Please note that our live blog can sometimes be slow to load. If it seems to be taking way too long, please refresh you browser.
Live blog: Sustrans launch major overhaul of National Cycle Network; “It’s just not true to say the cause of congestion is cyclists,” says Mayor of London + more
All today’s news from the site and beyond
Fri, Nov 30, 2018 14:56
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
14 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
wtjs 9 hours ago
@FionaJJ These officers deployed next-level stupidity, and it must be difficult for the police to find people this dim. It doesn't even need rolling-roads or whatever, just a reputable bike computer on a quickly changed mount for the difficult cases where a proper EAPC has been modded, although you would need to look hard in Lancashire to find a police officer who knows how to make a pedal cycle go. Most illegal electric motorbikes are immediately obvious, not least because the crim is wearing a face mask. I saw an obvious one tonight coming out of Garstang Sainsbury's, not pedalling but without a face mask because everybody knows that the police only come into the town to hide away in the police station 200 yards away.
bikeman01 11 hours ago
Gustav Gullholm.. that's not a good look mate
mdavidford 13 hours ago
@Chris RideFar I think what you meant to say was "REMOVE this and put it on PODCAST CC".
jaymack 14 hours ago
As Mary Whitehouse never said - one doesn't have to read the article if one doesn't want to read about an off-road bicycle.
Rendel Harris 15 hours ago
@FionaJJ In London they're allowed to stop on single and double yellows to deliver packages or empty pillar boxes; in practice they take this as carte blanche to park wherever and whenever they want, such as this chap on the Brixton Road who pulled into the bus/cycle/motorcycle lane without indicating, as I approached at 20mph, to park on a red route, response to a remonstrance, "I suppose you never get post delivered do ya?"
FionaJJ 15 hours ago
@Rendel Harris We have a pavement parking ban, but around here at least, royal mail vans are already exempt, subject to certain caveats, such as allowing at least 1.5m, and only being stopped to do their work.
FionaJJ 15 hours ago
It was already embarrassing for the police that they made such a mess of their attempt to determine whether a bike was legal or not, but I had assumed it was a group of well intentioned, but under-trained officers acting on their own initiative, having spotted something they thought looked not quite right. I'm now discovering this was a planned activity, something sufficiently organised to have been given a name - Operation FRISLEN, designed specifically to identify and remove illegal e-bikes and scooters. It's apparent that the officers were sent out without adequate training, never mind the kind of equipment that should be used for this sort of work. I'm not saying they always need specialist equipment to spot all illegal bikes, but at least if they'd been given a demonstration with that equipment, they'd have realised why their approach was not going to end well.
Geoff Ingram 18 hours ago
Have put drop bars on a 2001 B1 mtb, a 2007 stumpy hardtail and a 2010 stumpy full suss. In all cases fairly basic conversións leaving gearing and wheels broadly the same and concentrating on correct positioning of bars and fit. Oddly, with all 3 I was happy with the result when recently done, but after a few months found that the extra speed on easy trails was more than offset by the lack of ability (probably mine) on tougher routes and finally preferred flat bar with slammed and inverted stem as best overall compromise. Good fun playing around, though.
mark1a 18 hours ago
The photos in this review look they are for a different bag?
mattw 19 hours ago
This is a strange reactionary knee jerk overall. But what is this "are essentially motorbikes in disguise" waffle? "One letter claimed that high-powered electric ‘e-bikes’ were “essentially motorbikes” in disguise, with many being used without lights, helmets, or any hi-vis clothing." Surely, they simply ARE motorbikes?
14 thoughts on “Live blog: Sustrans launch major overhaul of National Cycle Network; “It’s just not true to say the cause of congestion is cyclists,” says Mayor of London + more”
“..the Association of British
“..the Association of British Insurers (ABI) says that a widely reported claim last week by the government that drivers who undertake cycle awareness training will benefit from lower motor insurance premiums is nonsense.”
I find that hard to believe. Surely the government wouldn’t lie to us? And I’m sure the 2014 review of road laws will be with us any day.
The news about the Unblock the Embankment Campaign is yet another demonstration of special interest groups hijacking our so-called democracy, a bit like fracking and Brexit. The majority of people support more spending on cycling and walking, but all the money goes on massive road schemes and ego-schemes like HS2.
Quote:
Maybe not, but it might have a meaningful effect on general road safety… But I guess “general road safety” isn’t a monetised quantity that the ABI is interested in.
brooksby wrote:
Maybe not, but it might have a meaningful effect on general road safety… But I guess “general road safety” isn’t a monetised quantity that the ABI is interested in.
If it was the have an effect on general road safety ( I’m not arguing that it woudn’t) the Government should be paying for it as they are the ones who would be benefiting from it, not expect the insurance industry to pay for it, for ( as it turns out) no benefit to the industry.
marcswales wrote:
The Government’s money is our money, from taxes.
So, if we want general road safety then we should pay for it as we would be the ones benefiting from it. Rather than expecting the insurance industry to pay for it because they’re the ones who would benefit (since they wouldn’t have to pay out so many claims…?).
brooksby wrote:
Maybe not, but it might have a meaningful effect on general road safety… But I guess “general road safety” isn’t a monetised quantity that the ABI is interested in.
It may not have much of an impact on insurance rates in general, but on a personal level, if you’ve taken the course you would presumably be a better driver, therefore avoid premium rate increases by avoiding accidents?
I work in the insurance
I work in the insurance industry and the first we heard of discounts for those who complete the bikeability course was when we read it in the press; the industry weren’t consulted prior to the paper being published. Surely, asking the industry what could be done should have been the starting point?
scouser_andy wrote:
Of course, ask insurers and they are bound to say ‘We aren’t paying for this,’ aren’t they? Don’t be fooled — this is just their first shot in a negotiation.
But there will probably be a proper consultation, when the industry can have their say and you’ll see how much public support there is for the idea. If enough people think it’s worth taking the training to get the discount, it’s more likely to happen, and the industry would be hard-pressed to argue against so many of their own customers. So they try to shoot it down before the idea gets established. Standard tactics.
If, to be fair, they do have a point, the government should waive insurance tax for people who have been trained. That is entirely in the government’s hands.
The Telegraph report is
The Telegraph report is quoting a press release from the ABI last week – as the industry wasn’t consulted then the other option is that the Government rebate part of the tax on insurance policies to those that qualify (and those that can manage a way to fraud the system)
Lots of nice words in that
Lots of nice words in that cycling safety review document – but virually nothing on funding. Not talking to the insurers in advance of the proposal kinda shows up how much of a priority this cycling review is for the DfT……
Sadiq – what tosh, can’t you
Sadiq – what tosh, can’t you see all those queues are queues of bikes ? All the cars have got home already as they are such space efficient vehicles, while the inneficient cycles are clogging up the roads. . . . . . Oh wait, I may have got those two means of transport transposed there.
Increased numbers of vans, and particularly PHVs (whom oddly get their licence to operate in the city from Sadiq’s TfL) don’t help.
Multiple “local collection points” across the central areas so people can collect parcels on their way to the tube home, and stopping the vast number of short stop/start runs by mainly diesel vans would be a big help. Offering incentives to the delivery firms to swap over to electric vans where they have to deliver in a stop/start cycle. And cutting the numbers of PHVs in the centre would reduce queues and make cycling a lot less dangerous.
StuInNorway wrote:
Except that’s not strictly true about the PHV licenses, there was a report earlier this year saying that there’s a loophole in the law being exploited by PHV operators which allows them to get a license elsewhere (say, Luton), but then only ever operate in London.
alexb wrote:
Time to introduce proper controls on that then…. along the lines of foreign truckers coming into Norway, they are allowed 3 internal jobs within a week before they leave the country again, to stop companies flagging out their fleet to eastern Europe and paying them a pittance, and on the jobs within Norway they have to pay the Norwegian minimum wage (about 6x what the eastern europeans are on)
I thought that looked more
I thought that looked more like a weasel.
If only there was a decent way to tell the difference…
The Sustrans story sums up
The Sustrans story sums up sublimely the problem with our transport system today; the government spends hundreds of billions of pounds of our money on road and rail schemes with very little benefit to society or public support, while walking and cycling schemes with absolutely huge benefits and massive public support are left to a charity.
Sheer lunacy and there is something profoundly wrong with our system of government.