- 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
Trudy HarrisonActive Travel minister told children not to cycle on “terrible” local roads
Trudy Harrison, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary at the Department for Transport responsible for active travel, admitted that she has “pleaded” with her daughters not to ride their bikes near her home in Cumbria, and argued that safe, segregated routes are essential to encouraging women, children and disabled people to cycle.
The Conservative MP for Copeland, who took up her current role in the DfT in September 2021, also told a meeting of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Walking and Cycling (APPCWG) that cycling and walking will play a “huge part” in decarbonising Britain and improving the economy.
On Wednesday we reported that Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s Spring Statement, which cut fuel duty by 5 pence per litre, was criticised by charity Cycling UK’s head of campaigns Duncan Dollimore, who claimed it was a “sticking plaster for the problems we face today”.
Dollimore also expressed his disappointment that the government did not unveil a more “progressive” Spring Statement which focused on alternative, sustainable forms of transport such as cycling and walking. The fuel duty cut will cost the Treasury a reported £5 billion per year – the current five-year cycling and walking budget is £2 billion.
However, Harrison told the APPCWG meeting that the government is investing “six times more than we’ve ever committed” to cycling.
She added: “I think it’s also important that the roads budget, and money that has been spent on transport more generally, looks at the way we design roads with a cycling and walking lens wherever possible.”
Harrison also claimed that she wants to work with landowners to develop safe new cycle routes, and argued that a “cultural change” – as well as improved infrastructure – is required to get more people cycling.
“If we are going to decarbonize and we are going to have a happier, healthier, safer society, then walking and cycling is going to play a huge part”, she said.
“The most important thing is making sure that we’ve got the infrastructure as well, so children and women [can cycle], and the fact that cycling can be life changing for disabled people.”
Harrison told the meeting that she wants to focus on rural as well as urban bike routes, and said that the lack of safe cycling infrastructure around her home in the Lake District has even led to her asking her children not to ride their bikes as she is concerned about their safety.
“We do have fantastic cycling infrastructure at Grizedale and Whinlatter Forests, particularly for leisure cycling, but I couldn’t possibly read that out about my own community,” she said.
“I’ve seen for myself in my own county of Cumbria some pretty poor so-called cycle infrastructure. A white line on a road does not constitute a cycle route.”
Harrison pointed out that her village, Bootle, has “terrible cycling infrastructure”, including a road with a 60mph speed limit between her home and the local railway station.
“I have taught my daughters to ride bikes, along with my husband, but I have many, many times pleaded with them not to go out on their bikes because I’ve been worried about their safety,” she said.
“That can’t continue. That’s something that I really want to change. I would like children to be able to walk and to cycle to school.”
She added: “I know that it makes such a difference to have that segregated designated route for people.”
> Chris Boardman heads newly-launched government body Active Travel England
The minister said that funding allocated to Active Travel England, a governmental body launched in January and led by Chris Boardman, and new, higher standards for cycle infrastructure design will contribute to greater numbers reaching for their bikes.
Harrison also claimed that her husband – “the keenest cyclist you could ever imagine” – experiences animosity from motorists while riding his bike, with the minister arguing that the apparent growing chasm between drivers and cyclists needs to be addressed if more people are to be encouraged to cycle.
“I feel that sometimes an unhealthy kind of divide is being created between cyclists and motorists – and the reality is that many motorists are often cyclists and many cyclists are often motorists and ultimately, we’re just people trying to get to the places we need to be.
“And I would very much like to dial down that divide and recognise the value of cycling, for health, for environmental for reducing congestion, for our economy.
“Somehow we need to find a way through all this and I am very, very keen to be part of the team that improves the way in which we get about.
“I really want to see us, this government, roll out an incredible cycling revolution.”
After obtaining a PhD, lecturing, and hosting a history podcast at Queen’s University Belfast, Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.
Latest Comments
- Clem Fandango 19 min 20 sec ago
Ride on the road by getting a car.....? Like this you mean? I fail to see how that would help.
- eburtthebike 27 min 10 sec ago
The Daily Mail, Telegraph and GB News.........
- Tass Whitby 35 min 42 sec ago
Still available on Amazon if anyone's keen - link is in the review.
- Benthic 40 min 8 sec ago
Not AB specifically, but that sort of thing. Focus Pocus is the most entertaining.
- the little onion 42 min 12 sec ago
Mr Butterworth warned riders who use the area to "be vigilant as there's an idiot kicking about again"...
- Benthic 46 min 43 sec ago
That question would send Daily Mail readers into turmoil.
- Benthic 50 min 11 sec ago
Will pedesrains have to remove their shoes?
- Dnnnnnn 1 hour 9 min ago
Was that Marchmont? I remember a £975 Claris bike there a few years ago.
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 27 min ago
It is for four months, TrainingPeaks offers a free basic athlete account and TrainingPeaks Virtual is currently free for all users until March 2025...
- Cyclo1964 3 hours 19 min ago
It's not vindictive and the council should crack down on it. There is an application process they should follow but in general it means you have to...
Add new comment
14 comments
“I really want to see us, this government, roll out an incredible cycling revolution.”
blah, blah, blah. It's so repetitive and meaningless. Some local authorities have done some excellent infrastructure in recent years - but they are a minority.
The government spouts on about where the money is going to come from to do all this (despite giving £5bn to motorists this week). Well the simple answer is to scrap the new road building budget and there's £27bn. The last thing we need to be doing, even if we had the money, is to be building more roads which only encourage more motorised traffic when we need to be discouraging it.
This is just more meaningless "Blah, blah, blah".
Nothing will change.
And referencing leisure routes in Grizedale. I mean, what is the point of that? They might as well be on the moon for all the relevance they have to her kids (or adults) being able to cycle in safety.
That was my thought too - how can she think they are 'cycling infrastructure'? They're mountain bike trails. It's a bit like saying Silverstone race track is an excellent road transport link, helping to reduce congestion for the residents of Northamptonshire!
Also, whilst infrastructure is good. It's not everything, you will need to mix with drivers at some point. Like yesterday when I popped out for a take away, only a mile away, but 200m on the high street. Half-way into the short high street stretch, a car races up and overtakes into oncoming traffic causing them to perform an emergency stop! All because they can't wait 10 seconds. Grrr.
Well put. Although I think she's sort of moving in the right direction in general this is the approach taken. That or "we'll encourage, say nice things, turn up for photo opportunities - everything except actually put serious money into this or legislate to encourage it".
As for "having to mix" - yes indeed. But the best designed infrastructure can help make interaction *much* safer. Limiting where it occurs allows it to be clearer to drivers what they should be doing. Also simpler (and less) to police. If you can get to a lot of places without having to mix, or spend most of your journey with no conflict with motorists (or pedestrians for that matter) that must be an improvement. The best infra also carefully manages any places where there is conflict.
Wouldn't be the first time I've seen politicians bending the laws of logic to justify as practical what is actually an ideological decision. The ideology here probably isn't "about bikes". Most people including politicians are unaware that these contraptions have anything to do with the practicalities of daily life or a better future in many respects. If bikes did appear on the radar it'd likely be (electric) cars = the future, progress and people "getting on"; bikes = yesterday, hair shirt brigade, MAMILS, loblolly men and losels.
All well said, but as ever, where's the funding? Fine words but meaningless without the money to back them up.
The piddling amounts this government are putting into cycling are risible, and will take centuries to achieve what needs to be done in a decade. Meanwhile, they haven't cut the roads budget, they've encouraged driving by cutting fuel duty and no amount of positivity from a junior minister with very little power is going to achieve the radical change that is required now.
I'm waiting for the announcement that for every #100 spent on transport by an organisation that gets govt money, 50% must be active travel and public transport. Given the climate even that isn't enough. That way when they want to widen a motorway they will have to put in a lot of bike lanes.
I'd vote for that
Don't hold your breath.
Unusually - for a ... politician - she sounds pretty genuine and understanding of some of the issues here. I approve of the emphasis on infrastructure - in conjunction with other changes.
However this government - like all our governments - doesn't seem to have much urgency about doing anything that might shake things up. For example Grant Shapps was recently admitting the government has no policy / idea about road pricing or other means of replacing revenues as electric vehicles come in (well, he fobbed the question off to the Treasury). Plus they've just
increased the motoring subsidydecreased the fuel tax. I know: fuel poverty ... hardworking families ... supply chains ... critical time for businesses ... cost of living crisis. But when was it ever a good time? When was ever the time that we said "y'know, we're feeling pretty comfortable now - maybe we could even think about spending some spare change on this whole cycling, walking and wheeling thing"?I'd like her to be contagious but:
Six times nothing is still nothing.
If.
The reality is that few motorists are cyclists (falling to very few if you qualify this as "cycling for transport") and while many adult cyclists are also motorists many cyclists can't drive - children for one. Finally lots of people who might benefit from the increased mobility and joy of cycling - e.g. children, the disabled, older people - are never going to do so without some more radical and rapid changes than are currently being mooted or there's funding for.
The reality is that few motorists are cyclists (falling to very few if you qualify this as "cycling for transport") and while many adult cyclists are also motorists many cyclists can't drive - children for one
Correct! To a first approximation, 0% of motorists are cyclists and maybe 50% of adult cyclists are drivers, so 0 x 0.5 = 0% of drivers have the remotest empathy with cyclists- this includes the police. Now we know why we don't believe 'I'm a cyclist myself', and why I'm fairly suspicious about this minister.
Right, so these viewpoints are very perceptive and fair.
what I've missed form everything she has said is exactly what she is going to do about it. Kind words butter no parsnips. Well done for understanding the problem, but let's see some actions and policies
She needs to go down Whitehall to the Department of Digital Culture and Media to get hate speech against two wheel transport treated like Racism, Diversity and Inclusion in the mainstream and social media.
Actually Diversity and Inclusion already applies since it is the level of risk that makes road riding not acceptable to women who have an equal right to use any road.
It's only when the attitude of all road users changes that it will be safe for everyone to get the physical and mental health benefits of traveling on two wheels. #VisionZero
Environmental benefits a bonus towards Carbon neutral. So good for all in many aspects.
We just need politicians brave enough to go for transforming change not baby steps.
Presumed Liability is that change. Amsterdam is ok, but Copenhagen is to [not] die for..
I was with you until...
You can already go after people in the civil courts for running into you, aparently with much more success than in the criminal courts. Presumed liability - wherever it's implemented ATM - is a change to that process to make it easier ([1], [2]). That would indeed be a good thing but it ain't the change you seek. Unless you mean altering the criminal law? That would not just be a transforming change it would be a world-leading innovation (and won't happen).
Most people are not reassured by laws. They are reassured by not feeling threatened. Compensation or justice after the fact is still a terrible outcome compared to "incident never happened". Yes, the legal side is important. Especially in the UK where there's effectively impunity for bad driving (sometimes even for homicidal driving). But that must run in parallel to removing the potential for conflict (as much full segregation as needed with genuinely safe junctions). Which incidentally makes cycling much more pleasant and convenient.
Also - although Amsterdam is far from the most cycling-friendly city in the Netherlands it's in a different league (ahead) of Copenhagen ([1], [2]). The Danes have done something really useful. That's taking a car-centric city and showing with some fairly crude and simple changes you ca achieve a high cycling modal share. (Caveats - as long as you apply the changes universally. Also Copenhagen wasn't starting from zero cycling e.g. they already had greater cycling modal share than the UK / USA). However Copenhagen - despite producing brilliant publicity and some bits of "spectactular infra" ([1], [2]) - has nothing like the "goes everywhere" convenience and the systematic approach to safety that you find all across The Netherlands. (I rate that last system as a better idea than "Vision Zero". Why? It's more than just a slogan or a goal, it's a philosophy principles of how our transport systems should work for us safely and conveniently - as well as the detailed plans to manage how we do so.)