Many political pundits are saying this will be the most crucial general election of the post-war era. Brexit, the NHS, tackling poverty and violent crime are all among the issues that will help sway voters, as is fighting climate change, with some parties emphasising the role that active travel can play in the latter.
As the nation goes to the polls, we take a look at the various parties’ pledges on cycling and walking, which were also outlined – at least for the Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats and Green Party at last week’s active travel hustings in West London, which we covered here in a special edition of our live blog.
We don’t include the positions of the SNP, Plaid Cymru or the various parties in Northern Ireland here, since outside England active travel falls within the remit of the devolved administrations elsewhere in the UK and is therefore a campaigning issue for elections to Holyrood, the Senedd or Stormont.
It should also be borne in mind that ‘England’ in this context effectively excludes London, with responsibility for active travel in the capital falling to City Hall and Transport for London.
The parties are listed in order of the number of seats held (or in one case, not held) in the last parliament.
Conservatives
Should the Conservative Party win a majority tomorrow, they have pledged to spend £350 million over the lifetime of the next parliament, equivalent to £70 million a year over the next five years on a Cycling Infrastructure Fund.
To describe that as peanuts would be putting it kindly. It works out at less than £1.20 per person per year, compared to the current spend of £7 – and even that little more than a third of the £17 a head annual spend that campaigners united under the Cycling & Walking Alliance umbrella have called for, rising to £34 by 2025.
There’s also a pledge to put £2 billion aside to fix potholes – but trade body the Asphalt Industry Alliance has estimated that nearly £10 billion would need to be spent over the next decade to fix the country’s road defects.
The Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy, finally published in 2017 but with no explanation of how much would be spent on it seems to have quietly disappeared, and earlier this year the Conservatives admitted that they would miss their own targets on increasing levels of cycling.
Behind the scenes, Boris Johnson has employed Andrew Gilligan – his former cycling commissioner in London – as his active travel advisor, and he is seen as someone who can knock heads together to turn plans for cycling infrastructure into reality; but how much he can do that at national level given that budget is open to question.
Labour
Labour has pledged to spend £50 per person per year on active travel – a figure that would transform cycling here, with the party also saying that it would draw inspiration from towns and cities in Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands as part of a healthy streets programme that would encourage people to walk or cycle.
There is a strong commitment to Bikeability, which Labour says would be provided to all primary school children as well as their parents, as well as being offered to more adults and secondary school pupils.
The party says it would build 5,000 kilometres of cycleways in a bid to double the numbers of journeys made by bike, and provide safe routes to walk or cycle to 10,000 primary schools in the country.
It also promises grants to buy e-bikes and to make bicycles affordable for all.
That £50 headline figure was certainly an attention-grabber, although of course pledging money in opposition is one thing, but finding it once in power quite another. Moreover, if Labour does form the next government, the likelihood is that it would be as part of a coalition, and with all the bargaining that entails with other parties, the manifesto promise could be watered down.
Liberal Democrats
There are some encouraging references to cycling in the party’s manifesto, including spending 10 per cent of the transport budget on active travel by the end of the next parliament – a figure that is on the wish-list of several campaign groups.
The party also pledges to draw up a national strategy for encouraging more walking and cycling including, for the latter, safe infrastructure, while other manifesto promises include reducing car use as well as greater integration of rail, bus and cycle routes.
You’d get pretty good odds on the Liberal Democrats winning an overall majority tomorrow, with the party struggling to make headway in the opinion polls and much of its campaigning focused on a small number of target seats in constituencies that voted remain in the 2016 referendum.
It’s entirely possible though that come Friday, the party could be in a similar position to 2010 and determine who will occupy Number 10 (although parties outside the main two could also have a say, of course). But it’s difficult to envisage that active travel would be a major factor in any coalition negotiations.
Green Party
Tackling the climate crisis is unsurprisingly the party’s key campaigning issue, and getting more people walking and cycling is of course a big part of that. There’s a pledge to provide £2.5 billion for cycling over the next decade, and investing in “highest quality” infrastructure.
The party has set a target of more than one in two trips of up to five miles to be done by bike or on foot, and ultimately aims to achieve levels of cycling similar to those in Denmark or the Netherlands.
Other promises include a default 20mph speed limit in residential areas, a vision zero approach to injuries and deaths on the roads, and subsidies for e-bikes and cargo bikes.
The Green Party ticks a lot of boxes for active travel, but while the environment is a greater concern for many voters now than ever before, our first-past-the-post system inevitably means it struggles to turn support at national level into seats at Westminster – it had just the one in the last parliament, but won seven at the most recent European elections.
Where it can and does make a difference though, with a record 400 councillors and involvement in nine council coalitions is at local level – witness Caroline Russell’s successful campaigning for a 20mph speed limit for Islington’s roads, for example, or the way Jenny Jones held Boris Johnson to account when he was Mayor of London.
The Brexit Party
Manifestoes, apparently, are a thing of the past – instead, we have a so-called Contract With The People.
Scour it for references to cycling and you will find … Rien. Nada. Niente. Nichts. Or whatever the word for ‘Nothing’ is in any of the other 19 official languages of the European Union …
























74 thoughts on “General Election: Where do the parties stand on cycling?”
Not only is the tory
Not only is the tory commitment to cycling pathetic, only a fool would believe they are actually going to spend even that tiny amount, and their record is appalling, even if their rhetoric is good.
OK, cycling is far from the only policy on which to decide who to vote for, but any cyclist would have to think twice about voting tory, and any alternative is better.
burtthebike wrote:
Call me crazy, but wasn’t it a Tory Mayor of London who led the explosion of cycling infrastructure in the capital? For sure, the idea might have started with Livingstone the Holocaust denier, but there’s a BIG difference between having an idea and making it happen. Ignorant statement as always by left-wing tribal voters.
alexuk wrote:
So you tell a gross exaggeration followed by a blatant lie in the cause of your partisan loyalties, then call others ‘tribal’. Yeah, I don’t call you crazy, I call you a crap propagandist. You need to be more subtle.
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
[/quote]
Honestly, can you point out the blatant lie and gross exageration? I must be a doofus, stupid or just too ignorant to see it in the post. Thank you in advance.
Pushing50 wrote:
Glad you admit to being a doofus and stupid. Now you’ve admitted it, perhaps you’ll stop posting?
Do I really need to do this? Are you genuinely that dim, or are you just blinded by bias?
Show me where Ken Livingstone, for all his monomania and poor-judgement with regard to Israel, has denied the Holocaust. Then show me this ‘explosion’ in cycle infrastructure and how it isn’t, in fact, just one or two half-decent new segregated cycle routes that have only increased cycling’s modal share of journeys by a very modest amount.
Then get back to me.
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
Professor of Holocaust Studies and international expert on anti-Semitism labelling Livingstone a Holocaust denier here:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2018/07/02/labour-responsible-rise-softcore-holocaust-denial-dr-deborah/
Explosion is obviously a subjective term. Nobody can deny that Johnson oversaw an increase in cycling infrastructure and modal share though.
Rich_cb wrote:
Professor of Holocaust Studies and international expert on anti-Semitism labelling Livingstone a Holocaust denier here:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2018/07/02/labour-responsible-rise-softcore-holocaust-denial-dr-deborah/
Explosion is obviously a subjective term. Nobody can deny that Johnson oversaw an increase in cycling infrastructure and modal share though.— FluffyKittenofTindalos
One person’s opinion, and even then your link doesn’t back up the claim made. They say, in a rather vague and curiously one-sided way, that Labour has encouraged the growth of ‘soft core holocaust denial’, which they define as ‘criticising Israel too strongly’. Not that convincing or relevant to your case (even though I certainly agree people shouldn’t use Nazi analogies when speaking of Israel).
Any comment on your pal Johnson’s support for the openly and actively anti-Semitic Viktor Orban or employing of Taki, by the way? Why the one-sided emphasis on Labour?
The increase in modal share is still very small. Hardly an ‘explosion’. Given how unimpressive Khan has been, I do wonder if it wouldn’t have been better all-round if Johnson had somehow been forcibly kept on as mayor and hence not able to do all that damage as foreign-secretary and now PM. Just have to stop him engaging in any more garden bridges and keep him fighting with black cabbies instead.
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
There does seem to be a lot of focus on accusations of Labour being anti-semitic and very little focus on Tories’ anti-Islamic stance. Why did they cancel that inquiry into Islamophobia?
Also, why isn’t the report on Russia meddling in UK politics being published? I would ask “do they have something to hide”, but they so obviously do have so much to hide that Jacob Rees-Mogg has been put to sleep in his coffin for the election period.
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
You have a former mayor here in London [Ken Livingstone] who would talk about the cooperation between the Zionists and the Nazis,” she said.
“He took one little historical fact and blew it up into something that never existed, completely twisted the truth. Irrespective of how you feel about him politically – its historically rubbish. “But it’s more than that – it’s a form of anti- Semitism. That’s the kind of softcore denial I worry about much more. It’s subtly anti-Semitic and its clearly denial because it rewrites history.”
She specifically mention Livingstone so I’m not sure how you can claim it’s not relevant.
It may be one person’s opinion but she is an expert in the field so you can’t entirely discount it just because you disagree.
I hope that when we leave the EU we won’t have to deal with Orban anymore, he is an odious individual.
No idea who Taki is. I initially brought up anti-semitism in response to Burt’s hillarious assertion that Corbyn had never told a lie. It’s just continued from there.
Rich_cb wrote:
The Daily Telegraph – a source of unbiased reporting on all things to do with the Labour Party.
I am totally opposed to all forms of discrimination against racial or ethnic groups and it should always be called out, be it in the LP or elsewhere, but I am sorry to say that so much of what is described as anti-semitism, particularly where the Labour Party is involved, is criticism of Isreal and its politics. That is no more anti-semitism than criticising any other foregn government is racism.
I am dismayed when I hear people repeating what they have been fed by the right wing media about what the Labour Party are up to. I was having a conversation with a lovely coleague yesterday who spoke about the “fake” photo of the boy lying on the floor of an A & E dept in Leeds, “put out by the Labour Party”. I and another coleague immediately piped up that it was in no way fake or that it had been put out by the LP. She was happy to be put right but like so many others she believes the constant stream of lies.
Rich_cb wrote:
“Professor of Holocaust Studies and international expert on anti-Semitism labelling Livingstone a Holocaust denier here”
I’m beginning to see where you get your ultra-right wing attitude from; nowhere in that article does the good professor say, in any way shape or form, that Livingstone denies the holocaust. You literally made that up.
Rather like this BBC “fact check” site which says that his claim that Hitler supported sending jews to Israel was inaccurate, but only because it wasn’t called Israel, it was Palestine. It totally fails to look at the content of the claim itself. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36165298
burtthebike wrote:
If only you’d read the article Burt.
“You have a former mayor here in London [Ken Livingstone] who would talk about the cooperation between the Zionists and the Nazis,” she said.
“He took one little historical fact and blew it up into something that never existed, completely twisted the truth. Irrespective of how you feel about him politically – its historically rubbish. “But it’s more than that – it’s a form of anti- Semitism. That’s the kind of softcore denial I worry about much more. It’s subtly anti-Semitic and its clearly denial because it rewrites history.”
Rich_cb wrote:
I’m beginning to see where you get your ultra-right wing attitude from; nowhere in that article does the good professor say, in any way shape or form, that Livingstone denies the holocaust. You literally made that up.
Rather like this BBC “fact check” site which says that his claim that Hitler supported sending jews to Israel was inaccurate, but only because it wasn’t called Israel, it was Palestine. It totally fails to look at the content of the claim itself. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36165298
— Rich_cb If only you’d read the article Burt. “You have a former mayor here in London [Ken Livingstone] who would talk about the cooperation between the Zionists and the Nazis,” she said. “He took one little historical fact and blew it up into something that never existed, completely twisted the truth. Irrespective of how you feel about him politically – its historically rubbish. “But it’s more than that – it’s a form of anti- Semitism. That’s the kind of softcore denial I worry about much more. It’s subtly anti-Semitic and its clearly denial because it rewrites history.”— burtthebike
How odd; you accidentally snipped your own words out of the above quote. Let me remind you;
“Professor of Holocaust Studies and international expert on anti-Semitism labelling Livingstone a Holocaust denier here”
I did read the article, and you lied; it doesn’t say that Livingstone was a holocaust denier, and the quote you’ve used doesn’t say that either. I’d normally expect an apology, but you’re a tory, so there’s no point expecting anything other than denial of the facts and distraction.
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
[
Honestly, can you point out the blatant lie and gross exageration? I must be a doofus, stupid or just too ignorant to see it in the post. Thank you in advance.
— Pushing50 Glad you admit to being a doofus and stupid. Now you’ve admitted it, perhaps you’ll stop posting? Do I really need to do this? Are you genuinely that dim, or are you just blinded by bias? Show me where Ken Livingstone, for all his monomania and poor-judgement with regard to Israel, has denied the Holocaust. Then show me this ‘explosion’ in cycle infrastructure and how it isn’t, in fact, just one or two half-decent new segregated cycle routes that have only increased cycling’s modal share of journeys by a very modest amount. Then get back to me.— FluffyKittenofTindalos
Wow, very sorry for asking to understand what you meant. Bias? I was after explanation only. You do realise that I am not Rich_cb? Now I get what you were refering to I understand the reason for the gross exageration (explosion) and the blatant lie (Livingstone). I thanked you in advance, maybe I should not be so polite next time!!!
Pushing50 wrote:
And you’re right, I can admit to being a doofus when I don’t understand something. This, I think is not a weakness and something to be attacked. If only some other people would do the same from time to time so that proper discussion could take place. I also know that I am NOT a political supremecist for any of the political parties, unlike a lot on here (which I thought was a cycling forum and not a labour/conservative propoganda factory).
Pushing50 wrote:
In fact, I am now sick of this site and the sanctimonious morons who post on it. You get your wish. No more posting or reading road.cc. Congratulations on your assumptive, unfounded and unprovoked view of someone who asked a question of you. Maybe go and take a look in the mirror. Fluffy Kitten my arse.
Pushing50 wrote:
Yeah, well good luck getting quality squirrel related posts elsewhere.
hawkinspeter wrote:
Yeah, well good luck getting quality squirrel related posts elsewhere.[/quote]
Some of us are still waiting for them here.
burtthebike wrote:
That’s austerity for you
Pushing50 wrote:
What on earth happened here? I don’t look at the site for a few hours and when I come back people are swearing at each other and flouncing off in a strop…
brooksby wrote:
Called it in comment #5…
FluffyKittenofTindalos wrote:
Call me crazy, but wasn’t it a Tory Mayor of London who led the explosion of cycling infrastructure in the capital? For sure, the idea might have started with Livingstone the Holocaust denier, but there’s a BIG difference between having an idea and making it happen. Ignorant statement as always by left-wing tribal voters.
— alexuk So you tell a gross exaggeration followed by a blatant lie in the cause of your partisan loyalties, then call others ‘tribal’. Yeah, I don’t call you crazy, I call you a crap propagandist. You need to be more subtle.— burtthebike
Thank you, took the words out of my mouth. The usual right wing mix of lies, exaggerations and insults.
Labour may well be promising
Labour may well be promising more money, as with all their policies. But it is pretty meaningless when we will be bankrupt next year if they get in.
biker phil wrote:
Daily Mail much?
Jimmy Walnuts wrote:
The Tories are actually responsible with money. Hence why we don’t have any starving children, families living in bed and breakfasts, schools not being able to afford books, or people not being able to get hospital beds. Those things are all, in fact, Labour’s fault, or immigrants or something.
Jimmy Walnuts wrote:
Not at all. Common sense. Anyone with half a brain can see that a Corbyn Government is a frightening prospect. Back to the 1970s, in fact it would be much worse than the 1970s. Corbyn is brainwashing retarded fuckwits with free this, free that. What a world it would be.
Yawn. The comments will be a
Yawn. The comments will be a shitshow.
Labour are proposing to
Labour are proposing to increase Government spending by £145 billion per year over the course of the next parliament (Spending+Investment+WASPI
bribecompensation).I don’t really think that’s achievable and when they start looking for promises to break I’m guessing active travel will be near the top of the list.
The £50 per head idea is fantastic, I just don’t trust Labour to deliver it.
The Conservative pledge is awful but it’s so awful it’s at least believable.
Rich_cb wrote:
To be honest, I’d live without active travel investment if it means schools and hospitals are properly funded, kids aren’t starving, and people with disabilities aren’t being killed.
dglsdms wrote:
But could you live without hyperbole?
Rich_cb wrote:
You realise all these things are widely reported, right? I guess writing it off as hyperbole helps with that tricky cognitive dissonance though.
dglsdms wrote:
There are children starving? Literally starving?
Or was that hyperbole?
Rich_cb wrote:
You do realise that the labour manifesto has been fully costed, checked by independent economists and recommended by 140 of them? The amount they want to spend would bring us up to the European average, so it’s hardly fantastic, just realistic. Stop believing whichever billionaire owned newspaper you waste your money on and do a little research.
burtthebike wrote:
I have done extensive research. Have you? Did you realise that the £50+ billion promised to WASPI women was not costed at all in the Labour manifesto?
A good independent breakdown of the flaws with each of the major party’s manifestos is here:
https://www.ifs.org.uk/election/2019/article/don-t-expect-those-carefully-costed-manifesto-promises-to-become-reality
BTW. I’m still waiting for you to explain how Corbyn can make statement that is indisputably false and yet have never told a lie?
Rich_cb]
It isn’t indisputable, and you have failed to prove your case multiple times.
From one of your previous posts “Also if you think Corbyn has never lied you’ve clearly not been paying attention to the anti-semitism scandal.
He’s lied repeatedly throughout.”
And yet despite your assertion that he’s lied repeatedly throughout, you can only find one example and you can’t prove that.
burtthebike wrote:
A national newspaper found comprehensive proof that Corbyn made a factually incorrect statement during his interview with Andrew Neil.
Do you dispute the evidence in the Times?
There’s little point in going in to other examples of Corbyn’s dishonesty if you refuse to accept irrefutable proof on this occasion.
As for Livingstone: Learn. To. Read.
It clearly and explicitly accuses Livingstone of Holocaust denial.
Rich_cb wrote:
— Rich_cb As for Livingstone: Learn. To. Read. It clearly and explicitly accuses Livingstone of Holocaust denial.— burtthebike
Thank you for your advice, but my comprehension is already excellent, and considerably better than yours, or perhaps you have your own peculiar definition of explicit that isn’t in the dictionary. Kindly post a quote from the article which clearly and explicitly accuses Livingstone of holocaust denial, because I’ve read it twice and nowhere does it say that. But being a tory, you think that what you think is the truth; bad news, you’re wrong again.
burtthebike wrote:
Your cognitive dissonance can clearly overpower your comprehension skills.
She directly refers to what Livingstone said , then labels that as anti-semitic and denial.
How can you read that as anything other than accusing Livingstone of Holocaust denial?
“You have a former mayor here in London [Ken Livingstone] who would talk about the cooperation between the Zionists and the Nazis,” she said. “He took one little historical fact and blew it up into something that never existed, completely twisted the truth. Irrespective of how you feel about him politically – its historically rubbish. “But it’s more than that it’s a form of anti- Semitism.That’s the kind of softcore denial I worry about much more. It’s subtly anti-Semitic and its clearly denial because it rewrites history.”
Seriously, how can you?
Still waiting for your opinion on the Times’ evidence btw.
Rich_cb wrote:
Thank you for your advice, but my comprehension is already excellent, and considerably better than yours, or perhaps you have your own peculiar definition of explicit that isn’t in the dictionary. Kindly post a quote from the article which clearly and explicitly accuses Livingstone of holocaust denial, because I’ve read it twice and nowhere does it say that. But being a tory, you think that what you think is the truth; bad news, you’re wrong again.
— Rich_cb Your cognitive dissonance can clearly overpower your comprehension skills. She directly refers to what Livingstone said , then labels that as anti-semitic and denial. How can you read that as anything other than accusing Livingstone of Holocaust denial? “You have a former mayor here in London [Ken Livingstone] who would talk about the cooperation between the Zionists and the Nazis,” she said. “He took one little historical fact and blew it up into something that never existed, completely twisted the truth. Irrespective of how you feel about him politically – its historically rubbish. “But it’s more than that it’s a form of anti- Semitism.That’s the kind of softcore denial I worry about much more. It’s subtly anti-Semitic and its clearly denial because it rewrites history.” Seriously, how can you?— burtthebike
Cambridge English dictionary:
“explicit
adjective
uk
clear and exact:”
Not wooly and vague. Sorry, is English not your first language?
burtthebike wrote:
“It’s clearly denial”
That’s the most pertinent part of the quote.
How is that not explicit?
Btw still waiting for you to comment on the Times evidence?
Never mind, Corbyn is history.
If Labour elect another leader with similar politics and prejudices they will be too.
I’m mostly on board with
I’m mostly on board with Labour’s policies, but the whole WASPI thing seems off. Is it fair that the state pension age should be equal? Yes. Is fifteen years long enough notice? Yes. Was the legislation passed in a proper way? Yes. So to describe it as ‘robbery’ makes no sense at all.
Compact Corned Beef wrote:
I’m fine with the basic change, but they subsequently accelerated it with very little notice. That final change-on-top-of-a-change seems unfair on those affected by it and should be reversed/compensated for. But insofar as the waspi thing is about objecting to any change at all I disagree with it.
To achieve anything there has
To achieve anything there has to be the political will. Clearly the Tories have no will to invest in active travel so it won’t happen under them. The Labour party has expressed the will to do it, so no matter how cynical you are at least there’s a chance of it happening.
The thought of what will happen to public services and, probably more importantly, to the fight to reverse the climate crisis under another Tory government frightens and depresses me.
iandusud wrote:
Active travel is a fair point, the Conservative promise is pretty dismal.
For those of us that live in Wales the idea that Labour will save our public services is also fairly laughable.
Our schools recently ranked dead last in the UK, again.
Our health service also significantly underperforms relative to England and Scotland. (Not sure about NI).
These are all run by Labour in Wales.
As for the environment, the UK has been one of the world’s leading nations in terms of decarbonisation over the past decade.
Criticism of public services and active travel is legitimate but you can’t really criticise their environmental credentials.
Like it or not the numbers speak for themselves.
Source:
https://fullfact.org/environment/uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions/
Rich_cb wrote:
To achieve anything there has to be the political will. Clearly the Tories have no will to invest in active travel so it won’t happen under them. The Labour party has expressed the will to do it, so no matter how cynical you are at least there’s a chance of it happening.
The thought of what will happen to public services and, probably more importantly, to the fight to reverse the climate crisis under another Tory government frightens and depresses me.
— Rich_cb Active travel is a fair point, the Conservative promise is pretty dismal. For those of us that live in Wales the idea that Labour will save our public services is also fairly laughable. Our schools recently ranked dead last in the UK, again. Our health service also significantly underperforms relative to England and Scotland. (Not sure about NI). These are all run by Labour in Wales. As for the environment, the UK has been one of the world’s leading nations in terms of decarbonisation over the past decade. Criticism of public services and active travel is legitimate but you can’t really criticise their environmental credentials. Like it or not the numbers speak for themselves. Source: https://fullfact.org/environment/uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions/— iandusud
Except that the decarbonisation has been achieved by exporting it, and our manufacturing, abroad, so we haven’t actually reduced much, if at all. If all the manufactured goods we import, including the CO2 generated by transporting it here, was counted, there is very little, if any, change.
burtthebike wrote:
Given your track record Burt I’m going to need a (reliable) source for that.
burtthebike wrote:
No – the CO2 reduction is mainly down to burning less coal and using more natural gas/nuclear/wind etc. Reduced manufacturing has played a part as well.
hawkinspeter wrote:
The irony being that Thatcher kick-started climate-change research, founding the Hadley Centre, precisely because she saw it as a weapon against the hated NUM.
As I understand it, UK declining emissions is down both to the shift from manufacturing to financial services, and the shift to gas over coal. The former makes us vulnerable to global financial hiccups the latter makes us dependent on imported fuel, but it seems it’s not all bad.
Neither was specifically a climate-change policy, but it’s a happy coincidence. Clouds and silver-linings and all that.
Rich_cb wrote:
To achieve anything there has to be the political will. Clearly the Tories have no will to invest in active travel so it won’t happen under them. The Labour party has expressed the will to do it, so no matter how cynical you are at least there’s a chance of it happening.
The thought of what will happen to public services and, probably more importantly, to the fight to reverse the climate crisis under another Tory government frightens and depresses me.
— Rich_cb Active travel is a fair point, the Conservative promise is pretty dismal. For those of us that live in Wales the idea that Labour will save our public services is also fairly laughable. Our schools recently ranked dead last in the UK, again. Our health service also significantly underperforms relative to England and Scotland. (Not sure about NI). These are all run by Labour in Wales. As for the environment, the UK has been one of the world’s leading nations in terms of decarbonisation over the past decade. Criticism of public services and active travel is legitimate but you can’t really criticise their environmental credentials. Like it or not the numbers speak for themselves. Source: https://fullfact.org/environment/uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions/— iandusud
It is shameful that health service and schools in Wales are seriously underperforming, but the funding (or lack of it) comes from central government.
It is fantastic that the UK is cutting its carbon emissions. That is in large part to the stopping of burning coal in favour of other forms of electricity production, which is great. However cutting of subsidies for solar power is not. We need to be investing more in renewables. If we are leading the way in reducing carbon emissions then that is a good thing, and if we keep it up it will hopefully encourage others to follow suit. Just like we led the way in abolishing slavery for example.
The graph looks impresive but it also indicates how bad things were. Our CO2 per capita figures are still higher than say France or Italy who are above the UK in that graph. Also that graph, for some bizare (convenient) reason doesn’t include air travel or shipping. The UK has one of the highest rates of flights per capita in the world, higher than the USA where internal domestic flights are commonplace. UK air travel has steadily increased over the period covered by the graph. We also, by the very nature of being an island, have a huge dependency on shipping.
iandusud wrote:
While the overall Welsh Budget is based (via a complicated formula) on Westminster public spending the size of the health budget and the education budget is decided in Cardiff.
The Welsh Assembly Government have recently spent £100m on an airport and another £100m on motorway expansion plans. They’ve also blown a fair few million investing in Aston Martin.
Hardly great from a climate change perspective and definitely not the sort of thing you should be prioritising if your health service is struggling.
That’s Labour’s track record in Wales.
Hence why I won’t be voting Labour.
Rich_cb wrote:
It is shameful that health service and schools in Wales are seriously underperforming, but the funding (or lack of it) comes from central government.
It is fantastic that the UK is cutting its carbon emissions. That is in large part to the stopping of burning coal in favour of other forms of electricity production, which is great. However cutting of subsidies for solar power is not. We need to be investing more in renewables. If we are leading the way in reducing carbon emissions then that is a good thing, and if we keep it up it will hopefully encourage others to follow suit. Just like we led the way in abolishing slavery for example.
The graph looks impresive but it also indicates how bad things were. Our CO2 per capita figures are still higher than say France or Italy who are above the UK in that graph. Also that graph, for some bizare (convenient) reason doesn’t include air travel or shipping. The UK has one of the highest rates of flights per capita in the world, higher than the USA where internal domestic flights are commonplace. UK air travel has steadily increased over the period covered by the graph. We also, by the very nature of being an island, have a huge dependency on shipping.
— Rich_cb While the overall Welsh Budget is based (via a complicated formula) on Westminster public spending the size of the health budget and the education budget is decided in Cardiff. The Welsh Assembly Government have recently spent £100m on an airport and another £100m on motorway expansion plans. They’ve also blown a fair few million investing in Aston Martin. Hardly great from a climate change perspective and definitely not the sort of thing you should be prioritising if your health service is struggling. That’s Labour’s track record in Wales. Hence why I won’t be voting Labour.— iandusud
Well I have to conceed that your criticisms of the Welsh Assembly are fair – that is poor record.
My perspective is that of the track record of the Tory government on the NHS, education and their active transport budget. Also Boris Johnson is clearly a control freek who has deliberately avoided any serious interviews with the media during the election campaign because he knows he’s a pathologoc liar and therefore cannot stand up to scrutiny. How anyone could think he can be trusted in government is beyond me.
Just remember folks…gammon is
Just remember folks…gammon is not conducive to improving cycling performance.
@Rich_cb – interesting graph
@Rich_cb – interesting graph as I did not know that the UK were performing well with CO2 (largely to do with not burning so much coal). I do notice that it excludes shipping and aviation, but I presume that the UK has a similar shipping/flying profile as other countries.
Though cutting CO2 is important, I’m also very concerned about air quality and the UK does not seem to be performing well with particulate emissions and certainly the air in Bristol is consistently above the legal targets (i.e. illegally noxious). Worryingly, traffic emissions have been increasing since 2012!
hawkinspeter wrote:
Yes, this is a problem in Cardiff too.
This is mostly due to diesel engines in Cardiff, probably similar in Bristol.
Cardiff Council and The Welsh Assembly have so far declined to pursue any interventions similar to that proposed with the Bristol diesel ban.
The UK government is launching a huge subsidy for EVs next year which will, amongst other things, apparently lead to Cardiff meeting EU rules on noxious emissions within 5 years.
I’m not holding my breath.
Rich_cb wrote:
@Rich_cb – interesting graph as I did not know that the UK were performing well with CO2. I do notice that it excludes shipping and aviation, but I presume that the UK has a similar shipping/flying profile as other countries.
Though cutting CO2 is important, I’m also very concerned about air quality and the UK does not seem to be performing well with particulate emissions and certainly the air in Bristol is consistently above the legal targets (i.e. illegally noxious).
— Rich_cb Yes, this is a problem in Cardiff too. This is mostly due to diesel engines in Cardiff, probably similar in Bristol. Cardiff Council and The Welsh Assembly have so far declined to pursue any interventions similar to that proposed with the Bristol diesel ban. The UK government is launching a huge subsidy for EVs next year which will, amongst other things, apparently lead to Cardiff meeting EU rules on noxious emissions within 5 years. I’m not holding my breath.— hawkinspeter
Oops – I just edited my comment (to add bits about the CO2 decrease being mainly due to reduced coal usage) and it’s now leapfrogged your reply.
I also added that traffic emissions have been increasing since 2012, so maybe we should be holding our collective breaths!
Though I prefer EVs to ICE vehicles, they’re not going to make a huge difference unless people change their transport habits. Apparently SUVs are now out-selling EVs by 37 to 1!
http://www.ukerc.ac.uk/news/suvs-sabotage-green-revolution.html
Well keeping this cycling. I
Well keeping this cycling. I do hope if you’ve voted tory today then when you’re up shit creek cos of negligible investment in active travel and no real efforts to curb the congestion and car love mentality that’s put you in hosipital, sorry tried to put you in hospital as you’re lying in the gutter and there’s no one to help as you’re stepped over, probably spat at, cos everyone elses life is more important. Ambulance isn’t coming anytime soon. Probably going to get a massive bill and then that injury that haunts you for years isn’t covered by your insurance, if you have any.
Sorry but you get the drift. You’re a keen cyclist and your voting for who. FFS get a grip. You can vote for new hope or you can vote for horrible policy and proven liars. Lying right now with all the evidence from the party in power.
visionset wrote:
Nothing says ‘kinder, gentler politics’ like wishing serious injury and lifelong suffering on your political opponents.
Rich_cb wrote:
Well keeping this cycling. I do hope if you’ve voted tory today then when you’re up shit creek — Rich_cb
Nothing says ‘kinder, gentler politics’ like wishing serious injury and lifelong suffering on your political opponents.— visionset
I didn’t say that. My wish is you think when that happens.
Rich_cb wrote:
Yes, it’s not that someone
Yes, it’s not that someone insulted a sizeable proportion of a religious community and the way they choose to dress, comparing them to awful, violent criminals, in their own column, in a national newspaper. Now that would be an anti-religious rant you could straight out quote and maybe want to investigate.
ktache wrote:
I think that Johnson’s comments about “bum boys in tight T-shirts” (can’t remember the exact phrasing, can’t be bothered to google it) might come across as a teensy bit homophobic, too…
brooksby wrote:
https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-women-gay-people-sexism-bumboys-totty-toby-young-2018-1?r=US&IR=T
“Tank-topped bum boys” were his words.
Don’t forget his attitude towards women as well: “voting Tory will cause your wife to have bigger breasts” (Johnson – 2005).
I don’t think his opinions on anyone not like himself (rich, white, male, heterosexual and living in London) are necessarily the worst thing about him – it’s his complete self-serving lack of integrity and honesty that makes him unfit to be PM.
Johnson might have had a
Johnson might have had a chubby racist sweating hand in increasing cycling in LONDON, but that’s all. Just LONDON. Although most folk who live in LONDON (and a good whack of the cycling press who are probaly based in LONDON) consider LONDON to be the UK. In reality, Doris/Joris/Boris/that upper-class racist has done f*ck all for cycling and active travel across the rest of the country.
Jimmy Walnuts wrote:
He just wants to spend a few more years “getting Brexit done” and then he’ll get started on it.
Cycled to work which was cold
Cycled to work which was cold but dry, then had to cycle a bunch of miles in the steady rain to proxy vote for my son and then home still raining to vote for myself, well done to all who cycled to get their vote in.
Good luck to all candidates, I’m not a Labour voter, never have, but, if they get in then good luck to them and the country!
As for Ken Livingstone, he was not at the head of suggesting cycle lanes for London, that came from elsewhere, he happened to be Mayor at that time, Boris did actually sign the docket to get the ball rolling. And to remind you that Lingstone was just a year before the first rumblings of cycle infra in London was calling for cyclists to have number plates, so any thoughts on KL being pro cycling is bollocks!
And with regards to his comments regarding the Jewish people, he actually compared a Jewish reporter to a “concentration camp guard”. he disgustingly claimed that Hitler “was supporting Zionism” in the 1930s and that there was “real collaboration” between Nazism and the Jewish national movement, a claim that he repeated in court. https://www.rt.com/uk/382844-livingstone-nazi-holocaust-hitler/ On the latter there is some evidence that on a small scale there is likely to have been some collaberation, to come out and say it as if it was a carte blanche, just tells you all you need to know about KL.
Did he actually say that the Jewish people were not mass murdered as part of an act of genocide, not that I know of, but just because he didn’t explicitly, it doesn’t mean what he has said is any less grotesque https://www.thejc.com/comment/comment/loach-livingstone-and-the-holocaust-a-study-in-slander-1.445044
And on the 1,287th day of
And on the 1,287th day of Christmas the turkeys all decided that they would let the pigs govern the farm, the pigs who had promised to Get Christmas Done.
Worst Labour result since
Worst Labour result since 1935 but Corbyn still won’t immediately get on his bike.
If a Blair type (without the war) Labour was the opposition it would have been a different story. The UK clearly doesn’t want Corbyn when he lost some pretty strong Labour seats.
Rick_Rude wrote:
So if the Labour opposition had been (much
) more like the Conservatives then they would have done better? OK, then…
brooksby wrote:
Traditionally Britain isn’t really a country of political extremes so yes, centre left would clearly have done better than far left has. When you’ve lost Blyth and Redcar then something is wrong with the Labour party.
Rick_Rude wrote:
Effectively this is a by-election or local council election protest vote but on a national scale. The challenge for Boris now is to do enough to convince those communities to vote Tory in 2024.
Of course, that may not matter because if Scotland votes for independence that’s 50+ potential Labour votes gone forever and I don’t see how they could ever win a majority just in England & Wales under FPTP. Ageing population isn’t helping, if you assume that the older you get the more likely you are to vote Tory.
Being in the “Anyone but
Being in the “Anyone but Jeremy or Boris” camp, I was prepared to be disappointed this morning, but wow!
I feel like we have ducked a bullet but only because we are stooping to pick up the live grenade of BrExit. But the people have spoken and as far as I am concerned confirmed the first vote. So time for me to shut up about that and get on with ensuring my own bunker is well stocked and zombie proof.
If there are any silver linings:
The conservative majority is so huge that there may be more leeway for MPs to disagree with party on behalf of the best interests of their constituents.
BrExit may be a softer affair as there is no need to accomodate the ERG or pay any attention to Nigel Farrage.
The DUP can go do one. No more fat payouts from the British taxpayer.
Best of all – No more general elections for 5 years.
Mungecrundle wrote:
Don’t be too sure. Despite the fixed term parliament act, we’ve had three in five years anyway, and when the report into Russian interference in our elections is eventually published, and it shows that the referendum and subsequent elections, including this one, were sabotaged, we might have one rather sooner than you think. Assuming of course that Boris doesn’t bury it so deep that it will never be found.
burtthebike wrote:
Too much Scooby Doo for this man.
Replace the tinfoil hat with a plastic one from Planet X as they’ve got a good sale on at the moment.
Being in the “Anyone but
Dbl post