| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Putney & Wimbledon Conservators | |
| Posted by: | Roland Gilmore | |
| Date/Time: | 25/09/10 19:36:00 |
| I am not saying that some people think cycling is a good way of keeping fit. They are entitled to their view. There are hundreds of ways of keeping fit that are not subsidised or being given preferential treatment as cycling is. It is this presumption by cyclists and their lobbyists that footpaths should also be cycle ways that I am objecting to here and supporting the Commons Commissioners decision. Where is the cogent argument against their decision? I notice that you do not deny that cycles cut up footpaths, create mud and hollows for muddy water to collect in making walking unpleasant and an obstacle course for the majority; particularly during the winter months. It results in footpath widening and erosion so please don't harp on about the eco-friendliness of cycling. Many of our national parks and historic footpaths such as the Pennine Way and the Seven Sisters are now plagued by cyclists going about their "eco-friendly" business and causing excessive damage. Who funds the London Cycling Campaign? When I visited their website and clicked on the link for their annual report, the link takes you to a load of Google adverts for company searches. I guess they are not a charity then but an enterprise. Opaque or what? Do you have a link to their published accounts? I would bet that only a tiny proportion of their funding comes from direct public donations. This issue has nothing to do with 20mph speed limits or bikes cluttering up pavements around stations or the central London bike hire scheme. It is about keeping bikes away from people on foot on FOOT paths that are not and should not be cycle ways. Pedestrians include everyone who can walk. Cycling is a minority interest in London and it's promotion by public money is highly questionable. We have covered the disproportionate incidence of death and serious injury involving cyclists on this forum before. The rational argument is surely not for more but for fewer cyclists on London's roads. The oft touted rubbish about drivers getting out of their cars and cycling is naive and pernicious. Why should anyone have a right to determine how anyone should choose to make a particular journey? There are too many examples of why it is a stupid suggestion to list in this brief response. Some people will not be satisfied until London roads look like Peking 30 years ago! It is rightly illegal for motorists to use hand held mobile phones while driving but legal for cyclists to wear headphones plugged into their MP3 that they may fiddle with while cycling along. Oblivious and a danger though they are, no law has been passed yet that I know of to ban this wide spread practice. It is long overdue that the police got tough with cyclists. Just 24 out of 200 offenders fined doesn’t sound like effective policing to me. How many motorists would get away with a ticking off in similar law breaking circumstances? Preferential treatment of cyclists is disproportionate and their publicly funded political movement should be brought to an end so that the rest us can feel safer on our streets and in our public open spaces. That is not antipathy but a positive point of view that considers the benefits to all and not just the few. |