The Times Cycling Campaign

Posted on
Page
of 30
/ 30
Last Next
  • The Times is running a very special front page tomorrow, sneak peek here: twitpic.com/8ehuh2

    They're launching a cycle safety campaign called Cities Fit for Cycling, with this manifesto:

    • Trucks entering a city centre should be required by law to fit censors, audible truck-turning alarms, extra mirrors and safety bars to stop cyclists being thrown under the wheels.
    • The 500 most dangerous road junctions must be identified, redesigned or fitted with priority traffic lights for cyclists and Trixi mirrors that allow lorry drivers to see cyclists on their near-side.
    • A national audit of cycling to find out how many people cycle in Britain and how cyclists are killed or injured should be held to underpin effective cycle safety.
    • Two per cent of the Highways Agency budget should be earmarked for next generation cycle routes, providing £100 million a year towards world-class cycling infrastructure. Each year cities should be graded on the quality of cycling provision.
    • The training of cyclists and drivers must improve and cycle safety should become a core part of the driving test.
    • 20mph should become the default speed limit in residential areas where there are no cycle lanes.
    • Businesses should be invited to sponsor cycleways and cycling super-highways, mirroring the Barclays-backed bicycle hire scheme in London.
    • Every city, even those without an elected mayor, should appoint a cycling commissioner to push home reforms.

    You can sign up and support it here:

    thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyc­lesafety/contact/

  • Repost
    Capaigning thread and news thread >>>>>>>>>>

  • Even if you hate Murdoch, it is worth having a gander at The Times today. Their front page is devoted to their new cycling safety campaign, launched following the serious injury to one of their young reporters.

  • This story relates to this rider down thread.

    Sadly she's still in a coma.

  • Save our cyclists!

    []cyclists being thrown under the wheels.
    [
    ]The 500 most dangerous road junctions
    []cyclists are killed or injured
    [
    ]Cycle safety
    []Businesses should be invited to sponsor cycleways
    [
    ] appoint a cycling commissioner to push home reforms.

    You can sign up and support it here:

    Crap campaign. The language they use would put anyone off cycling. They've got the wrong end of the stick. Cycling isn't dangerous, (driving is). Why not a 'Tame our drivers" Campaign. I'd sign that one!

  • signed.

    EDIT: language aside, they dont sound like bad ideas?

  • The best way to save our cyclists is to get more cyclists. This will put non cyclists off cycling. Because of the language.

  • Hmmmm... I guess.

    Surely having one of Londons biggest papers rattling the cage is a good thing though? All those sensors on trucks and stuff... That probably would never have made this article had it not been for the publicity around the CEMEX stuff.... and maybe as a result of this, that idea might gather momentum. I dont know.

  • However many mirrors and alarms safety bars we put on lorries the drivers need to look. And anyway it is the private car drivers not lorries that kill and injure most. Better to act to put people off driving, Tolls, higher fuel tax, enforcement and massive penalties for driving dangerously.

    We know how cyclists are killed. By car drivers not looking when turning and driving to fast and on the phone. Slow them down, get drivers used to sharing the road, create shared spaces like exhibition road where and make less space for driving and more for walking and cycling.

    Why should businesses sponsor cycling? The state should be responsible for make are street environment livable for all.

  • Fair enough.

    it is the private car drivers not lorries that kill and injure most.

    I did not know this...

  • ^^ I agree, that would be the better campaign, I do think the Times campaign is a knee jerk reaction by a lot of car drivers faced with the horror of an injured cycling colleague.
    They could campaign for proper justice for carelessness or recklessness behind the wheel
    There is some good in it, just not as much as there could have been.

  • couldnt help wondering about the conversation in number 10 this morning

    Call me Dave comes into the office to get his briefing for the day from Sir Humphrey

    Humph-
    "morning sir, bit of bother in the Times today, cycling again, seems a bit hot at the moment"
    Callmedave
    "Oh really, tell me more"
    Humph-
    "Well theyve got this campaign, breaks down to few things really not too much to worry about but it is front page, think that it might be worth doing something"
    Callmedave
    "Ah, I see, (skim reads paper) well didnt we get daft to do a cycle lanes thing a couple of years ago?"
    Humph-
    " Yes, the local authorities didnt do anything with it as we didnt tell them they had to"
    Callmedave-
    "Nonsense anyway, that time I rode down Whitehall I didnt need a cycle lane, besides, theres not enough room to build stuff all over the place, think of something else"
    Humph-
    "We do have Justine now, shes a bit of a looker, perhaps a photocall sir"
    Callmedave-
    "Yes, good idea Humph, ask her to ride down to P.M.S questions from here will you, she can borrow my bike"
    Humph-
    "and the press release sir?, this isnt the 'Deckchairecho' needs to be something worthwhile"
    Callmedave-
    " Yes, well do some sums, say a couple of million for cycling schemes, it wont touch the sides of the daft pot, and anyway the HS2 will take up everything they have next year anyway"
    Humph-
    "Yes minister, that should do it"
    Callmedave-
    " Right then, well done, we cant have these things getting too big, I mean whatever next? the Mail calling for kids rights, saying theres millions of children unable to play out and grow up properly because of our transport priorities?"
    Humph-
    " God forbid sir"

  • Jack Thurston of Resonance FM Cycle show has just tweeted a link to Le Monde article stating that ZERO cyclists were killed in Paris in 2011

    lemonde.fr/societe/article/20­12/01/26/le-velo-un-nouveau-remede-antic­rise_1633390_3224.html

  • Jack Thurston of Resonance FM Cycle show has just tweeted a link to Le Monde article stating that ZERO cyclists were killed in Paris in 2011

    lemonde.fr/societe/article/20­12/01/26/le-velo-un-nouveau-remede-antic­rise_1633390_3224.html

    also better food.

  • Some of the above comments feel a little gift horse/mouth. Regardless of whether your agree with all of the details, front page headlines on a proper newspaper highlighting things that can be done to help cyclists in cities is a good thing.

    I agree that confident, assertive cycling mitigates the need for most of these, and that's when the 'drivers not driving like a plank' becomes the key issue on your agenda. However, you won't get the general public out of cars and onto bikes until dedicated infrastructure is their to make them feel safe in the initial wobbly months. And if the only way to fund such dedicated infrastructure is by getting company logos plastered over it then fine - I'd rather have something decent there and with RBS branding, than nothing at all because of the idealogical stance that it should be state money not private.

    Gee, this is a high soapbox I've found myself on...

  • There ain't no logos on exhibition road
    thisislondon.co.uk/standard/a­rticle-24032482-shared-space-is-the-futu­re-for-londons-roads.do

    Now this is dedicated infrastructure that I buy. Not silly strips of green and blue that take bike riders out of driver's way for the drivers convenience.

  • also better food.

    Bien sur.

  • Crap campaign. The language they use would put anyone off cycling. They've got the wrong end of the stick. Cycling isn't dangerous, (driving is). Why not a 'Tame our drivers" Campaign. I'd sign that one!

    Skydancer, dear fellow, I think you may have the wrong end of the stick. A major and read national newspaper campaigning for cycle safety is a very positive thing. It brings the debate out into the mainstream. That is what is important.

    Or is it because they critisise current cycle safety training?

  • There ain't no logos on exhibition road
    thisislondon.co.uk/standard/a­rticle-24032482-shared-space-is-the-futu­re-for-londons-roads.do

    Now this is dedicated infrastructure that I buy. Not silly strips of green and blue that take bike riders out of driver's way for the drivers convenience.

    Not if you have a visual impairment.

  • No they don't criticise training. They use the language of road safety, that reinforces the myth that cycling is dangerous and it is not, (driving can be though). The basic premise is all this stuff needs to be done to 'save us'. We don't need saving. We need more people doing what we do. This stuff puts potential cyclists off.

    Re visual impairment and shared space. It is an issue and has been dealt with to some extent on exhibition road. Again, by reducing road danger across the board more onus is put on the drivers to be responsible to look out for everyone whether by design as well as law

  • No, that's not really an answer. They put a mini rumble strip in. But 'putting the onus on drivers to be responsible' - how is that driver going to be aware of someone's visual impairment? Previous crossings enabled blind / visually impaired people to know where and when it was safe to cross. As far as I'm aware, that's been removed.

  • But anyway, that's a side issue. Sorry for diverting.

  • ^^^ Disagree (and I'm wary of heading down the xkcd cartoon route here).

    Cycling at certain places in Glasgow (and presumably London) is dangerous, as the road design/traffic flow is inherently hostile to something slow moving and squishy. Fully agree that if every driver was perfect, this wouldn't be an issue. I don't believe they are, and I don't believe they ever will be. I'm not.

    Again, agree with you that more people cycling gives safety in numbers, increases awareness, etc, etc. Currently, unless you're prepared/able to travel at around traffic speed, assertively and be sufficiently savvy to anticipate and expect errors from other road users, I would say parts of our city road network are best avoided. If someone's campaigning to change that, they deserve all the help they can get. Whether that's through cycle training, driver training, political lobbying or plastering stuff over the front pages, it all contributes towards getting more people safely travelling by bike.

  • Just one thing regarding describing cycling as dangerous.
    Dangerous means 'causing harm' (dangerous animal, dangerous criminal)
    Cycling is benign and beneficial.

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

The Times Cycling Campaign

Posted by Avatar for Sparky @Sparky

Actions