Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

'Traffic is not a force of nature' Boris Johnson praises success of Low Traffic Neighbourhood and cycle schemes

"For decades we mourned that children no longer played in the street. Now once again, in some places, they do"...

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has praised the success of active travel schemes in reducing the number of cars on the road and said 'traffic is not a force of nature'.

He also explicitly warned critics of LTN's and bike lanes that if they wanted to oppose the initiatives they must at least offer a viable alternative that would combat rising traffic levels.

Mr Johnson made the comments alongside the government's 'Gear Change One Year on' report released yesterday.

He said: "About this time last year, I promised to kick off the most radical change to our city streets since the arrival of mass motoring. Perhaps rather quickly for a government promise, we seem to be achieving it...

"Cycling has increased by more in this one single year than it did over the whole of the previous 20 years.

"The roads are festooned with people wearing colours not found in nature.

"Hundreds of new schemes have created safe space for people to cycle and walk, supported pubs and restaurants that might otherwise have closed, and allowed us to get the exercise we need. For decades we mourned that children no longer played in the street. Now once again, in some places, they do."

The prime minister also condemned critics of Low Traffic Neighbourhood schemes, some of whom, when the first LTN was announced, marched through the streets with a coffin claiming the plans would lead to the 'death of local shops'. 

He continued: "I know many people think that cycling and walking schemes simply increase car traffic on other roads.

"But there is now increasing evidence that they do not.

"We sometimes think of traffic as like water: if you block a stream in one place, it will find the next easiest way.

"Of course some journeys by car are essential, but traffic is not a force of nature. It is a product of people’s choices. If you make it easier and safer to walk and cycle, more people choose to walk and cycle instead of driving, and the traffic falls overall."

> Department for Transport say councils must give walking and cycling schemes time

The Prime Minister also promised that on active travel this year would increase – from the £257 million announced at last November’s Spending Review to £338m.

The money will be used to invest in more low-traffic neighbourhoods, protected cycle lanes as well as assisting with upgrades to the National Cycle Network.

> Cycle safety in focus as Highway Code changes revealed, including setting out hierarchy of road users

Alongside the well publicised Highway Code changes, the Government also announced a new scheme that aims to increase awareness of e-cycles and help overcome barriers to using them, with an e-cycle support programme to be launched later this year

It will also be looking at how historic railway infrastructure across the country can be turned into cycling routes.

If you wish to read the report, and Mr Johnson's comments in full, you can do so here.

Add new comment

47 comments

Avatar
wtjs | 2 years ago
5 likes

Above is the rhetoric- this is today's reality brought about by the complete indifference to cyclist safety of forces like Lancashire Constabulary. See the inside edge of the 'T' in 'STOP' which the front tyre is about to skim? That's 127 cms from the kerb. Forget all that 150 cms 'clearance' rubbish they put on the signs all these b******s ignore- allowing for the mirror that's 120 cms of carriageway for the whole cyclist to fit in, and I'm not centred at 60 cms from the kerb- clearance is 10 cms, granted to me by the b*****d driver of Yaris PE70 RXP

Avatar
Richard D replied to wtjs | 2 years ago
3 likes

Sadly for most of us this is far too often the reality, which in turn actively discourages people from cycling.  It's all well and good putting in cycle lanes and LTNs, but most of every journey undertake n by most of us on bikes will be on roads "shared' with motor vehicles.  Yet the evidence time and again is that some twats in cars and vans refuse to share properly, and there are no grown-ups around to make sure that they change their ways.

Avatar
HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
4 likes

The 'traffic is not like water' stuff is quite good. It's lifted almost word-for-word from Andrew Gilligan's Foreword to the 2016 report Human Streets - see p7.

Avatar
Jenova20 replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
2 likes
HarrogateSpa wrote:

The 'traffic is not like water' stuff is quite good. It's lifted almost word-for-word from Andrew Gilligan's Foreword to the 2016 report Human Streets - see p7.

It's a nice phrase. Is no one else allowed to use it or say something similar ever again?

Avatar
HarrogateSpa replied to Jenova20 | 2 years ago
7 likes

There's no need to get shirty about me pointing this out. I remembered the original passage, because I thought it was good at the time.

The right thing to do would be to give credit to the original author, and it would be quite easy to do so. It is no surprise that Johnson has not done so, and the fact that he hasn't says a lot about his character.

Avatar
Jenova20 replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
1 like
HarrogateSpa wrote:

There's no need to get shirty about me pointing this out. I remembered the original passage, because I thought it was good at the time.

The right thing to do would be to give credit to the original author, and it would be quite easy to do so. It is no surprise that Johnson has not done so, and the fact that he hasn't says a lot about his character.

Erm, you're the one making baseless plagiarism accusations. It's a similar sentence on transport, from 5 years ago, that's all. Anything else has been inferred by you.

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
1 like

Anyone would think that Andrew Gilligan might just have been involved in this report...

Avatar
HarrogateSpa replied to Rich_cb | 2 years ago
3 likes

Of course Gilligan supplied the lines, and of course he has given permission for Johnson to plagiarise him.

Still, if I were borrowing someone else's lines, I would choose to credit that person. It is no surprise that Johnson has not done so, and the fact that he hasn't says a lot about his character.

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
3 likes

Do you think politicians write all their own speeches?

Do you think that every piece of text attributed to a politician was entirely authored by said politician?

There was a story in the press recently about Tony Blair and a statement credited to him about the Irish Famine which won him much praise at the time. He had neither written it nor even read it when it was released.

That was unusual in that Blair had not actually approved the text but politicians routinely give speeches and approve statements or newspaper columns that they had no part in writing.

Johnson has, on this occasion, done absolutely nothing unusual or wrong.

Ironically, your desperation to find something to condemn in an incredibly positive piece of news says a lot about your character.

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
0 likes
HarrogateSpa wrote:

The 'traffic is not like water' stuff is quite good. It's lifted almost word-for-word from Andrew Gilligan's Foreword to the 2016 report Human Streets - see p7.

But probably not original.  There are many and various sources which might be original for that concept, and Andrew Gilligan doesn't seem to be complaining.

Avatar
HarrogateSpa replied to eburtthebike | 2 years ago
1 like

I know perfectly well that Andrew Gilligan is behind Johnson's speech.

I've provided the specific source of the words Johnson used. If you think there is another older source, I'd be interested in it. If it's just speculation that there probably might be, I'm less interested.

Avatar
gazza_d replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
4 likes
HarrogateSpa wrote:

The 'traffic is not like water' stuff is quite good. It's lifted almost word-for-word from Andrew Gilligan's Foreword to the 2016 report Human Streets - see p7.

You do of course know that Andrew Gilligan is one of if not the key advisor and architect behind all this so is likely to have written Johnson's speech and comments for him.

Avatar
HarrogateSpa replied to gazza_d | 2 years ago
1 like

Yes I'm well aware of that.

I'm pointing out the source of Johnson's speech primarily because I think it's interesting. There is no reason this should raise your hackles.

I do believe that when quoting or paraphrasing someone else's words, the right thing to do is to be transparent about the source. Academic institutions insist on this, and plagiarism can land students in big trouble. My view is that the person with the most responsible job in the country should be held to at least the same standards as university students.

Avatar
AidanR replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
2 likes

Given that Gilligan probably at least had a hand in writing the speech, it would be mighty bizarre of Boris to name-check him in that same speech. This isn't an essay. I'm no fan of Boris, but you are scraping the barrel.

Avatar
HarrogateSpa replied to AidanR | 2 years ago
0 likes

When quoting or paraphrasing someone's text, it isn't bizarre at all to mention the original source.

I'm no fan of unnecessary jibes, but you're scraping the barrel.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
2 likes
HarrogateSpa wrote:

When quoting or paraphrasing someone's text, it isn't bizarre at all to mention the original source.

I'm no fan of unnecessary jibes, but you're scraping the barrel.

It's unusual in speeches though, especially political speeches.

Avatar
HarrogateSpa replied to hawkinspeter | 2 years ago
0 likes

Can I genuinely invite you to consider the case of Joe Biden plagiarising Neil Kinnock? Please read it with an open mind and tell me if there are at least some similarities with the present case.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
0 likes
HarrogateSpa wrote:

Can I genuinely invite you to consider the case of Joe Biden plagiarising Neil Kinnock? Please read it with an open mind and tell me if there are at least some similarities with the present case.

There's some similarites, but also some differences. Neil Kinnock's speech was relatively famous in its own right, so Biden should (and intended to, but forgot) have given some attribution. Also, there's the question of how much was used. If it's just a phrase or two, then I don't think attribution is really needed, but if it's whole sections, then I'd say that the author should be recognised.

I don't pay much attention to what Boris says, so can't really judge this particular instance, but if in doubt I'd usually assume that Boris is dishonest and self-serving.

It's interesting that Biden thanked Kinnock for being his best speech writer and also saving his life.

Avatar
AidanR replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
2 likes

It is bizarre in a speech. What was Boris going to say: "as the man who wrote this speech once said, traffic isn't a force of human nature"?

For once Boris has said and done something positive. I'm all for criticising the bad things he's done, but equally we need to acknowledge when he does something good. Otherwise we just sound like bitter trolls.

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
2 likes

In academia you are correct.

In politics you are completely wrong.

Avatar
HarrogateSpa replied to Rich_cb | 2 years ago
0 likes

How strange, then, that Joe Biden was accused of plagiarising Neil Kinnock - and nobody said 'it doesn't matter in politics'.

You may wish to appreciate that you are completely wrong.

Avatar
AidanR replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
3 likes

You're accusing a politician of plagiarising his own speech writer, not another politician.

Avatar
HarrogateSpa replied to AidanR | 2 years ago
0 likes

If Gilligan had simply written the words for Johnson you would be right.

Unfortunately for Johnson and for you, Gilligan published the words under his own name 5 years ago. It is then a problem for Johnson to try to pass the speech off as his own.

I appreciate that no amount of reason will move you from your emotional view, so I won't engage with you any further.

Avatar
AidanR replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
2 likes
HarrogateSpa wrote:

I know perfectly well that Andrew Gilligan is behind Johnson's speech.

You are accusing Boris of plagiarising his own speech writer. I suppose that in some way that's literally true, but utterly meaningless.

Avatar
Flintshire Boy replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
1 like

Hole.

When in.

Stop digging.

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
5 likes

Political reports and speeches are collaborations. Everybody knows this.

The report in question is a collaboration between Boris, Gilligan and others.

You're accusing Boris and Gilligan (et al) of plagiarising Gilligan (et al).

It just makes you look foolish.

There was (AFAIK) no overlap between Biden's staff and Kinnock's staff. So Biden and staff used somebody else's work.

Boris did not do that as everybody knows the report was a collaboration with Gilligan (et al).

Written attribution is not the protocol in political speeches/reports etc.

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to HarrogateSpa | 2 years ago
1 like
HarrogateSpa wrote:

When quoting or paraphrasing someone's text, it isn't bizarre at all to mention the original source.

I'm no fan of unnecessary jibes, but you're scraping the barrel.

Perhaps you should mention the source of your quote "scraping the barrel."?

Avatar
the little onion | 2 years ago
5 likes

Well, it's a start. The stuff about the highway code was also good. But now let's fund the visiona and actually build some proper infrastructure. At a fraction of a cost of the scheduled motorway expansion, let alone HS2.

Avatar
gazza_d replied to the little onion | 2 years ago
4 likes
the little onion wrote:

Well, it's a start. The stuff about the highway code was also good. But now let's fund the visiona and actually build some proper infrastructure. At a fraction of a cost of the scheduled motorway expansion, let alone HS2.

There is a lot of essential groundwork going in.
Things like the new LTN1/20 which is new statutory guidance and is really good, which will apply to new schemes.
They're jumping hard on councils who are just removing infra cos it upsets a councillor or two (Liverpool, Brighton, Cambridge).
Active travel England is going to be the new body leading and approving schemes and that's almost up. Boardman is one of the favourites for the top job.
Oh and they've kicked highways England in the nuts for concreting up old railway bridges

There seems to be a lot of stuff happening behind the scenes which is good and I think Gilligan and co are actually trying to make active travel as much of a given as provision for motors and to depoliticalise it so councils have to make provision.
I'm no Tory and it pains me to admit it, but I think they're doing a good job here. Shame about everything else

Avatar
Captain Badger | 2 years ago
12 likes

"Of course some journeys by car are essential, but traffic is not a force of nature. It is a product of people’s choices."

Wtf?? I find myself wanting to stand up and applaud. I must be going down with Socratitis.... Shoot me, someone.

Pages

Latest Comments