Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Labour commits additional £89m to cycling and walking in run up to the General Election

Five year pledge leaves party lagging behind the Lib Dems and Green Party

Labour has announced a further £89m funding for cycling and walking in an announcement today, or around 33p per head per year over five years, as well as £300m to fix Britain's potholes.

While Labour claims the money, to be reallocated from the existing transport budget, goes further than the Conservatives and Lib Dems, the latter's £10 per head per year commitment would amount to a significantly higher annual spend of £530m.

Arguably as important, however, is the party's reiteration of its plan, announced in March, to create a "high-level and cross-governmental Cyclist and Pedestrians' Advisory Board", which it says will put those on foot and bikes "at the top table of transport policy for the first time."

CTC's Sam Jones said: "Though this reminder was announced before the election campaign began, in many ways it is much more interesting than the funding announcement of £89m spread over five years. Campaigners have long argued that cycling is not purely a transport issue and requires cross-departmental buy-in and support to ensure its long term growth. Such a board is very much a step in the right direction for the future of cycling in the UK."

Labour's Shadow Transport Secretary, Michael Dugher, said: "David Cameron and Nick Clegg have failed to deliver on their promises on cycling and walking.

"Labour has a better long-term plan and will go further than the Tories and the Lib Dems by investing an additional £89 million in local active travel projects and infrastructure schemes. This extra spending, which is fully funded, will help enable more people to cycle and move cycling and walking from the margins to the mainstream – where it belongs."

Labour plans to spend the money over five years in a new "active travel fund" for local cycling and walking projects and infrastructure.

The proposed Cyclists and Pedestrians' Advisory Board will be chaired by the Secretary of State, and will "include ministers from across Whitehall, senior civil servants from the Department for Transport, cycling and pedestrian representatives."

This, Labour says, "will help facilitate the quick publication of a long-term walking and cycling strategy in the next parliament by the summer of 2016.

An announcement from Labour has been anticipated for the last week, though it doesn't go as far as some might hope.

Boardman sat on the national cycling strategy board towards the end of his pro career. In a 2013 interview he said: "I resigned when it got to the point that I realised government action was to set up an advisory board and that was it. That was the action! It wasn't given any teeth and the advice wasn't listened to."

According to the CTC, the recent Conservative announcement for £200m of cycling funding was a re-announcement of existing funding. Labour's £89 million appears to be in addition to the coalition government's existing commitment to cycling. That ongoing funding incudes money from Highways England to "cycle proof" the UK's major roads, and Cycle City Ambition Fund money for eight UK cities and four national parks.

Richard Burden MP, Labour's Shadow Roads Minister, clarified this was not Labour's answer to the Cycling and Walking investment strategy, required by law in the next parliament, though details of this haven't been announced yet.

CTC's Sam Jones welcomed Labour's recognition of active travel, and said it would be "great news for the rest of the country" if Labour introduced an Active Travel Act, as they did in Wales, which requires ongoing planning and spending on cycle networks.

As it stands, 20% of Labour councillors have responded to CTC's Vote Bike campaign, committing to five specific promises, including £10 per head per year spending on cycling. The Lib Dems and Greens currently have the highest percentage of councillors signed up, with Labour in the middle, while the Conservatives trail behind UKIP, with 6% and 7% respectively.

Jones said: "For a party that has professed championing cycling we would hope that there would be a higher turnout than 20%."

Labour was contacted to clarify their comparison with Lib Dem spending but have not yet responded.

Laura Laker is a freelance journalist with more than a decade’s experience covering cycling, walking and wheeling (and other means of transport). Beginning her career with road.cc, Laura has also written for national and specialist titles of all stripes. One part of the popular Streets Ahead podcast, she sometimes appears as a talking head on TV and radio, and in real life at conferences and festivals. She is also the author of Potholes and Pavements: a Bumpy Ride on Britain’s National Cycle Network.

Add new comment

9 comments

Avatar
Chris James | 9 years ago
0 likes

Complaining that politics is ludicrous - and then selecting the party with pie in the sky promises and no chance of getting elected, or even if elected, being able to implement their plans, just seems perverse?

Avatar
nowasps replied to Chris James | 9 years ago
0 likes
Chris James wrote:

Complaining that politics is ludicrous - and then selecting the party with pie in the sky promises and no chance of getting elected, or even if elected, being able to implement their plans, just seems perverse?

There's a self-defeating argument. It's about growth in support over time.

Avatar
Chris James replied to nowasps | 9 years ago
0 likes
nowasps wrote:
Chris James wrote:

Complaining that politics is ludicrous - and then selecting the party with pie in the sky promises and no chance of getting elected, or even if elected, being able to implement their plans, just seems perverse?

There's a self-defeating argument. It's about growth in support over time.

I think you have misread my posting - or maybe I have written it badly.

I am not saying that someone shouldn't vote green simply because they won't win. If I was, then I would agree with your post.

I am saying that the green manifesto is full of policies that are unachievable.

For example they predict that they will raise an extra £37 billion a year by taxing the rich more. That is an ... ahem .. somewhat ambitious target. Natalie Bennett seemed at a loss to describe how they would actually be able to collect this money when interviewed on the Daily Politics.

Even if they are able to raise this money, their other manifesto commitments require £338 billion of borrowing over the parliament.

Avatar
jacknorell | 9 years ago
0 likes

£89m is a rounding error in the transport budget.

Pitiful. I'm voting Green. But only because the Flying Spaghetti Monster Party isn't running, because UK politics have become that ludicrous now.

Avatar
don simon fbpe | 9 years ago
0 likes
Quote:

Labour has announced a further £89m funding for cycling and walking in an announcement today

And walking eh?
*Rubs chin*

Avatar
jasecd | 9 years ago
0 likes

Crumbs from the table

Avatar
vonhelmet | 9 years ago
0 likes

£89m? Pitiful.

Avatar
ianrobo | 9 years ago
0 likes

I think the pothole commitment is vital, above all that is what causes my main gripe at the moment (two pictures today !)

Avatar
Dnnnnnn replied to ianrobo | 9 years ago
0 likes
ianrobo wrote:

I think the pothole commitment is vital, above all that is what causes my main gripe at the moment (two pictures today !)

The pothole promise isn't any more more serious than the cycling one. It's just scrabbling around for votes wherever they can find the gullible.

Latest Comments