Cycling article in Telegraph.

Simon Mason quoted:

Quoted message said:

£60,000 on riding lessons? On your bike, drivers tell council

<snip>

Quoted message said:

But residents said the £60,000 plan was "absolutely ridiculous" and a
"complete waste of money".

Seems like an excellent use of taxpayer's money to me. I think the
council spokesman was spot on:

Quoted message said:

A lot of people have a perception that cycling on the roads is very
dangerous," he said. "A lot of cyclists are not aware of the rules of the
road and how they've got to behave on the road."

--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Danny Colyer said:

Simon Mason quoted:

Quoted message said:

£60,000 on riding lessons? On your bike, drivers tell council

<snip>

Quoted message said:

But residents said the £60,000 plan was "absolutely ridiculous" and a
"complete waste of money".

Seems like an excellent use of taxpayer's money to me. I think the
council spokesman was spot on:

A couple of weeks ago there was a festival in Cardiff Bay. The traffic
was horrendous - people circling round and round the roads, trying to
find a space to park. They should have had a cycle park, and a stall,
and anyone parking their cycle there would be given £5 if they left at
least 60 minutes later.

In fact that would be a good plan to encourage cycling generally. If you
leave your cycle parked for a certain length of time in certain places
where car-parking is hard to come by and congestion a problem, you
should get paid to do so. Obviously, the money would come from that
raised by the car parks...

Daniele
--
Apple Juice Ltd
Chapter Arts Centre
Market Road www.apple-juice.co.uk
Cardiff CF5 1QE 029 2019 0140

Seems like a good idea to me, too. There are plenty of people who would
cycle if only they felt more confident on the roads.

Quoted message said:

But residents said the £60,000 plan was "absolutely ridiculous" and a
"complete waste of money".

..........

Quoted message said:

"To spend £60,000
teaching adults like myself to cycle properly is absolutely
ridiculous when the money could be spent so much better."

I wonder how many inches of road 60 grand would build?

~PB

Danny Colyer popped their head over the parapet saw what was going on
and said

Quoted message said:

Simon Mason quoted:

Quoted message said:

£60,000 on riding lessons? On your bike, drivers tell council

<snip>

Quoted message said:

But residents said the £60,000 plan was "absolutely ridiculous" and
a "complete waste of money".

Seems like an excellent use of taxpayer's money to me. I think the
council spokesman was spot on:

<snip>

£60,000 , surely the 'council' could get a bulk discount and get
1,000 bicycles [1]for that money, then they could divide them evenly
between the local high schools obviously there will be a % age
who dont want bikes. this 'cheap' and there will be a % age who
already cycle, this dole of bikes. along with a no stopping zone
at the schools will educate young adults into cycling and get the
mums/dads off the school run, surely this will do more to alleviate
congestion than teaching people how to ride in traffic [2]

[1] Or even half this number of bikes as someone will need to
supervise the distribution of these bikes. (and be paid), and I have no
idea of
the legal position but would it be enough to have the responsibility
of maintenance transfered at the time of the distribution or would
someone have to do a quick check once a month or so?
Can't have all and sundry suing the 'council' when the 'council'
supplied
bike's brakes fail and dump poor Johnny under a bus.

[2] Yes I know bicycles are traffic but in this case
I mean other motorised traffic OWTTE.

IVOANAL

--
yours S

Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione

"Simon Mason" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You need to subscribe, so I posted the text:

£60,000 on riding lessons? On your bike, drivers tell council
By Nick Britten
(Filed: 03/09/2004)
Commuters in a wealthy city suburb are being offered bicycle lessons in an
attempt to persuade them to leave their cars at home.

But residents said the £60,000 plan was "absolutely ridiculous" and a
"complete waste of money".
Wolverhampton city council has targeted 400 households in Tettenhall
offering them personal journey plans. Cycling training, advice on how to

be

Quoted message said:

more economical when driving and promotional offers on public transport

are

Quoted message said:

included. The council hopes the project will help reduce pollution, road
accidents and congestion but residents are not so keen.

<snipped>

Milkinder Jaspal, the council's transport spokesman, said funding

earmarked

Quoted message said:

for transport could not be spent in other areas.
"There are a lot of transport issues around Tettenhall and I'm trying to
look in to these problems," he said. "I know £60,000 seems like a lot of
money, but it will be well worth it." He said cycling officers were a key
part of the project and cost relatively little to train. "

A lot of people have a perception that cycling on the roads is very
dangerous," he said. "A lot of cyclists are not aware of the rules of the
road and how they've got to behave on the road."
Jonathan Yardley, Conservative councillor for Tettenhall Regis, said:

"Most

Quoted message said:

people in Tettenhall know how to get to work and have already managed to
find the shops and bus stops for themselves."

====================
Councillor Milkinder Jaspal, the council's transport spokesman, also had
another idea to promote road safety. He ordered that Stafford Road, one of
the main roads into the city centre, should be 'improved' by having all
existing bus 'pull-ins' removed to control traffic. Buses now have to stop
for passengers in the inner lane of a two lane highway and other traffic has
to filter around the stopped buses or wait behind. It certainly hasn't
improved either traffic flow or the tempers of commuters, most of whom think
that Councillor Milkinder Jaspal should stick to playing with his Dinky
toys.

Cic.

Pete Biggs said:

I wonder how many inches of road 60 grand would build?

In late 1990s, it would get you 222 inches of dual three lane
motorway, so enough to park one car in each lane.

(Parliamentary written answer in January 1998 - 17.1 million pounds
per mile for dual three lane motorway)

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 20:15:52 GMT, "Cicero" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"Simon Mason" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You need to subscribe, so I posted the text:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

====================
Councillor Milkinder Jaspal, the council's transport spokesman, also had
another idea to promote road safety. He ordered that Stafford Road, one of
the main roads into the city centre, should be 'improved' by having all
existing bus 'pull-ins' removed to control traffic. Buses now have to stop
for passengers in the inner lane of a two lane highway and other traffic has
to filter around the stopped buses or wait behind. It certainly hasn't
improved either traffic flow or the tempers of commuters, most of whom think
that Councillor Milkinder Jaspal should stick to playing with his Dinky
toys.

Unless those commuters are on the bus, of course. Buses suffer a lot
of delay when car drivers won't let them out of those lay-bys.
Speeding up buses is the reason their being done away with in many
towns.

There's the secondary benefit that replacing the layby with pavement
improves the pedestrian environment as well.

It's all classic reallocation of roadspace and a Good Thing.

from the way the original article read the spokesperson isn't a
Councillor but a profesional officer.

A Councillor attacked the proposal saying people didn't need any help
planning journeys etc.

That's why they are all stuck in the same traffic jams at teh same
time, because they don't need any help, it's every one stuck in the
jam that needs it.

Selective interviewing by the paper? Or are all the residents of that
area pensioners?

"[Not Responding]" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 20:15:52 GMT, "Cicero" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"Simon Mason" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You need to subscribe, so I posted the text:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

====================
Councillor Milkinder Jaspal, the council's transport spokesman, also had
another idea to promote road safety. He ordered that Stafford Road, one

of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the main roads into the city centre, should be 'improved' by having all
existing bus 'pull-ins' removed to control traffic. Buses now have to

stop

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

for passengers in the inner lane of a two lane highway and other traffic

has

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to filter around the stopped buses or wait behind. It certainly hasn't
improved either traffic flow or the tempers of commuters, most of whom

think

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

that Councillor Milkinder Jaspal should stick to playing with his Dinky
toys.

Unless those commuters are on the bus, of course. Buses suffer a lot
of delay when car drivers won't let them out of those lay-bys.
Speeding up buses is the reason their being done away with in many
towns.

There's the secondary benefit that replacing the layby with pavement
improves the pedestrian environment as well.

It's all classic reallocation of roadspace and a Good Thing.

================
This is stated to be an experiment and it's also been stated that it may be
reversed next year despite the cost. The system was working reasonably well
prior to the changes. Apart from creating more congestion all that has
happened is that bus commuters are being given priority over other
commuters. This seems to be rather unfair bearing in mind that many car
users simply could not travel by bus because of poor transport links. The
truth is that the Council appear to be trying unsuccessfully to force people
out of cars and on to public transport. Councillor Jaspal, like so many
Councillors doesn't appear to understand that public money isn't an
unlimited resource.

Cic.

IMO, its great that something is being done to push folks towards cycling. However, £60K on teaching folks how to get from A to B and how to stay upright is pointless. I feel that to get more people to cycle (at least typical short journeys that last a couple fo minutes in a car), it needs to be approached from a different angle.

Perhaps offering some king of incentives/rewards etc, creating more useful cycle lanes on the roads, bit like the bus lanes. May be getting some celebs to help promote it etc. I dunno, all I am saying is that it would be a waste of £60K and it needs to come from another angle.

Oooh, forgot to mention that, its likely that these council folks don't ride cycles, may not have ridden cycles since they were children. If they cycled a bit, they may be able to see the situation from a cyclists point of view on where improvements could be made to encourage more people to enjoy cycling on the roads etc. Alternatively, to learn more about the activity, they could pay for people in the know (magazines, well known cyclists, local groups, general cyclists etc) to comment, make suggestions and so on.

"Martyn Bolt" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

from the way the original article read the spokesperson isn't a
Councillor but a profesional officer.

A Councillor attacked the proposal saying people didn't need any help
planning journeys etc.

That's why they are all stuck in the same traffic jams at teh same
time, because they don't need any help, it's every one stuck in the
jam that needs it.

Selective interviewing by the paper? Or are all the residents of that
area pensioners?

==================
Four interviewees - aged 43, 74, 63, 57 - looks like 25% pensioners.

Milkinder Jaspal, the council's transport spokesman is actually Councillor
Milkinder Jaspal, Labour Cabinet member with responsibility for transport.

Given the kind of working patterns of most people it's difficult to envisage
any major change in journey plans. People have little choice about the time
they travel to work.

Cic.

Cicero said:

Councillor Milkinder Jaspal, the council's transport spokesman, also had
another idea to promote road safety. He ordered that Stafford Road, one of
the main roads into the city centre, should be 'improved' by having all
existing bus 'pull-ins' removed to control traffic. Buses now have to stop
for passengers in the inner lane of a two lane highway and other traffic has
to filter around the stopped buses or wait behind.

Aw, diddums.
Giving priority to PT is such a bad thing is it?

john B

"JohnB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cicero said:

Councillor Milkinder Jaspal, the council's transport spokesman, also had
another idea to promote road safety. He ordered that Stafford Road,

one of

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the main roads into the city centre, should be 'improved' by having all
existing bus 'pull-ins' removed to control traffic. Buses now have to

stop

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

for passengers in the inner lane of a two lane highway and other traffic

has

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to filter around the stopped buses or wait behind.

Aw, diddums.
Giving priority to PT is such a bad thing is it?

john B

=============
It's quite irrelevant to me personally because I don't commute. The point is
that people pay their taxes and have a right to choose their own mode of
transport without being penalised for their choice. That's a question of
being fair not a matter for childish sarcasm.

Cic.

DSK said:

IMO, its great that something is being done to push folks towards
cycling. However, £60K on teaching folks how to get from A to B and
how to stay upright is pointless. I feel that to get more people to
cycle (at least typical short journeys that last a couple fo minutes in
a car), it needs to be approached from a different angle.

I think DSK is missing the point here. I also feel that the quoted
population of Tettenhall were making the same mistake. Cycle training
does not necessarily mean teaching people how to balance or operate the
brakes or change gear. The most difficult part of utility cycling (i.e.
cycling to get somewhere as opposed to going somewhere to cycle) is
learning to cope with the fact that you are not the only person using
the road. It is possible to cycle to work using shared use roads, I know
because that's how I commute, but it is not an innate skill, it has to
be learned.

Quoted message said:

Perhaps offering some king of incentives/rewards etc, creating more
useful cycle lanes on the roads, bit like the bus lanes. May be
getting some celebs to help promote it etc. I dunno, all I am saying
is that it would be a waste of £60K and it needs to come from another
angle.

I think the 60,000 would be extremely well spent if it taught a few more
ordinary people that cycle commuting is not only possible, but fun. The
spin off from such a programme would also be welcome, we would have
fewer cars on the road (not in my town, but Tettenhall is a start) and
hopefully a few more urc members willing to spread the word that cycling
is A Good Thing.

--
Terry Duckmanton.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/terry.duckmanton
A website mostly dedicated to cycling
http://tduckmanton.bravejournal.com
A daily log of my cycling exploits

in message <[email hidden]>, Cicero

(') said:

This is stated to be an experiment and it's also been stated that it
may be reversed next year despite the cost. The system was working
reasonably well prior to the changes. Apart from creating more
congestion all that has happened is that bus commuters are being given
priority over other commuters. This seems to be rather unfair bearing
in mind that many car
users simply could not travel by bus because of poor transport links.
The truth is that the Council appear to be trying unsuccessfully to
force people out of cars and on to public transport. Councillor
Jaspal, like so many Councillors doesn't appear to understand that
public money isn't an unlimited resource.

Road space isn't an unlimited resource, either. It isn't practical to
knock down all our towns and cities to build fifty lane motorways to
nowhere. A bus uses up far fewer square metres of road space per person
as a car; therefore busses need to be advantaged and cars disadvantaged
in everyone's interest - to economise on use of road space. And as for
those '...car users [who] simply could not travel by bus...' they
should either move house to somewhere nearer to where they work or
change job to one nearer to where they live. There is simply no reason
for the rest of us to subsidise those who through selfishness decide
that their choice of residence and occupation takes priority over
everyone else's chance of having tolerable urban space.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Women are from Venus. Men are from Mars. Lusers are from Uranus.

Cicero said:

"JohnB" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Giving priority to PT is such a bad thing is it?

Quoted message said:

It's quite irrelevant to me personally because I don't commute.

Buses which are available to *all* get held up by not being able to
re-enter the traffic stream.To give priority to a mode of transport that
is available to all rather than one that is private and has a
detrimental (if not selfish) affect on PT is both responsible planning
and morally preferable.

Quoted message said:

The point is
that people pay their taxes and have a right to choose their own mode of
transport without being penalised for their choice.

Paying a tax does not mean you are always immune to 'being penalised'.
Paying a tax does not give anyone the right to ride roughshod over
others.
In towns where the private car is not adequately controlled that is what
often happens.

Quoted message said:

That's a question of
being fair not a matter for childish sarcasm.

Eh?

John B

Cicero said:

It's quite irrelevant to me personally because I don't commute. The point is
that people pay their taxes and have a right to choose their own mode of
transport without being penalised for their choice.

They certainly don't have that right. Many people have their chosen mode
of transport made more expensive, difficult or unpleasant, by laws,
transport infrastructure or other people. I think that the modes of
transport which make it more difficult or unpleasant for most people
should be most penalised.

Daniele
--
Apple Juice Ltd
Chapter Arts Centre
Market Road www.apple-juice.co.uk
Cardiff CF5 1QE 029 2019 0140

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 21:43:00 GMT, "Cicero" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

The point is
that people pay their taxes and have a right to choose their own mode of
transport

And with that right comes a number of responsibilities. And if they
can't be responsible without coercion, they can be responsible WITH
coercion.
--

Cheers,

Al