UKIP policies on bikes…

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #18112
    sporran

    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

Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 57 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #719809
    alexholt3

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

    #719807
    PhilRuss

    [[[[[ Cretins! Fuckwits!
    [[[[[ 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.

    #719805
    OldRidgeback

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

    #719803
    jacknorell

    mattsccm wrote:In no case is

    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_development

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

    #719801
    Stumps

    I actually find farage quite
    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 =)) =))

    #719799
    mattsccm

    The poster way above who
    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!

    #719797
    HarryTrauts

    Forester wrote:My letters to

    Forester wrote:
    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.

    I live in the Cotswolds and horse riders vary, as all people do. However, I agree that there are quite a few who don’t acknowledge bike riders who slow down for them and their steeds. Still, they’re not as stupid or as dangerous as the life threatening drivers on the roads. While not exclusive to UKIP, they have the same mentality in as much as they believe they have an indisputable right to have it their way so that they can do exactly as they want.

    Come the revolution…

    #719795
    mrmo

    darrenleroy wrote:I hate

    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.

    #719793
    egb

    darrenleroy wrote:I hate

    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?

    #719791
    darrenleroy

    wildnorthlands wrote:There’s
    [quote=wildnorthlands]There’s a telling analysis of UKIP supporters in the Grauniad: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/14/ukip-poll-fans-farage-more-likely-alienated-angry%5B/quote%5D

    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.

    #719789
    wildnorthlands

    There’s a telling analysis of
    There’s a telling analysis of UKIP supporters in the Grauniad: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/may/14/ukip-poll-fans-farage-more-likely-alienated-angry

    #719787
    drfabulous0

    darrenleroy wrote:I hate

    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!

    #719785
    Flying Scot

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

    #719783
    darrenleroy

    I hate Nigel Farage for his
    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.

    #719781
    farrell

    eurotrash wrote:Oh dear, the

    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?

Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 57 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.