David Cameron says "this is a cycling nation" - as DfT stats reveal bike use falling across England

Old adage that "a week is a long time in politics" still holds true in 2014

by Simon_MacMichael   April 29, 2014  

David Cameron opens the Cotswold Line Cycle Route (picture courtesy Sustrans)

Four days after Prime Minister David Cameron declared “this is a cycling nation” as he opened the latest section of the National Cycle Network, newly published data from the Department for Transport (DfT) reveal that the levels of cycling in England fell in the year to October 2013.

According to the DfT’s Local Area Walking and Cycling in England: 2012 to 2013 report, published today, the percentage of people cycling at least once a month for either leisure or utilitarian purposes was 14.7 per cent in the  year to mid-October 2013, down from 15.3 per cent in the preceding 12 months.

The DfT says that “although the change is small, the size of our national sample [162,882 people] means that we can be confident that this decrease exists in the whole of the English population.”

Cycling campaigners have greeted the news with dismay and are urging the government and local authorities to do more to encourage people to take to two wheels and make conditions safer for existing riders.

Chris Peck of CTC, which earlier this month helped launch the national Space For Cycling campaign ahead of May’s local elections, said: “Figures released by DfT earlier today very worryingly suggest that cycle use appears to be falling in many parts of England – which is likely to be a direct result of councils across the country failing to provide space for cycling.

“Thousands of people have already written to their councillors calling for space for cycling on main roads and reduced speeds and through traffic on residential streets.”

Claire Francis, head of policy at Sustrans, said: “It is a damning reflection on road safety in the UK that cycling levels have decreased over the last year; but the few areas where numbers have increased show when decision makers put their minds and resources into increasing cycling, real progress can be made.

“Whether women and children feel able to get on their bikes is a litmus test for how safe our roads really are for cycling; we must strive to reach a point where everyone, aged 8 to 80 and regardless of gender, feels safe enough to cycle on our roads.

“We urgently need dedicated investment in walking and cycling, to allow more people to make healthier everyday journeys by bike,” she added.

Last Friday, Mr Cameron had joined the sustainable transport charity's chief executiv, Malcolm Shepherd, in the village of Chadlington in his Witney constituency to officially open the Cotswold Line Cycle Route, running from Oxfordshire to Worcestershire via Gloucestershire.

He said: “This is a cycling nation and in the year we are hosting the Tour de France I’m delighted to be here opening this new cycle route between Hanborough and Honeybourne.

“The National Cycle Network is a national treasure. It’s great for the community, linking up towns and villages and it’s great for local business like the café here in the village which is already full of cyclists.

Mr Cameron added: “I’m going to be riding this route myself as soon as the weather brightens up.”

The data published today come from Sport England’s Active People Survey, with the DfT analysing the results since 2010/11 meaning that two-year comparisons can now be made, and local authority areas identified where there have been significant increases in the percentage of people cycling for any purpose.

Between 2010/11 and 2012/13, those were Bournemouth, Copeland (Cumbria), Dover (Kent), Eastbourne (East Sussex), Mansfield (Nottinghamshire), North East Lincolnshire, Oxford (Oxfordshire), St Edmundsbury (Suffolk), Shepway (Kent), Wealden (East Sussex) and the London boroughs of Hillingdon and Redbridge.

Significant decreases across the two-year period were registered in areas including the South East and East of England regions as a whole, the counties of Essex, Norfolk, Northamptonshire, Surrey and West Sussex.

Specific local authority areas recording decreases between 2010/11 and 2012/13 included Blackpool, Middlesbrough, Milton Keynes, South Gloucestershire, Windsor & Maidenhead, and the London boroughs of Havering, Hounslow and Newham.

The data reveal that in the year to mid-October 2013, some 6.5 per cent of people cycled at least once a month for utility purposes and 10.2 per cent for leisure, overlap between the two groups explaining the 14.7 per cent total.

Cambridge has the highest percentage of its population riding a bike at least once a month for any purpose at 58 per cent, followed by Oxford (43 per cent) and high levels were also found in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (34 per cent), York (27 per cent), South Cambridgeshire (27 per cent) and New Forest (26 per cent).

Only the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames ranks among the top eight local authorities for both utility and recreational cycling at least once a month – with respective levels of 22 and 19 per cent.

Once again, Cambridge (53 per cent) and Oxford (37 per cent) were top for utility cycling, while for leisure purposes, Winchester is highest with 20 per cent, with Rushcliffe in Nottinghamshire third on 18 per cent, and the New Forest district of Hampshire next at 17 per cent.

That last statistic is worthy of note – for all the regular stories on road.cc about local opposition to mass participation cycling events there, among its residents New Forest does have some of the highest levels of at least monthly cycling both for recreational and all purposes in the whole of England.

Women make up around half of occasional cyclists – those who ride once a month – but the proportion declines as the frequency of riding a bike increases, while by age, riding a bike among adults is most prevalent among those aged 16-24 and 35-44.

While the government insists it is investing in cycling, many have been disappointed by actions such as the dissolution of Cycling England shortly after the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition was formed in 2010, as well as a tepid response to the Get Britain Cycling (APPCG) report from the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group last year.

That report called for a minimum investment of £10 per capita in cycling, something that transport minister Robert Goodwill claimed in March was happening, citing the Cycle City Ambition scheme, with local authorities such as Greater Manchester Greater Manchester (£20 million), West Yorkshire (£18.1 million) and Birmingham (£17 million) all receiving significant investment, which will be supplemented by local match funding.

Mr Goodwill was speaking at Portcullis House, Westminster, at a meeting arranged by the APPCG before an audience comprising members of the group, representatives of cycle campaign groups such as CTC and the London Cycling Campaign, and media including road.cc.

After the minister, who is responsible for cycling at the DfT, made his £10 per capita claim, CTC’s Roger Geffen pointed out to him that what the Get Britain Cycling report called for was that level of spend across the country as a whole and for a sustained period, rather than limiting it to specific areas and only for two years, as happens under the Cycle City Ambition initiative.

53 user comments

Latest 30 commentsNewest firstBest ratedAll

allez neg wrote:
Disappearing cars? Fk me, that would be dangerous!

It'd be just like the way cyclists can manage to "appear from nowhere".

posted by farrell [1395 posts]
30th April 2014 - 13:13

like this
Like (16)

@Matt eaton: I agree in general, but am tempted (for the first time in my life) to cut DC a bit of slack because the rain was really pretty horrible that day. I was just out of shot on that picture and I was absolutely, thoroughly drenched!

Doctor Fegg's picture

posted by Doctor Fegg [134 posts]
30th April 2014 - 13:30

like this
Like (9)

oozaveared wrote:
Yennings wrote:
Classic Camoron. And yes, that's a deliberate typo.

I am not a Conservative supporter by any stretch of the imagination and I know this is a comment site and your are entitled to your opinion but I do think it's probaby better to make your case why you think someone is wrong rather than just say they are a moron (Camoron).

He may be wrong but he'snot a moron. Moron was once applied to people with an IQ of 51–70, better than "imbecile" (IQ of 26–50) and better still to "idiot" (IQ of 0–25).

Cameron passed 12 O-Levels and then three A-Levels. He obtained three 'A' grades. He got a '1' grade in the Scholarship Level exam in Economics and Politics. He passed the entrance exam for the University of Oxford, where he was offered an exhibition. That's a scholarship. That's awarded on merit. He graduated with a first-class honours degree (MA).

His Oxford professor Vernon Bogdanor (not a Conservative either) described Cameron as "one of the ablest" students he has taught.

Say why you think he is wrong by all means. But an MA from Oxford and on a scholarship award isn't easy to get. I would conclude he's smarter than the average bear.

Yep he is clever but he lacks probably zero commonsense and the complete lack of ability to listen to what the nation is crying out for and is more concerned about making the rich richer and the downtrodden more downtrodden. Personally i think he is an arrogant buffoon who has tried to mould himself around his idol, thatcher.

Regardless of that though its good to see more people on bikes in some areas its just a shame its not across the whole country.

If you must break the law, do it to seize power: in all other cases observe it. Gaius Julius Caesar.

stumps's picture

posted by stumps [2698 posts]
30th April 2014 - 13:46

like this
Like (7)

I'm all for quiet routes around the countryside but the National Cycle Network should primarily be on routes that encourage commuter cycling not leisure bimbling.

I often cross those disused railway cycle routes in Lancashire and Norfolk; cyclists plonked into a straight trench to keep them away from cars on the pretext that it all adds to the UK's wealth and productivity to separate slow from fast and allow tubbies to drive from farm shop to garden centre un-impeded to reward themselves with cake.

As for Cameron. Who was it who said he looks like a single buttock with eyes? And his enormous intellect? Ooza may be impressed but didn't Harold Wilson have a double first from Oxford from
more humble beginnings? That's truly impressive.

Silly me. You're probably right....

MercuryOne's picture

posted by MercuryOne [1055 posts]
30th April 2014 - 14:45

like this
Like (12)

“this is a cycling nation”

Rolling On The Floor

No, wait ...

Rolling On The Floor

... hang on ...

Rolling On The Floor

OK, I'm under control now. Look at the traffic, even where there are high levels of cycling, the predominant mode of transport is the car.

djcritchley's picture

posted by djcritchley [146 posts]
30th April 2014 - 14:51

like this
Like (11)

Quote:
IanW1968 wrote:
Quote:
Tax from fuel, and other motoring taxes, does not anything like pay for the costs that motoring imposes on society

Nope but it moves wealth from lots of individuals to a few manufacturers, financiers and oil companies which trumps everything else.

What you mean the manufacturers that employ hundreds of thousands of people, designing, testing and building vehicles and buy components that are designed tested and built by hundreds of other companies employing yet more people. The manufacturers that supply the vehicles that when bought require servicing and repair throughout their lifecycle. Servicing and repair supplied by yet more companies employing yet more people.
Or the oil companies that employ thousands of geologists, geophsicists surveyors, engineers, and others to find extract, transport, refine, and retail fuel, requiring a supply chain utilising and maintaining highly specialised equipment supplied by yet more companies employing yet more designers, engineers, fitters and others. Including shipping. Not to mention the off shoot industries like petrochemicals supplying a huge range of the materials and chemicals used in just about everything you take for granted in your modern life and which employ yet more people.
Or the financiers that aggregate and direct investment into the huge projects and supply chains that underpin these massive enterprises and which put the profits back into your savings or pension funds.
Or did you think it was just one posh bloke with a pile of cash doing all this stuff in his spare time?

So you think the benefits of a dominant of motor industry are equally distributed amongst the people who pick up the costs of providing the infrastructure?

There are of course degrees within the argument, its not either/or but rather that the balance is too far in favour of the car on the road and the balance sheet when planning or regulating..

So yes I'm happy to lose a few quid off the pension fund for air thats not quite as poisonous to breath.

posted by IanW1968 [154 posts]
30th April 2014 - 15:29

like this
Like (12)

Quote:

Quote:
IanW1968 wrote:
Quote:
Tax from fuel, and other motoring taxes, does not anything like pay for the costs that motoring imposes on society

Nope but it moves wealth from lots of individuals to a few manufacturers, financiers and oil companies which trumps everything else.

What you mean the manufacturers that employ hundreds of thousands of people, designing, testing and building vehicles and buy components that are designed tested and built by hundreds of other companies employing yet more people. The manufacturers that supply the vehicles that when bought require servicing and repair throughout their lifecycle. Servicing and repair supplied by yet more companies employing yet more people.
Or the oil companies that employ thousands of geologists, geophsicists surveyors, engineers, and others to find extract, transport, refine, and retail fuel, requiring a supply chain utilising and maintaining highly specialised equipment supplied by yet more companies employing yet more designers, engineers, fitters and others. Including shipping. Not to mention the off shoot industries like petrochemicals supplying a huge range of the materials and chemicals used in just about everything you take for granted in your modern life and which employ yet more people.
Or the financiers that aggregate and direct investment into the huge projects and supply chains that underpin these massive enterprises and which put the profits back into your savings or pension funds.
Or did you think it was just one posh bloke with a pile of cash doing all this stuff in his spare time?

So you think the benefits of the motor industry are equally distributed amongst the people who pick up the costs of providing the infrastructure or cant get away from its dominant presence ?

There are of course degrees within the argument, its not either/or but rather that the balance is too far in favour of the car on the road and the balance sheet when planning or regulating..

So yes I'm happy to lose a few quid off the pension fund for air thats not quite as poisonous to breath.

posted by IanW1968 [154 posts]
30th April 2014 - 15:39

like this
Like (11)

IanW1968 wrote:
Quote:
IanW1968 wrote:
Quote:
Tax from fuel, and other motoring taxes, does not anything like pay for the costs that motoring imposes on society

Nope but it moves wealth from lots of individuals to a few manufacturers, financiers and oil companies which trumps everything else.

What you mean the manufacturers that employ hundreds of thousands of people, designing, testing and building vehicles and buy components that are designed tested and built by hundreds of other companies employing yet more people. The manufacturers that supply the vehicles that when bought require servicing and repair throughout their lifecycle. Servicing and repair supplied by yet more companies employing yet more people.
Or the oil companies that employ thousands of geologists, geophsicists surveyors, engineers, and others to find extract, transport, refine, and retail fuel, requiring a supply chain utilising and maintaining highly specialised equipment supplied by yet more companies employing yet more designers, engineers, fitters and others. Including shipping. Not to mention the off shoot industries like petrochemicals supplying a huge range of the materials and chemicals used in just about everything you take for granted in your modern life and which employ yet more people.
Or the financiers that aggregate and direct investment into the huge projects and supply chains that underpin these massive enterprises and which put the profits back into your savings or pension funds.
Or did you think it was just one posh bloke with a pile of cash doing all this stuff in his spare time?

So you think the benefits of a dominant of motor industry are equally distributed amongst the people who pick up the costs of providing the infrastructure?

There are of course degrees within the argument, its not either/or but rather that the balance is too far in favour of the car on the road and the balance sheet when planning or regulating..

So yes I'm happy to lose a few quid off the pension fund for air thats not quite as poisonous to breath.

Whether there is some idyllic alternative is a moot point. The modern world has developed in the way it has. There is no off switch. You can't stopp the world and get off. The modern economy that developed since the industrial revolution is predicated on mobility.

Are you sure that people would want to go back to only having access to the jobs and opportunities that are a bike ride away? Or goods/food produced locally.

No thanls pal. I have had occasion to travel and work in developing countries and I can tell you that it ain't so idyllic as you think it is.

The grass is always greener and all that!

Cycling is like a church - many attend, but few understand.

posted by oozaveared [559 posts]
30th April 2014 - 17:02

like this
Like (15)

What Oozaveared said x lots.

posted by allez neg [4 posts]
30th April 2014 - 17:45

like this
Like (15)

He also thinks we are a christian nation too. Perhaps it's just christians who ride bikes. There is probably about the same percentage of the population amongst each group. About 5%. At a complete guess. Laughing Laughing Laughing

posted by Hensteeth [36 posts]
30th April 2014 - 18:17

like this
Like (12)

oozaveared wrote:
Yennings wrote:
Classic Camoron. And yes, that's a deliberate typo.

I am not a Conservative supporter by any stretch of the imagination and I know this is a comment site and your are entitled to your opinion but I do think it's probaby better to make your case why you think someone is wrong rather than just say they are a moron (Camoron).

He may be wrong but he'snot a moron. Moron was once applied to people with an IQ of 51–70, better than "imbecile" (IQ of 26–50) and better still to "idiot" (IQ of 0–25).

Cameron passed 12 O-Levels and then three A-Levels. He obtained three 'A' grades. He got a '1' grade in the Scholarship Level exam in Economics and Politics. He passed the entrance exam for the University of Oxford, where he was offered an exhibition. That's a scholarship. That's awarded on merit. He graduated with a first-class honours degree (MA).

His Oxford professor Vernon Bogdanor (not a Conservative either) described Cameron as "one of the ablest" students he has taught.

Say why you think he is wrong by all means. But an MA from Oxford and on a scholarship award isn't easy to get. I would conclude he's smarter than the average bear.

Must have struggled in maths.
14.7 doesn't come anywhere near 100

posted by Hensteeth [36 posts]
30th April 2014 - 18:21

like this
Like (12)

I bet there are more practising muslims than actual cyclists in this country. Surely then we must be a muslim country not a christian one.
Personally I don't think we are any of the above. Kiss

posted by Hensteeth [36 posts]
30th April 2014 - 18:47

like this
Like (11)

When Islam nets us more bank holidays than we've got from Jesus, then I'll convert.

posted by allez neg [4 posts]
30th April 2014 - 19:10

like this
Like (8)

Digressing

oozaveared wrote:
But an MA from Oxford and on a scholarship award isn't easy to get. I would conclude he's smarter than the average bear.

An Oxford MA isn't a real MA though, whereas i had to read books and pass exams to get mine, Oxford gives them to anyone who got a Batchelors.

/Digressing

mrmo's picture

posted by mrmo [1064 posts]
30th April 2014 - 19:19

like this
Like (13)

allez neg wrote:
When Islam nets us more bank holidays than we've got from Jesus, then I'll convert.

Well roll out the prayer mat...

Eid Al Fitr - 3 days
Eid Al Adha - 3 days
Isra and Miraj - 1 day
Islamic New Year - 1 day
Prophet's Birthday - 1 day

Compare to Christmas Day, Boxing Day, Good Friday and Easter Sunday.

Those are just the religious holidays before you add in any state or other holidays.

Of course you may find Ramadan a bit of a trial but no worse than Lent really.

abudhabiChris's picture

posted by abudhabiChris [515 posts]
30th April 2014 - 19:23

like this
Like (15)

Oozy - the world around you is like it is by design and it can be what we want if to be by design.

Btw I'm surprised to hear the "your not taking my car away" argument on a cycling website, that's usually the preserve of the more narrow minded end of the local newspaper websites.

So for clarity..you can keep your car, you can work wherever you like however neither car users or the car/transport industry should expect everyone else to pay for your choice, not directly through taxes on infrastructure or healthcare or indirectly in quality of life.
We can and do already regulate similar industries (alcohol/fags/gambling/drugs etc) without world coming to an end.

posted by IanW1968 [154 posts]
30th April 2014 - 21:09

like this
Like (14)

IanW1968 wrote:
Oozy - the world around you is like it is by design and it can be what we want if to be by design.

Btw I'm surprised to hear the "your not taking my car away" argument on a cycling website, that's usually the preserve of the more narrow minded end of the local newspaper websites.

So for clarity..you can keep your car, you can work wherever you like however neither car users or the car/transport industry should expect everyone else to pay for your choice, not directly through taxes on infrastructure or healthcare or indirectly in quality of life.
We can and do already regulate similar industries (alcohol/fags/gambling/drugs etc) without world coming to an end.

Is this kind of like the intelligent design theory so beloved of born yesterday Christians?
Who designed the modern world. James Watt? Stevenson? Trevithick? Benz? Diesel? Macadam?

There is no great designer either in the sky or here on earth. There are merely a succession of scientific discoveries that underpin technologies applied in a variety of ways and under varying political and economic systems to address human needs. Evolution my good friend. Hard for some to get their heads around the fact that we have had an continue to have an infinite number of futures. And no big beardy fellah or some omnipotent mythical Bond style villain is designing the present or the future. Scary isn't it?

Yea I drive a car. Handy for getting to bike races and triathlons and other longer journeys.

Are you Amish? Just thinking about the combination of religious style beliefs in supernatural designers married to an aversion to modern contraptions?

Cycling is like a church - many attend, but few understand.

posted by oozaveared [559 posts]
1st May 2014 - 0:13

like this
Like (15)

Dutch cycle track
dutch cycle track

English cycle track (NCN 27)
English cycle track

Mr Cameron said: “The National Cycle Network is a national treasure."

posted by kie7077 [452 posts]
1st May 2014 - 10:58

like this
Like (15)

'National Cycle Network' It's crap.

All they do is place some tiny signs at the junctions of some roads and they can't even do that well. It is really hard to follow, there are times when you get to a junction and stop and scratch your head and have to take a guess as which way to go.

The signs are little bigger than a smart phone so you can't see them from a distance after they've weathered a little.

National Cycle network sticker Can you spot the NCN route sticker? You're supposed to go left here.. probably.

Parts of it are completely unfit for cycling unless you are riding a mtb with the fattest tyres.

It's outright moronic with completely different routes having the same number.

National Cycle network, Cyclists dismount
This is an English NCN, please get off your bike... Being the North Sea Cycle Route, I'm guessing this means you'll have to swim at some point.

posted by kie7077 [452 posts]
1st May 2014 - 11:03

like this
Like (8)

@oozeafeared

Its a nice unfalsifiable theory you have there - if the previous poster ever gets his desired changes you'll just declare that that was just the inevitable result of this 'evolution' (driven not by human choices and actions but by what? God? Aliens?) and that now that is the new unchallengeable fact of existence.

I guess that conservativism for you. Just look at whatever exists and declare it to be inevitable and unchangeable, a consequence of some mystical 'evolution' and beyond the influence of mere humans (being dictated by supernatural entities presumably). If what exists nevertheless changes, just repeat the declaration with the new arrangement.

posted by FluffyKittenofT... [660 posts]
1st May 2014 - 13:17

like this
Like (5)

FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
@oozeafeared

Its a nice unfalsifiable theory you have there - if the previous poster ever gets his desired changes you'll just declare that that was just the inevitable result of this 'evolution' (driven not by human choices and actions but by what? God? Aliens?) and that now that is the new unchallengeable fact of existence.

I guess that conservativism for you. Just look at whatever exists and declare it to be inevitable and unchangeable, a consequence of some mystical 'evolution' and beyond the influence of mere humans (being dictated by supernatural entities presumably). If what exists nevertheless changes, just repeat the declaration with the new arrangement.

There is no inevitable about it. That's the point. There is no grand plan. There is no omnipotent being or grand designer that has made the world the way it is or will create the future according to an inevitable plan. Just the aggregation of millions of decisions, the incremental improvement of technology, the odd game changing breakthrough mixed with a large dollop of fluke.

Philosophically speaking (see Heraclitus and the Stoics) this relies on a view that change is a constant, that the normal state of things is instability. I happen to be a progressive though I would concede that although I believe change to be a constant you can not neceassrily assume change to be always progressive.
ie Status Quo is necessarily impermanent
Logical position being that attempts to maintain the status quo are pointless that change should be continually accepted as transigent

Conservatism is the view that things are stable and should remain so changing only when necessary.
ie Status Quo permanence
Logical position being that the staus quo is the desired state and that change should be resisted.

I'd say that your views appear to be reactionary more than they are conservative in that you appear to favour a return to a previous state. It's a common meme with the green types*
ie Status Quo Ante
Logical position is that a previous status quo should be regained.

For example take this quote:

"We recognize that separating humanity from nature, from the whole of life, leads to humankind’s own destruction and to the death of nations. Only through a re-integration of humanity into the whole of nature can our people be made stronger. That is the fundamental point of the biological tasks of our age. Humankind alone is no longer the focus of thought, but rather life as a whole . . . This striving toward connectedness with the totality of life, with nature itself, a nature into which we are born, this is the deepest meaning and the true essence of National Socialist thought."
Ernst Lehmann, Biologischer Wille. Wege und Ziele biologischer Arbeit im neuen Reich, München, 1934, pp. 10-11.

perhaps have a think about what words mean and what they describe might help you discern a philosophy from the opportunity for a cheap shot.

Cycling is like a church - many attend, but few understand.

posted by oozaveared [559 posts]
1st May 2014 - 14:26

like this
Like (4)

So THAT'S why the bike companies keep inventing new BB standards. Laughing

posted by allez neg [4 posts]
1st May 2014 - 15:30

like this
Like (7)

"Just the aggregation of millions of decisions"

Er, and who made those decisions, in what context?

God? No, human beings. In the context of complex systems of power (where by no means are all decisions given equal weight).

Whereas you were ascribing it to some reified, "evolution" that is somehow separate from human agency and choice.

The simple point is "evolution" is a analogy that can't be pushed very far. Evolution works via genes which follow mechanistic rules and which lack intention and agency. You can't erase human beings from the picture the way you were doing. There _is_ an element of "design", we are not talking about forces of nature we are talking about decisions taken by human beings.

The original poster is quite entitled to favour different decisions.

That you have some bee in your bonnet about 'Greens' and Nazis is really besides the point. Who wants to go 'back'? Some people think things could be done better, is all, no 'back' or 'forward' about it. Indeed one could call for restrictions on cars in the name of classical liberalism, as the externalities mean car owners are being subsidised.

posted by FluffyKittenofT... [660 posts]
2nd May 2014 - 0:26

like this
Like (5)

DC "We're a Christian nation" No.

DC "We're a cycling nation" No again.

And this man is in charge? He has absolutely no idea what he's talking about, and I'm surprised he's managed to achieve the level of knowledge to be able to ride a bike. Presumably he can't chew gum at the same time though.

burtthebike

posted by burtthebike [68 posts]
2nd May 2014 - 18:05

like this
Like (3)

"Walking is unpopular too, despite pedestrians have a pretty good infrastructure already. They're called pavements."

Any tarmac/bitmac surface is a pavement. Walking areas are called footways.

Andy

posted by jazzdude [59 posts]
2nd May 2014 - 18:29

like this
Like (4)

We will not be a nation of cyclists until the attitude of anti-cycling motorists is changed, no matter how much is spent on "get britain cycling" campaigns. I am an adult male, I cycle for fun only, and I hit the country lanes. There's no way you would get me cycling in rush hour traffic while the roads are too narrow and motorists hate cyclists. Cameron might not be a moron but he is a cock.

Andy

posted by jazzdude [59 posts]
2nd May 2014 - 18:35

like this
Like (2)

Twat Cameron wasn't referring to the UK but some other nation where a significant part of the population that does actually cycle regularly. Holland or Denmark?

Airzound

posted by Airzound [274 posts]
2nd May 2014 - 20:01

like this
Like (1)

Let us remember that Prime Minister David Cameron refused to provide Government backing for the parliamentary report, Get Britain Cycling, last year.

posted by Condor flyer [17 posts]
3rd May 2014 - 12:22

like this
Like (2)

Well thank goodness Status Quo aren't permanent.
I was counting on them going away one day.

posted by dcddcd [4 posts]
4th May 2014 - 11:16

like this
Like (2)

dcddcd wrote:
Well thank goodness Status Quo aren't permanent.
I was counting on them going away one day.

They are well connected through, I've been warned not to upset the Status Quo several times.

All Campag

posted by Flying Scot [522 posts]
4th May 2014 - 11:53

like this
Like (2)