Locals support ban on “malicious” cycling in town centres where police claim cyclists “rifle through” – but cyclists call for clampdown on “speeding vehicles” and worry PSPO could target safe cycling

Plans to introduce a ban on cyclists deemed to be riding in a dangerous or “malicious” manner through the centre of Nuneaton and Bedworth have been backed by a majority of locals, over a year after a local police officer claimed that “kids wheelie-ing around” and cyclists “rifling through” town centres were “setting the wrong tone” in the borough.

However, cyclists in the Warwickshire towns have raised concerns that the proposed Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) – while not an outright ban on cycling in certain areas – could lead to cyclists riding safely and considerately in pedestrianised zones being fined.

Meanwhile, others called for a clampdown on “speeding vehicles” through the town centres, and argued that, instead of fining “nuisance” cyclists, installing safe, protected cycle routes should be a priority for the local authority.

Next Wednesday, members of Nuneaton and Bedford Borough Council will vote on whether to approve a PSPO designed to tackle “anti-social behaviour” and “disrupt criminality” in the two towns.

According to the proposals, if approved, the PSPO will enable a council officer or warden to “request a person to dismount if they are cycling, skateboarding, scootering, or using similar devices” within certain restricted areas if they “reasonably suspect that the person is riding in a malicious and/or dangerous manner as to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to any person within that area”.

Nuneaton’s proposed PSPO zone, outlined in red

The restricted areas in question in both cover substantial portions of both Nuneaton and Bedworth, not just the towns’ pedestrianised or shopping areas (some of which already prohibit cycling), as is normally the case when it comes to cycling PSPOs.

The order also compels groups of three or more who appear to be causing harassment or distress to immediately disperse, while banning face coverings used to conceal a person’s identity. Anyone found in breach of this order will receive a £100 Fixed Penalty Notice, the council says.

Bedworth’s anti-social cycling zone

The introduction of a PSPO clamping down on anti-social cycling in Nuneaton and Bedworth was first mooted back in October 2023, when Nuneaton police inspector Kris Shore told a council scrutiny meeting that officers want more power to stop anti-social cycling in the town.

Insp. Shore said he wanted to see the town centre “fully pedestrianised” and called for the council to approve measures to grant officers “extra powers to stop” cyclists.

“We did a lot of engagement around the Knife Angel [a sculpture in Nuneaton], we were in the town centre quite a lot and we had people on push bikes just rifling though the town,” he told the meeting.

“For me, it is a pedestrianised area of town, and it is really dangerous to be riding straight through there. We get a lot of kids wheelie-ing through and it sets the wrong tone. It is ASB (anti-social behaviour) in itself for me.”

> “We get a lot of kids wheelie-ing through”: Police claim danger of “anti-social behaviour” should be tackled with town centre cycling ban

Following the police’s call for extra powers, the council launched a public consultation on the proposed PSPO, a report of which was presented to the local authority this week.

According to the consultation’s findings, of the 311 responses, 306 supported the introduction of the PSPO, while only four voiced their opposition to the cycling element of the order.

Of the 165 written responses submitted to the council, 140 were either in complete support of the PSPO, or wanted it to be extended, either geographically or through increased enforcement and additional banned behaviour, including – as one local requested – the use of “foul language” in the town centre, while another bizarrely called for mobility scooters to be prohibited within the restricted area.

Bedworth High Street pedestrian zone

However, the consultation’s responses also featured concerns from cyclists that, like other PSPOs throughout the UK, the order could be used to crack down on safe cycling in pedestrianised zones.

As we have reported on road.cc on a regular basis, PSPOs banning cycling in pedestrian areas, and giving council officers the power to fine people riding bikes, have been the subject of intense scrutiny in recent years.

Despite their apparent aim to deter anti-social or nuisance behaviour in town and city centres, several local authorities who have implemented the measures have been criticised for instead imposing sometimes hefty fines on people riding their bikes safely in pedestrian zones.

> “If you don’t want cycling on footpaths, support bike lanes and 20mph zones”: Town centre cycling bans and the fight against “cowboy” wardens

In Grimsby, for instance, where the fines have become something of a long-running saga, council officers have been accused of targeting “old and slow” cyclists using their bikes to get into town and visit the shops, while ignoring youths “racing up and down”.

And in Colchester, the local council was forced to put a temporary halt to its penalty system after campaigners complained that people on bikes were being unfairly targeted by third-party wardens “running amok”.

These “cowboy” wardens were also accused of discouraging people from cycling in the city, by mistakenly fining cyclists £100 for riding their bikes in areas where cycling is permitted, threatening them with a £1,000 penalty if they appealed the fine, and telling one elderly female cyclist that she wasn’t allowed to use a city centre road because she doesn’t pay “road tax”.

In Birmingham, cycling campaigners are currently hoping to stop the introduction of a PSPO seemingly designed to halt “speeding” delivery riders, but which cyclists argue will make parts of the city centre “impermeable for cycling”, discriminate against people who use cycles as mobility aids, and fail to stamp out nuisance or dangerous behaviour.

Active travel charity Cycling UK has long been a prominent critic of PSPOs, which it claims have the effect of criminalising cycling and discouraging people from riding into town, while failing to combat actual nuisance behaviour.

“Some councils have used PSPOs as a geographically defined version of an ASBO to restrict the use of public space and criminalise behaviour not normally regarded as illegal,” Duncan Dollimore, Cycling UK’s head of campaigns, has previously said.

> Cyclists can’t reach proposed active travel route due to town centre bike ban, as “crazy” plans slammed as “white elephant” that will not benefit cycling

And these sentiments have been echoed in the response to Nuneaton and Bedworth’s consultation, with six locals urging the council to provide further clarification about how the PSPO will affect “cyclists pedalling in a safe manner”.

Meanwhile, three respondents asked if the PSPO will apply to “speeding vehicles” within the restricted zones, and two other residents asked the council to “consider adding cycling routes within the town centre”.

The disparity between the local authority’s proposed PSPO and its active travel agenda was laid bare in October, when proposals to install a toucan crossing near Bedworth town centre, as part of a planned ‘Green Corridor’ for active travel connecting a park to a new leisure centre, were dubbed a “white elephant” by one local councillor, who claimed cyclists won’t be able to reach the crossing thanks to the town’s bike ban on its main shopping street.

Cycling campaigners also criticised the plans, arguing that the pedestrianised town centre – located just 60 metres away from the proposed shared-use route – exposes a “glaring problem” in the scheme and will mean “very few cyclists” will use the new crossing.