Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

UKIP policies on bikes...

I've not posted on here before and not sure if this has been covered, but after being surprised to learn that UKIP have another policy, I thought it might be of interest to road.cc users that they have this to say in their transport policy. Note with particular interest point 10.6:

10.2 We believe that there needs to be a better balance of rights and responsibilities for pedal cyclists, with too much aggressive abuse of red lights, pedestrian crossings and a lack of basic safety and road courtesy.

10.6 UKIP would consult on the desirability of minimum third party liability insurance cover for cyclists - a simple annual flat rate registration ‘Cycledisc’, stuck to the bicycle frame, to cover damage to cars and others, which are currently unprotected. The Cycledisc should also carry clear identification details, which will help counter bicycle theft, and deter dangerous cyclist behaviour. We support provision of cycle parking at
reasonable charges.

10.7 UKIP believes that basic cycle and safety training should be made mandatory, and be funded in schools or via local authorities. UKIP supports the campaign work of national cycling organisations.

10.9 Local authorities should be given additional powers to enforce a ‘cyclists dismount’ or ‘no cycling’ regulation where there are safety concerns – such as on busy roundabouts, junctions or bus lanes, or where the road would be too narrowed by cycle lanes and cause
unacceptable delays to traffic

Unbelievable.

Source: http://www.ukip.org/media/pdf/UKIPtransport.pdf

If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.

Add new comment

57 comments

Avatar
OldRidgeback | 9 years ago
0 likes

I think the Monster Raving Loonie Party has more credibility than UKIP. It's certainly got a better track record politically.

Avatar
alexholt3 | 9 years ago
0 likes

YES. UKIP have got something right. 100% agree to all of this (with some exception to 10.9)

Avatar
PhilRuss | 9 years ago
0 likes

[[[[[ Cretins! Fuckwits! Shitforbrains! Moronic Arseholes! Look, the problem with "strong" language is that it's actually weak language. It's boring, juvenile and unedifying....could you abusive types (you know who you are) perhaps swop email addresses and insult each other privately? Or meet behind the bike-sheds after school for a rumble?
P.R.
[[[[[[ Er...that looks a bit rough, dunnit. Peace and love to you all.
P.R.

Avatar
Stumps | 9 years ago
0 likes

I actually find farage quite a funny bloke. Its great watching him twitch and fidget when he's asked any sort of question that doesn't involve his racist policies on Europe cos he doesn't have a clue.

The best part of it all though is that the great unwashed that think he's great and will vote for him seem to forget that if we get rid of "immigrants" who do all the menial and unsavoury jobs that the "Great British" public think are below them it will fall to the great unwashed to fill these jobs, oh the irony of it all  24  24

Avatar
mattsccm | 9 years ago
0 likes

The poster way above who objected to some one objecting to swearing really does need to think a bit. In no case is swearing in public acceptable.
Full stop, no exceptions.
This is an open forum and young people do read it. Your opinion (and mine) is subservient to normal rules of social behaviour . And Swearing doesn't fit socially acceptable behaviour no matter how common it may become.
para 10.2 is correct. Cyclists must become more responsible and law abiding. anyone who breaks the law is wrong. NO questions there. Rude and offensive riding is wrong.
No where above is the stupid and dangerous driving of motor vehicles mentioned so there is no place for this thread to have comments on that!

Avatar
jacknorell replied to mattsccm | 9 years ago
0 likes
mattsccm wrote:

In no case is swearing in public acceptable.
Full stop, no exceptions.
...
para 10.2 is correct. Cyclists must become more responsible and law abiding. anyone who breaks the law is wrong. NO questions there. Rude and offensive riding is wrong.

In the first... do you really think kids don't know how to swear already?

In the second... you are utterly naive in regards to laws. Laws addressing safety are there to protect. Non-dangerous behaviour, even if it's obnoxious, does not need pursuing: On the roads we have enough actually dangerous behaviour taking place which the police already does not have either the resources or desire to monitor and remove.

Also, you should probably read up on Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development so that you can have a somewhat less naive view on our legal system:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_devel...

Not all laws are good, there's a reason we, for example, no longer imprison victims of trafficking for breaking immigration laws.

Avatar
wildnorthlands | 9 years ago
0 likes

There's a telling analysis of UKIP supporters in the Grauniad: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/14/ukip-poll-fans-farage-mo...

Avatar
darrenleroy replied to wildnorthlands | 9 years ago
0 likes
wildnorthlands wrote:

There's a telling analysis of UKIP supporters in the Grauniad: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/14/ukip-poll-fans-farage-mo...

I don't know why the Grauniad fixates on trying to rubbish UKIP. It's preaching to the converted. No reader (apart from a few weirdo's like me) are gonna vote for this party. The Guardian always fails to understand the reasons behind dissenting behaviour (unless those dissenting are Islamic). It's one of the big failings of the paper. If the editorial team bothered to take notice of some of the below the line comments it would soon learn that not everyone went to a grammar/private school and then were fast tracked through Oxbridge or a red brick uni and live within six miles of Big Ben.

Avatar
Flying Scot | 9 years ago
0 likes

I've just declined a request to pilot a tandem towing a banner with Nigel Farage as stoker.

Avatar
darrenleroy | 9 years ago
0 likes

I hate Nigel Farage for his smoking, beery, car driving, posh boy mentality and his party's approach to cycling in the UK. I will however be voting UKIP in the upcoming elections because I hate the Tory/Labour/Lib Dem oligarchy even more.

Avatar
drfabulous0 replied to darrenleroy | 9 years ago
0 likes
darrenleroy wrote:

I hate Nigel Farage for his smoking, beery, car driving, posh boy mentality and his party's approach to cycling in the UK. I will however be voting UKIP in the upcoming elections because I hate the Tory/Labour/Lib Dem oligarchy even more.

But that's just stupid, vote Green!

Avatar
egb replied to darrenleroy | 9 years ago
0 likes
darrenleroy wrote:

I hate Nigel Farage for his smoking, beery, car driving, posh boy mentality and his party's approach to cycling in the UK. I will however be voting UKIP in the upcoming elections because I hate the Tory/Labour/Lib Dem oligarchy even more.

Yeah, probably best to support a racist party hell bent on destroying workers rights, human rights, the NHS and any hard fought rights just because you don't like the three main parties. Honestly, are you that stupid?

Avatar
mrmo replied to darrenleroy | 9 years ago
0 likes
darrenleroy wrote:

I hate Nigel Farage for his smoking, beery, car driving, posh boy mentality and his party's approach to cycling in the UK. I will however be voting UKIP in the upcoming elections because I hate the Tory/Labour/Lib Dem oligarchy even more.

Whilst I can understand your hatred of the three main parties, is voting for a bunch of fascists actually a sensible protest vote? Vote Green, vote monster raving loony, just don't give UKIP any more support. As can be seen from their use of EU money they are just on the gravy train but don't even have the decency to represent their whole constituencies. Who was it who voted against EU money after the floods, who voted against improving Lorry safety, etc.

Avatar
andyp | 9 years ago
0 likes

'happen to think there are more important things than a party's position on cycling... '

well, quite. Like, are they complete racist mentalists or not.

Avatar
eurotrash | 9 years ago
0 likes

Oh dear, the usual "racist" slurs... yawn. As someone who will be voting for UKIP in the euro elections, I don't agree with their cycling "policies" (if indeed they are such) but happen to think there are more important things than a party's position on cycling...

Avatar
farrell replied to eurotrash | 9 years ago
0 likes
eurotrash wrote:

Oh dear, the usual "racist" slurs... yawn. As someone who will be voting for UKIP in the euro elections, I don't agree with their cycling "policies" (if indeed they are such) but happen to think there are more important things than a party's position on cycling...

Like their ability to get half-wits on board by screaming about immigration and pretending to give a fuck about the working class whilst fighting hard to make sure them and their rich mates continue to get richer?

Avatar
LondonDynaslow | 9 years ago
0 likes

This is a shame, because I am a racist but I am also a cyclist. NOW who do I vote for?

Avatar
dafyddp | 9 years ago
0 likes

UKIP are to the UK what the Tea Party is to the US. They thrive on small-minded, little-England, NIMBY fears and profess bold solutions regardless of long-term social damage. Worst still, they don't actually need to gain power in order to disrupt progress - the fear of their popularity is drawing a centrist Tory party ever rightward.
The coalition doesn't have many fans because consensus politics requires small steps and negotiated progress, but the only sustainable way we can move away from a two party Punch and Judy stalemate will be through local, national and international consensus.
Im not a huge fan of Stewart Lee, but his recent gag about UKIP as a protest vote hits the nail on the head http://pic.twitter.com/5UKWxE9MGu

Avatar
hood | 9 years ago
0 likes

wow, their caveman like ideas are scary. they are literally a party from the dark ages

Avatar
lolol | 9 years ago
0 likes

Just to add "cyclists Dismount" signs are advisory, not mandatory anyway, so there cant be any enforcement.

Avatar
lolol | 9 years ago
0 likes

Just to add "cyclists Dismount" signs are advisory, not mandatory anyway, so there cant be any enforcement.

Avatar
argotittilius | 9 years ago
0 likes

"cycle training" is made up of moving off, stopping, steering round a traffic cone, and making sure you can stick your arm out without wobbling - how thats going to stop people getting flattened by trucks I don't know.
When I did it, we were actually shouted at for taking the lane, and even for riding more than about a metre from the curb.

Avatar
farrell replied to argotittilius | 9 years ago
0 likes
argotittilius wrote:

"cycle training" is made up of moving off, stopping, steering round a traffic cone, and making sure you can stick your arm out without wobbling - how thats going to stop people getting flattened by trucks I don't know.
When I did it, we were actually shouted at for taking the lane, and even for riding more than about a metre from the curb.

The UKIP cycling training is somewhat different and actually encourages riding in a primary position. Well, the far right anyway...

Avatar
SB76 | 9 years ago
0 likes

Most of this policy doesn't really deserve response. They are policy made by a disconnected few who are obviously right despite knowing nothing.

Interestingly, I found out that the old cycling proficiency test that kids take at 12 still going. Isn't this effectively the training of which they speak?? Granted that is very young but it was pitched at that she for a reason.
I don't have a great issue with the idea of a level of training but frankly where does it stop? Should people walking require a license?? I mean they can be dangerous and just cross roads with paying due attention at times.
At the end of the day, all the training and licenses in the world are useless if the roads aren't going to be policed.

Avatar
Paul M | 9 years ago
0 likes

What we need is a campaign for EU legislation, before the European Parliament, imposing licensing and identification plates etc on cyclists.

That way, UKIP would be bound to have to change their policy so that they could vote against the proposal.

Avatar
bashthebox | 11 years ago
0 likes

Revealing thread this has turned out to be - but actually I quite like that. Assuming we're all keen cyclists, you can hardly pigeonhole much else about us. We've got euro-skeptics, conspiracy theorists, and normal people  3 who don't like UKIP much.

Avatar
sanderville | 11 years ago
0 likes

Don't worry, UKIP are not intended to win any elections. They are just a distraction to diffuse the euro-sceptic vote. Nigel Farage is a Rothschild gold dealer and his job is to help protect the fascist EU, not to undermine it.

Avatar
robbieC | 11 years ago
0 likes

I recently corrected an item in a local newspaper where it reported an 'accident' between a cycle and a car. I said it was a collision. The police had arrested the driver and I made the mistake of adding that something was very wrong where someone on a 10kg vehicle is hit by one weighing at tonne. Cue quite a lot of thumbs downs and stories about 'dangerous' cyclists. I was then told by a moron that of course it was an accident if the driver did not mean to do it! the idea of criminal negligence does apply to car drivers. Yep these are the people who vote UKIP.

Avatar
Forester replied to robbieC | 11 years ago
0 likes

My letters to the local paper about cycling usually provoke a negative response, especially from horse riders, who are a highly influential lobby here in the New Forest. Having done a lot of riding in recent years I have found that the majority of horse riders appreciate a warning such as 'bike coming' and great care when you approach them in high vis clothing. Horses are not intelligent, and having seen a few spooked by bike riders and runners I do have some sympathy, even though there are a few stuck up sorts who regard you as lower than the deposits which their steeds leave on the highway.

Avatar
surly_by_name replied to Forester | 9 years ago
0 likes
Forester wrote:

Having done a lot of riding in recent years I have found that the majority of horse riders appreciate a warning such as 'bike coming' and great care when you approach them in high vis clothing. Horses are not intelligent

Are you suggesting that one should approach UKIP members in the same way?

Pages

Latest Comments