After days of confusing interviews and cringe-inducing conference talks, the government finally officially published its ‘Plan for Drivers’ yesterday evening – and it’s everything you imagined (or dreaded) it would be.
“There’s nothing wrong with driving,” the document begins. “Most of us use a car and, for many, life would not be liveable without their car. For those in rural areas, it is a lifeline. A car can hugely expand the independence of a younger person, as well as keep older people connected to key services and their families.”
But what about walking, cycling, and public transport?
“Walking, cycling, and public transport are necessary in a multi-modal transport system and we support their continued growth, but they are not the right choice for everyone’s journey.
“Being pro-public transport does not mean being anti-car. The easy political choice is to vilify the private car even when it’s been one of the most powerful forces for personal freedom and economic growth in the last century. Used appropriately and considerately, the car was, is, and will remain a force for good.
“It is not right that some drivers feel under attack.”
Ah yes, because it’s motorists who are most in danger out on the roads, that’s right.
The document goes on to say that the government will “explore options to stop local councils using so-called ‘15-minute cities’, such as in Oxford, to police people’s lives” (I’m sure the conspiracy theorists will be delighted), and that it “will restrain the most aggressively anti-driver traffic management measures”.
“We will make it clear that 20mph speed limits in England must be used appropriately where people want them – not as unwarranted blanket measures,” it says, before noting that the government “will take steps to stop councils profiting from moving traffic enforcement”.
> Cycling charity accuses Conservatives of "ill-fated attempt to win" votes with pro-motoring policies "undermining" active travel success
Needless to say, after Cycling UK and National Active Travel Commissioner Chris Boardman criticised Rishi Sunak’s new “proudly pro-car” over the past few days, the plan hasn’t gone down too well with those people tasked with encouraging cycling and walking throughout the UK.
In a joint letter to the prime minister, Ed Clancy, Dame Sarah Storey, Adam Tranter, and Simon O’Brien – the active travel commissioners for South Yorkshire, Greater Manchester, West Midlands, and the Liverpool City Region, respectively – argued that the “most effective plan for drivers will be to get right behind the government’s Gear Change plan”.
“There are some very real challenges in local transport and a key one is ensuring the existing road network does not suffer huge congestion, bringing disbenefits to communities and to the economy,” the commissioners say.
The letter continues:
Every extra person enabled to walk, cycle, or take public transport for their journeys frees up limited road space for those who really need to drive. The length of the UK road network has increased by just over two percent over the last 17 years… In towns and cities, we cannot knock down buildings or cut down trees to make more space for growing car ownership. Put simply, we need to be more efficient with the roads we already have.
[The Prime Minister is] right when he says that many people rely on their cars but this shouldn’t be confused with their aspirations; time and time again, representative polling reminds us that people do indeed want freedom of choice when it comes to transport.
The freedom of choice for mobility in our areas is best provided through high-quality active travel and reliable public transport networks.
The letter also stressed the importance for Sunak not to “vilify” the concept of 20mph zones – which “help support safe walking and cycling to school” – while also calling on the government to provide an update on its consultation to ban pavement parking.
The active travel commissioners also questioned Sunak’s reference to “local consent” in his Plan for Drivers, arguing that “while consultation can bring out strong voices on either side, it should be noted that active travel schemes are broadly popular when polled”.
“We stand ready to help deliver local transport networks that provide people with genuine choices about how they travel,” the letter concluded.
“This will make life easier for those who drive,” Tranter said of the commissioners’ recommendations on Twitter, “and create nice places where people want to live, work, and visit.”
Meanwhile, three-time Olympic champion Clancy said: “Time and time again, people tell me that they want the freedom of choice when it comes to how they travel. Choices that are made possible through the provision of quality active travel infrastructure and public transport networks.
“As Active Travel Commissioner, it’s my role to help improve South Yorkshire’s active travel network. But, to provide genuine choice, that must be based on decisions by local people.”
“Each year in Greater Manchester, 250 million journeys of 1km or less are done by car,” added Paralympic legend Storey. “If even half of these were possible to walk or cycle, that improves the roads for everyone including drivers.”
> Chris Boardman urges Rishi Sunak to stick with "fantastic" pro-cycling plans, admits concerns with language of "war on motorists" policies
However, not everyone was convinced with the commissioners’ apparent desire to frame active travel improvements through the lens of making motorists’ lives easier.
“I understand the sentiment, but we shouldn’t be re-issuing our targets by making them a positive for drivers,” wrote one Twitter user.
“It should very much be a by-product of better active travel. I feel like we’re bowing to an out of touch PM with this kind of phrasing. We need to call it how it is.”
Meanwhile, Lucy Jones summed up the general reaction from people who ride bikes to the language deployed by Sunak during his latest vote-grabbing scheme: “We’ve had a number of female cyclists killed on the roads of London in the last few months… there is no war on motorists. Quite the opposite.”
Quite.
Add new comment
38 comments
Had a new cycle path obstruction experience this morning. Came around a bend on a narrow section to find a bloke crouching down in the middle of the path doing something in his rucksac. I said hello, slowed to a crawl and as I edged past noticed he was cooking up heroin! Straight up caramel coloured liquid in a metal spoon over flame. He was using the rucksac as a windbreak for the lighter. Whatever next?!
Was going to challenge you that it might have been EPO but then those dopers probably prefer the road to the cycle path.
He heard someone saying have you seen the way all those lycra louts go shooting up that path and thought...
I'm genuinely alarmed by this. Firstly, specifically on cycling, this will create anti-cycling and anti-pedestrian culture and road design, more than at present. We can expect LTNs and 20mph zones to be ripped up, segregated cycle lanes removed, and more 'gerroff my road' intimidation from drivers.
Secondly, as a citizen, it is frightening to see ministers using nonsense conspiracy theories around 15 minute cities repeatedly in interviews. It's the UK version of QAnon. Full Trump. And as with all conspiracy theories, whilst on the surface they appear either funny or loony, scratch the surface and it all becomes deeply unpleasant.
Someone makes up some nonsense. An MP repeats that nonsense to the public. The public then repeats the nonsense to the MP. MP takes that as proof that nonsense is true and they repeat more nonsense.
What a wonderful world we live in.
Let's see if I'm following this correctly. Firstly, the Tories are massively in favour of small government and would consider this a core belief. Presumably as they feel it's more democratic. The Tories then win a massive majority and subsequently come up with an active travel plan that intructs those that they've devolved the power to to be "bold". Not unsurprisingly, the more progressive devolved powers are the boldest. The Tories then attack those local authorities for trying to fulfill the Tory objective namely that 50% of short journeys in towns and cities are completed using active travel. (Is this gaslighting?)
They then threaten to take back some of the powers that they've devolved (very big government) whilst at the same time suggesting that some local authorties are about to unilaterally embark on creating authoritarian enclaves where they would restrict movement, and that somehow this would happen right under the noses of government with no power to do anything.
I'm beginning to feel sorry for Andrew Bowie if he's been sent out to explain this twisted logic.
A quick preview of Rishi Sunak's conference closing speech.
I think this divisiveness and controversy we're seeing is clearly being driven by an establishment figure, using their massive media reach. They want to fuel enmity and outrage for their own benefit. Yes it's all the fault of a Zimbabwean care worker with a following of literally a few thousands, Cycling Mikey. Poor Rishi is just a pawn...
Pages