Re:
Alas, the UK has generally followed the US and its mindset to a lot of things, even though it's closer to continental Europe. One time in the states, all persons had equal rights in the highway, whilst being obliged to take due care of all other road users. Eventually, motorised vehicles came to dominate the roads both practically and legally – the ‘crime’ of jay walking helped further subjugate road users on foot and put pedestrians in their place.
What's considered good, positive and beneficial for communities and the people who live within those communities has been increasingly eroded over decades of 'progress’. In post-war Britain, the brave new world of modernisation has been the way forward – communities and what's beneficial for the people living within them has been devalued. Pre-war, most people couldn’t or didn’t have to move around so much. More people could get about on foot or commute t’ factory by bicycle. There was a network of numerous branch lines or there were local trams/buses. Car ownership was way out of reach for most and the preserve of just the wealthy and landed.
The rot probably began at the start of the 1960s with the appointment of Dr Richard Beeching by Ernest Marples, Harold Macmillan’s then minister of transport. Marples was a businessman and quite possibly had too many fingers in too many pies. One of the biggest pies he was indulging in was the new road construction across the nation. Modernisation and motorways mattered. Increasing car ownership was seen as the model way forward – this would be good for business – particularly for those with a stake in the car industry. The railways were viewed as an archaic, loss-making beast, so they were obvious prey for the axe of Macmillan’s modernisers. Buses and individual car ownership would, from now on, get you around the land.
Decades of changes in technology, industry and employment, along with successive boom years, have had a socioeconomic impact on the nation. As people generally did better, they became more aspirational. Car ownership and mobility would become an intrinsic part of this and sign of one’s success and status. The car’s badge would symbolise your standing in society.
Car ownership and motoring have become the unstoppable norm and a birth right – symbolic of being grown up, successful and independent. Why then would you want to use public transport or god forbid get about on a bike? Surely, bikes are now just play things for children? Do only strange old beardy men use bikes as a means of transport because they’re poor or greens or commies?
Growth in populations and disposable income have lead to more and more people wanting more cars. The increasing volume of motor traffic has demanded the need for more road space. Petrol heads and the many varied interests vested in the motoring lobby dominate everything, even though they feel hard done by. Their collective voice has got evermore louder, shouting down the needs of people getting about on foot or using bikes.
Aspiration, status/social standing, the brand and model of car, the pride, its price, the cost of the insurance and Vehicle Excise Duty, the sense of self-importance, the feeling of power, the price of fuel, the gridlock, having to stop and wait for other road users – it’s a heady cocktail for the petrol heads. They’ve sweated and paid their dues. Why should cyclists have any rights to the road? They get in the way and they’re trying to get something for nothing! They don’t pay road tax or have any insurance either! Time for the punishment manoeuvre – oops, sorry I didn’t see you there…
Even pedestrians are allied with the anti-cycling core of the motoring lobby. They too believe that cyclists don’t pay their way and crucially break the law. The media (particularly certain papers who love a daily outrage) champion big-name cyclists who bring back the medals for Great Britain! but oddly perpetuate the fear that anyone riding a bike always jumps red lights, don’t stop for pedestrians at crossings, routinely ride the pavements, scare and maim the elderly or the blind with their guide dogs or families with their prams. Having spent a few years commuting back and forth across London, I would report back that these fears are mostly ill-founded. There are a few idiots on bikes but they're not the norm. The greatest danger to pedestrians (and cyclists) comes from buses, black cabs, delivery vans and the endless procession of heavy trucks of the construction industry. They’re infinitely more dangerous and the law seems to turn a blind eye to their indiscretions. Besides, there’s less risk for a traffic cop to stand in front of cyclist to issue a ticket, than do the same with someone in a moving motor vehicle.
Even local businesses are against us – cycle lanes mean there’s nowhere for cars to park and that will kill trade. Just ask David Burrowes MP, local to my Enfield area. A legitimate public consultation was conducted with all residents asked to vote on and submit their views on proposed safe cycling routes and infrastructure. Virtually every small business/trader put up bright yellow anti-cycling posters pedalling myths and fears about how the scheme would be unsafe to pedestrians, stop people being able to park outside shops and how trade would be killed because motorists wouldn’t be able to drive were they desired.
http://www.enfield-today.co.uk/article. ... hyear=2015
I work, I pay my taxes, drive a car, drive a van but irrespective of all this, why can’t I ride a bike if I choose to, without fear for my life every time? The public highways belong to us all. There’s no ring-fenced pot of tax that means it doesn’t. End of rant.
