94 Million set aside for cycling

[GregZ4]

£94 million isn't a lot. It would probably pay for all the lines on all the existing cycle path to be repainted and maybe some Tarmac.

How much is spent on footpaths, pavements, underpasses, footbridges and pedestrian crossings? Bloody pedestrians they should be taxed to pay for these.....

Ummm yes OK.
My name's Greg and sometimes I'm a pedestrian too!
Oh yeah. I also pay more tax in a year than Mrs GregZ4's gross salary thanks very much.

Sent from some bloody gadget using Tapatalk

 

[GregZ4]

Will this include their own traffic light system?

As they don't use the current ones...

Best, and most significant comment in the whole thread.

It really p!sses me off to see the Lycra clad hordes flagrantly disregarding the rules of the road that everyone else abides by.

Actually the most informed, balanced and well argued comments re cycling usually come from Lillywhite.

I hope that you are not a medical doctor as I'm not sure I'd want you treating me when I turn up in shredded lycra after I get knocked off by another trailer or a "pillock in a BMW" overtaking then turning left on me!

Sent from some bloody gadget using Tapatalk

 

[ranski]

@GregZ4 - Maybe you should stop weaving then

Out of interest how many times have you seen a cyclist run a redlight?

http://road.cc/content/news/61153-red-ligh-jumping-yclist-convicted-careless-cycling-causing-brain-damage

If this has been someone driving a car it would have been more than a £800 fine...

 

[GregZ4]

Currently there are in the region 110-140 cyclists killed a year. Far too many but to put this into perspective the greatest number of cyclists killed in a year peaked in 1935 IIRC when approaching 3000 cyclists were killed and remember there was far fewer motor vehicles on the road in pre-war days.

It'll be a combination of better technology on bikes (brakes etc), helmets (IMHO) and advances in treating those injured which prevent them becoming deaths, not to mention advances in car design which soften impacts although I'm sure I read most fatalities involved vans and HGVs.
How many cyclists are seriously injured and survive?

Sent from some bloody gadget using Tapatalk

 

[ranski]

It'll be a combination of better technology on bikes (brakes etc), helmets (IMHO) and advances in treating those injured which prevent them becoming deaths, not to mention advances in car design which soften impacts although I'm sure I read most fatalities involved vans and HGVs.
How many cyclists are seriously injured and survive?

Sent from some bloody gadget using Tapatalk

I disagree... The problem is that cyclists aren't regulated like normal road users e.g car, truck, bikers etc

They don't need a licence, no enforced training / road awareness and more noticeably if they cause an accident they can just hop back on the saddle and hit the road the following day

This is why we often see cyclists not giving a damn about other road users, including their own fellow cyclists

 

[GregZ4]

@GregZ4 - Maybe you should stop weaving then

Out of interest how many times have you seen a cyclist run a redlight?

http://road.cc/content/news/61153-red-ligh-jumping-yclist-convicted-careless-cycling-causing-brain-damage

If this has been someone driving a car it would have been more than a £800 fine...

I get your point totally.
I see some cyclists do it (usually kids but not exlusively) and I am fortunate enough to have the fitness to be able to chase them down and have stern words. Usually an angry 6 foot plus "fellow cyclist" seems to have an impact on their bubble!
It also winds me up whether in Zed or on bike when any cyclist uses a predestrian crossing to stop the traffic then rides across and off down the pavement!
These are the ones that people remember and tar us all. Means other cyclists reap the whirlwind!
As for fines forget them. Just seize the bike and crush it. That's if you can find a copper to spot it happen....


Sent from some bloody gadget using Tapatalk

 

[GregZ4]

It'll be a combination of better technology on bikes (brakes etc), helmets (IMHO) and advances in treating those injured which prevent them becoming deaths, not to mention advances in car design which soften impacts although I'm sure I read most fatalities involved vans and HGVs.
How many cyclists are seriously injured and survive?

Sent from some bloody gadget using Tapatalk

I disagree... The problem is that cyclists aren't regulated like normal road users e.g car, truck, bikers etc

They don't need a licence, no enforced training / road awareness and more noticeably if they cause an accident they can just hop back on the saddle and hit the road the following day

This is why we often see cyclists not giving a damn about other road users, including their own fellow cyclists

Ranski - we seem to be roughly on the same page!

Sent from some bloody gadget using Tapatalk

 

[ranski]

Good'o

You still won't catch me on a bike though!

 

[GregZ4]

Good'o

You still won't catch me on a bike though!

Shame! Some pretty lanes out there

Oh No this sounds like grooming ROFL - Where's my breakfast!

Sent from some bloody gadget using Tapatalk

 

[IK.]

The NHS could save billions if everyone wasn't so fat and didn't smoke.

This man speaks sense.

A lot has been said in this thread, including ironically about the NHS... Ever hear a little thing called 'public health'? We are meant to be trying to prevent people ending up in hospital in the first place. Rewarding failing trusts with more money is stupidity (though it does happen - just look at A&E recently).

But isn't that what this country is about, freedom of choice, if you want to smoke, eat yourself silly, drink yourself to death, cycle or drive to work its the individuals free choice right or wrongly. Its just a shame many dont act responsibly. There are also many who through no fault of their own rely on the NHS and being failed through lack of investment.

Tim.

That is kind of my point. To enable/encourage people to make those healthy choices, we spend money. Stop smoking services, get fit programmes for overweight people, alcohol awareness, cycle lanes...

The NHS needs to stop wasting money. It may need more, but it also needs to stop wasting it.

 

[Anonymous]

Isn't the whole point that Tim was trying to make, that spending this money, now, when the economy is so shite, seems wrongly placed?

Its not that spending on cycling is bad. Indeed, its a good thing (just wish it was more towns). My wife is in the process of getting a bike from cyclescheme that she intends to use some days for work (she is a community nurse, so cant cycle always).

The problems with the NHS are far wider spread, and as I said earlier, so much money is wasted in other ways, this money wouldn't make any difference.

£94M may be a tiny proportion in the bigger picture, but I'm sure there are things crying out for it. Spending on cycling (which with this money isn't going to help most of the population) just seems like a fad, and the government trying to score points.

The whole car/bike argument is not what this thread was started for.

 

[IK.]

Isn't the whole point that Tim was trying to make, that spending this money, now, when the economy is so shite, seems wrongly placed?

Then Tim is wrong.

Would it be better to continue spending on reactive rather than proactive? No.

We already spend a shed load of money in the NHS, yet people moan when we actually do something which may help the situation.

 

[Anonymous]

Isn't the whole point that Tim was trying to make, that spending this money, now, when the economy is so shite, seems wrongly placed?

Then Tim is wrong.

Would it be better to continue spending on reactive rather than proactive? No.

We already spend a shed load of money in the NHS, yet people moan when we actually do something which may help the situation.

I didn't just mean the whole health issue. There must be other things that could use the money instead.

Prevention is better than cure, but this won't help most of the population. It is a start though, but have they got more money to reach the whole population?

 

[IK.]

It won't reach most of the population, that's true. It's often something is well-intended in government but not well enough thought through.

There are a number of things we need to do, but saying "this money could be used for X" is too simplistic.

 

[Anonymous]

There are a number of things we need to do, but saying "this money could be used for X" is too simplistic.

Very true. I don't know what, but I'm sure there is something.

Where did this money come from anyway?

 

[Lillywhite]

It really p!sses me off to see the Lycra clad hordes flagrantly disregarding the rules of the road that everyone else abides by.

FFS nothing like tar brushing every cyclists is there? I suppose that in your eyes every Muslim is a bomber, every White Van driver never obeys the rules of the road and every dog owner let's their dog c**p on the ground without picking it up?
I love your comment about 'the rules of the road that everyone else abides by'. I'm sure that even with your blinkered view of the world you'll realise that many motorists, even some on this forum, often break the rules of the road with more serious consequences that a 'Lycra clad cyclist' could cause by a minor traffic infringement.
Rant over.

 

[TitanTim]

Then Tim is wrong.

Would it be better to continue spending on reactive rather than proactive? No.

We already spend a shed load of money in the NHS, yet people moan when we actually do something which may help the situation.

I may not be right in targeting monies on the NHS but come on, will spending 94 million on cycle routes actually provide any real benefits? except for those who are already into cycling and moan about the roads, I don't think it will, correct me if I'm wrong but only 2% of the population use a cycle for work etc, 2%. We are talking about the UK, we're not like other European countries and quite frankly I think the majority of the UK population will never have the inclination or be arsed to get on a bike, I don't think that will ever change anytime soon, you can call me pessimistic. To me it smacks of the Government riding on the back of what it thinks is a popular fad at the moment, Lisa Pendleton, Bradley Wiggins etc and hoping it woos the elecrorate. I think the Conservatives will be in for a shock.

I think peeps are misunderstanding regarding the amount of money.

Tim.

 

[Lillywhite]

There are a number of things we need to do, but saying "this money could be used for X" is too simplistic.

Very true. I don't know what, but I'm sure there is something.

Where did this money come from anyway?

Probably siphoned off from the billions that we give in a year for Overseas Aid without a blink of an eyelid. As for the money that the NHS currently receives and pisses up the wall through poor, inefficient management and administration rather than being spent wisely on the critical area of patient care.

 

[Lillywhite]

I don't get this riding on the back of Wiggins, Pendleton et all success criticism. That's the way it works. Maybe the sum of £94 million is a drop in the ocean to have any real effect but someone has already said in this discussion that their wife is now getting a bike through the cycle to work scheme which can only be a good thing and reduces a another potential car journey on the highway. It's a fact that a large proportion of journeys are 5 miles or less so it does make sense, wherever possible subject to weather conditions, that more people use this mode of transport. It won't happen overnight I'm sure but whether it's the Conservatives, Labour or Lib Dems in control I'm sure that their mandate will to be to improve road conditions for all users and this can only be good on a number of fronts.

 

[CornishRob]

The NHS could save billions if everyone wasn't so fat and didn't smoke.

This man speaks sense.

A lot has been said in this thread, including ironically about the NHS... Ever hear a little thing called 'public health'? We are meant to be trying to prevent people ending up in hospital in the first place. Rewarding failing trusts with more money is stupidity (though it does happen - just look at A&E recently).

But isn't that what this country is about, freedom of choice, if you want to smoke, eat yourself silly, drink yourself to death, cycle or drive to work its the individuals free choice right or wrongly. Its just a shame many dont act responsibly. There are also many who through no fault of their own rely on the NHS and being failed through lack of investment.

Tim.

Of course that is your choice, but you can't then moan when the NHS cant cope because of it.

What about making people pay more then? I would happily pay a few hundred extra a year to sort out the NHS.

Unfortunately, people are generally a little short sighted with health. The body isn't designed to be over weight or draw smoke into it. Like anything, it will break! If you poorly maintain your car, it's going to break! You wouldn't expect someone to fix it for free would you if you poorly maintained it??