is healthy, free and green. We will inherit the earth.
It's inevitable.
You know you're on the wrong side of the argument when your champions are Katie Hopkins & Laurence Fox
Be thankful At least that miserable,sour faced git who used to do that series about the coast didn't feature, he makes me want to kill myself! .
Had to look this up. I guess you mean Neil Oliver, who now presents a programme on GB news. I was worried it was Nicholas Crane, who was a big cyling inspiration to me back in the day. But a quick Google suggests that Mr Crane has (thankfully) not entered the LTN debate.
I remember seeing him hauling up a very old and heavy bicycle up a very wet mountain on a BBC programme once...
Could have been a series on maps?
Indeed!
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/apr/17/what-prompted-u-turn-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-laurence-fox
Well, I watched it and while it wasn't as bad as it could have been, there was plenty to criticise, like interviewing conspiracy theorists, or not asking opponents for evidence, or the presenter not being impartial and putting words into the mouth of objectors.
It could be that by producing such shows, they are demonstrating the paucity of the arguments of the opponents, whilst pretending to be impartial? Maybe, but I still want to see a thousand articles about cycling in the next year; no, make that 10,000.
I don't touch the BBC so won't be watching but I am curious if they challenge the narrative central to anti-LTN activism: that they stop people from going to places rather than stopping them going via places.
"with a car pushing him off the road one time"
No. "with a driver using his car as a weapon to push him off the road on one occasion."
They tried to be balanced, but missed the point. Especially at 22:30 minutes in, they picked a worst case scenario of a car journey from a house to the railway station, where due to the modal filter, the journey would have to go via the ring-road rather than through the city centre.
The conclusion is it took 25mins, whereby the city centre route took 12 mins. This was described as 'a fraction of the time' - well, yes, about half. But they didn't make the point that this is exactly the sort of journey that the scheme is trying to discourage! They didn't compare the time it might have taken on the bus, by bicycle, foot or mobility scooter.
Well, of course I had to go and have a look on google maps. The short journey at the moment is taking:
20 mins by car
19 mins by bus
28 min on foot
8 mins by bicycle
We can see that the bicycle is by far the quickest option, with the bus similar to the car.
In contrast, the longer route is taking 55 minutes; that will create a huge incentive to choose an alternative mode of transport and is exactly what the scheme is trying to achieve.
Pages