Are there campaigns/organisations that the Times should support/partner with to achieve the aims of the cycle safe campaign?

This is one of seven questions that people were asked at June’s Street Talk. The responses below are unedited and in no particular order. We’d welcome further comments/suggestions – comments will close on 2nd July.

• All pedestrians & disabled lobby groups

• Local shops and farmers markets – cyclists spend more at these than car drivers

• Senior citizens groups who cannot drive/use buses which are held up in traffic jams

• PTAs of schools – encourage the women/mothers to cycle/walk to school – majority of traffic in term-time is the above.  Women are the most likely to say they are too scared to cycle – as they jump in their cars!!!

• Movement for Liveable London – cycling is central to liveable cities

• Movement for Liveable London – build an alliance between cycling , pedestrians, children and OAP groups.  Make the issue about streets for people – agreed!

• Cycling Embassy of Denmark & the Netherlands

• Gehl Architects

• NHS & Public Health Organisations

• Living Streets

• 20 mph as a default speed is a must and not up to each council to decide

• Stricter Liability

• 20 mph default speed limit in cities (not just residential areas) – definitely

• 1000% of budget should be earmarked to making all streets safe and convenient for cycling and walking – agreed

• To make it more about “people” partner with pedestrian organisations to class a cycle-friendly city as people friendly

• Go to New York and compare Janette Sadik-Khan (transport commissioner) with London.

• Talk to NYC politicians about how they changed their mind on cycling and now love it.

• Then go and see Rahm Emanuel, Mayor of Chicago and do the same.

• Neighbourhoods that are willing their neighbourhood plan encourage walking and cycling

• Carry Me Bikes – cargo bike social enterprise promoting families and freight by bike www.carryme.org.uk

• Reach out to open-minded motoring organisations to convince them that with more cycling there will be fewer cars on the road and less congestion for those who must drive.

• Motoring organisations – they’re not all bad to the core, and look for mutual gains.

• Reach out to cycling forums – road cc, cfess etc, all full of ideas and criticisms

• See me, save me

• Roadpeace

• NUT NASWT – issues with childhood freedom and school run traffic

• EVAW/WI

• NUS – national and individual universities (London Met has had disproportionate number of incidents)

• Pedestrian groups: Living Streets, Help the Aged – the elderly (Age UK & other older people’s organisations) are disproportionately KSI in UK.  Until we have a coalition of non-motorised road users asking for the same thing we will fail

• Sustrans

• Living Streets

• Cycling Embassy of GB – add a voice to their calls for better, safer, happier travelling

• NCT, kids orgs – rights of kids and parents to travel safely, conveniently, healthily and cheaply (by bike!) e.g. ‘Carshalton Mums’, ‘Kingston Mums’ etc…(there are loads of them) – is it Mumsnet?

• British Institute of Human Rights – a rights-based approach to the problem would be a great read

• Move beyond “cycling” to kids scared of traffic, can’t play on the streets, residential and neighbourly “values” all too scared to be in the street

• STOP interviewing the mad CTC and focus on groups like LCC, British Cycling that “get” cycling as transport

• This campaign will only succeed when it broadens outside active and almost active cyclists.  There is a gaping chasm between these groups and the rest of the population.  It needs to move to a liveable streets agenda covering pedestrians and children walking to school.  What do most parents really fear? – not kidnappers, molesters or terrorists….they fear traffic and this very rational fear is distorting our streets, neighbourhoods and cities.  It is a unifying campaign that will resonate on Mumsnet.com and in the Mail