In article <[email hidden]>,
Tony W said:Some sense from the Minister (amazing). Generally his comments would not be
out of place on this NG. (Though some standard b*llsh*t about cycle paths).
Actually the minister seemed to me to veer on the side of unduly-lenient
towards cycling offences - more so than this newsgroup. He said (rightly)
that police enforcement should concentrate on those offences that kill
people[1]. But the suggestion of "this really doesn't matter much" is not
helpful, as it will tend to alienate the 'neutral' majority.
The cyclepaths bit just said they're improving. That may be true, in the
sense that the ubiquitous "cyclists dismount" signs and other showstoppers
are more commonly associated with older cycle lanes than new ones - and
signposting is better than 20 years ago. That of course sets aside the
fact there are still plenty of new nonstarters.
Quoted message said:Why no cycling representative? (Other than initial vox pop).
If a cycling representative had been there, the minister would perhaps
have felt obliged to take the opposite side ... as he did towards the
petrolhead. Not that that's an answer.
[1] including speeding - which the petrolhead very sensibly allowed to pass.
--
Nick Kew