Town where cyclist ordered to pay £1,150 for riding on shopping street cuts ‘no cycling’ tannoy message down to twice an hour because “it was too repetitive” – as councillor says residents can “park their bike up and walk in”

As cyclists in Birmingham voice their frustration at plans to implement a ban on cycling in certain parts of the city – which they claim will make riding a bike “more dangerous”, as it will push cyclists onto congested roads – the local authority in Grimsby, the site of arguably Britain’s most controversial bike ban, has reduced the number of ‘no cycling’ messages played through a loud speaker in the town centre from four to two an hour, because locals thought it was “too repetitive”.

In July, we reported that North East Lincolnshire Council introduced the public announcements reminding shoppers that cycling is prohibited in Grimsby town centre, where hundreds of cyclists have been fined and some ordered to pay sums in excess of £500, and even as much as £1,150 in one case, after the council introduced a controversial Public Space Protection Order (PSPO), ostensibly designed to clamp down on anti-social behaviour.

The short messages were programmed to be played every 15 minutes, outlining the ‘no cycling’ rules brought in through a PSPO by North East Lincolnshire Council in 2019, and which have seen more than 1,000 fixed-penalty notices issued since then, the bulk of which have been for cycling on Victoria Street South and walking dogs along the main beach.

However, the fines have become something of a long-running saga, and 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”.

> Cyclist ordered to pay £500 for riding through town centre, as councillor insists cyclists "who have not followed rules" will be "rightly punished"

Nevertheless, Councillor Ron Shepherd, the local authority’s portfolio holder for communities argued at the time that the fines and speaker messages will ensure anyone behaving in an anti-social way will “be made aware of what they are doing and reprimanded accordingly”.

“Additionally, this new [speaker] system will be a way of educating a wider audience as visitors and residents go about their daily business. Should the trial be successful, we look forward to expanding its use in the future,” he said.

However, speaking to the Guardian this week, Shepherd said that the council has reduced the number of times the message plays per hour, after complaints that it was too repetitive for those shopping and working on the 200-metre-long street – but insisted that Grimsby’s clampdown on cycling is “about ensuring the protection of pedestrians”.

“It was every 15 minutes, but we cut it down because it was getting too repetitive,” he said.

“We’ve had a lady who was knocked over a few weeks ago by somebody on a bike. It’s just about ensuring the protection of pedestrians, trying to make it a nice shopping experience rather than having the risk of being run over. We have cycling hubs at either end of the no cycling zone so people can ride in, park their bike up and walk in.”

> Active travel campaigners blast “clumsy, unworkable, and discriminatory” plan to ban cycling in Birmingham city centre, which council says will target delivery cyclists “speeding around city without care”

However, despite Shepherd’s belief that the PSPO has “revitalised” the town centre by stamping out loitering and anti-social behaviour, plans to implement similar bike bans elsewhere in the UK have been met with fierce resistance by campaigners, who say they make cycling “more dangerous”.

Earlier this month, we reported that a new report submitted to Birmingham City Council recommended adding cycling to a PSPO designed to tackle anti-social behaviour, a move the council claims will enable it to crack down on delivery couriers “moving around the city centre at speed and without care for pedestrians”.

However, Mat MacDonald, the chair of the campaign group Better Streets for Birmingham, told the Guardian that the move will hinder active travel objective set by the council.

“If you have someone zipping by at 20mph on one of those things, it does create a risk,” he said.

“But there is already ample legislation to deal with that. There are ways of clamping down on that problem that don’t involve cutting off the entire middle of the city for people who are travelling by bike.

“It would only make cycling more dangerous in Birmingham.”

> "Majority of cyclists are reasonable people and will dismount": Cycling campaign opposes controversial town centre cycle ban which has seen "738 cyclists fined in last few months"

MacDonald added that if a cycling restriction was included in the PSPO, which focuses on the area around New Street train station, it would “force cyclists back on to busy, dangerous roads alongside lots of traffic”.

He also argued that questions should be asked of delivery companies, which he argued contribute to the problem outlined in the council’s report by creating difficult working conditions.

“I have some sympathy for those who are basically on a job where they get paid per delivery, so they’re going to want to go as quickly as possible,” he said.

In response to this criticism, a Birmingham City Council spokesperson said the proposed PSPO would attempt to decreases instances of “cycling at speed”, and of cyclists making certain city centre areas “unsafe” due to the “likelihood of near misses and collisions”.

“The council is seeking to renew an existing PSPO in respect of anti-social behaviour and considering new restrictions where anti-social behaviour is evident. This is being done specifically to improve the safety of people in the city centre,” the spokesperson said.

“We are considering measures to try and decrease instances of cycling at speed through one small area of the city centre where there is high footfall, and it is unsafe to cycle due to the likelihood of near misses and collisions.

“This does not impact on the council’s commitment to prioritise pedestrians and cyclists as part of ongoing developments and its transportation plan.

“Before any decisions are made, we are seeking the views of all through a consultation in how best to manage the issue. It may be that appropriate restrictions should be introduced in this pedestrian only area to restrict all cycles, some cycles, manage the direction of cycles to provide a safe flow of movement, or take no action in this issue.

“To inform this consideration we would encourage all residents and community groups to make their voices heard once when the consultation is opened.”

> “We are sorry if we have not always got it right”: Council waives penalties for cyclists fined by “cowboy” wardens for riding on pavements and town centre streets

As seen in Grimsby and Birmingham, cycling ban PSPOs have proven an almost constant source of controversy and tension in the areas where they’ve been introduced in recent years.

Earlier this month, the chair of a cycling campaign in Bedford lamented the “large drop in residents cycling” into town caused by the council’s “aggressive” implementation of its PSPO, which has reportedly seen 738 people fined for riding bikes in the town centre over the past few months.

A senior doctor also urged Worcester policy makers to see past “so much negativity locally” and implement safe cycling routes that encourage and enable people to leave their cars at home for short local journeys, in a bid to “redress the balance” of the city’s cycling discourse, which has focused predominantly on its cycling ban, branded a “psychological barrier” to people using bicycles.

Assessing the issue of PSPOs across the UK, Duncan Dollimore, the head of campaigns at Cycling UK, said “banning a whole class” of transport “is not how you address a problem”.

“There are people in this world who are irresponsible, and some of them are on a bike, but if that’s the problem, we need to deal with that behaviour. Banning a whole class of activity and a means of transport is not how you address the problem,” he said.

“It’s very difficult to see how banning all cyclists, including people who would have always behaved responsibly, isn’t restricting access, which isn’t what PSPOs are designed to do. Plus, a lot of the companies contracted by councils to issue these fines have an incentive to do so.”