Did we get our manifesto right? What would you have in there if we wrote it again?

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.

• Bigger focus on children and future of our cities.  Otherwise, very good?

• 20 mph should be default speed limit in all urban and residential areas regardless of cycle lanes or not.

• More emphasis on adopting best European practice – learning from those countries that are successful.

• Freight consolidation centres and night-time deliveries.

• £100m? Not enough if we want 10% of journeys by bike = 10% budget, 20% of journeys = 20% budget

• Better integration of cycling and public transport would encourage more people to cycle, esp. For longer trips. (This would include secure cycle parking, which is noticeably deficient across the UK)

• DfTs Mode Hierarchy should be mandatory, not optional for local authorities/highways

• Sensors on lorries don’t help if drivers on phone and not paying attention.

• 20 mph zones need to be polices, problems in Edinburgh in 20 mph residential zones where cars are speeding and going on to pavement to avoid speed bumps.

• Ask non-cyclists what they need to see to be tempted onto a bike and work from there.

• Item 6 suggests that 30 mph speed limits in residential lanes are ok where there are cycle lanes – not the case (ignores needs of children, pedestrians, older people, pets and social functions of streets)

• Needs to include introduction of assumed liability

• Every local authority (or group of authorities) to have a specific officer in charge of cycling (and walking) and to liaise with local cyclists etc – no fake consultations.

• “Road safety” is flawed, health and safety pyramid is needed on roads where personal protective equipment (hi viz, helmets) is LAST and removing danger is FIRST

• Zero fatality approach as starting point in road design, as would be expected for construction sites etc

• Get commitment to Road Danger Reduction (RDR)Charter:
  1) Identify and tackle sources of danger
  2) Develop science of RDR including street design
  3) Use RDR to support and encourage sustainable travel
  4) Promote actions and charter widely

• Science includes Understanding risk ‘thermostats’ and what influences risk-taking/compensation

• Like the idea of encouraging % of road danger for next generation road users…..need to ensure figures available to counter claim that cyclists don’t pay for roads

• Mostly yes – but quite a conservative manifesto, should push hard for implementation soon

• Balance reducing danger and positive aspiration

• There is no one element, no golden bullet (infrastructure, training etc) The problem with cycling in the UK are a systematic failure from uninsured drivers using the roads, to the roads themselves, to the CPS dropping charges and it goes on and on like E$ repeating Friends or Dave repeating Top Gear or whatever

• Don’t have a manifesto with specific policies.  They know how to do it.  The information is out there we just want it to get better.  Let the councils decide how.

• 20 mph on all city roads. Cyclists and pedestrians don’t just get killed/injured in residential areas.

• I think the manifesto is good, but I would. There’s a lot of data on the number of cyclists and accidents out there already, does it need to be in the manifesto or replaced by something else? Encourage cycling training at schools?

• Include justice system – highlight problems with investigation, prosecution, sentencing and compensation

• More money essential but also:
  – Rewrite DfT guidance to dutch standards
  – Major road schemes built around cycle infrastructure rather than vice versa
  – Make change in subjective safety a target. See DfT surveys etc.
  – 2% budget commitment – while laudable – is unambitious. Bar set too low as a negotiating position – should be wider to include all public realm improvements, and road maintenance budgets

• Why for 500 most dangerous junctions?  Why not if there is a certain level of danger deal with them even if turns out to be 5000!

• Stop calling us ‘cyclists’: talk about ‘people’ on bikes

• Infrastructure and money should be higher on the list

• Health, health, health!

• Adopt a road danger reduction approach

• Dutch-style infrastructure – cycle tracks – the populace wants it!

• Not quite, look at southwark cyclists manifesto: all about stopping ’intimidation’ of cyclists either by segregation on main roads or calmer residential routes. Check their website for their very detailed manifesto.

• Drop the sponsorship nonsense – nobody will do it

• We have, have, have to move this beyond simply a cycling issue. We cannot simply appeal to common humanity around road traffic incident/victims and move to making it a children walking to school and pedestrian issue.  The dutch won this around ALL road victims.

• Does not mention looking to Holland & Denmark (and Seville, NY etc) for solutions

• Ask people who don’t cycle!

Many senior politicians including Boris Johnson have pledged their support for the campaign, how should they be held to account and their track record assessed?

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.

• Introduce a ‘Ben test’ the non-cyclist is the one who matters and can judge whether interventions have worked

• Ensure consistency of measuring from year to year

• Invite them to cycle with children and local LCC groups to show them the problems

• ‘Reference panel’/mystery shoppers??(perhaps involve Which??)

• Data on number of children cycling, mode share of child cyclists, ditto for older people. Mode share of journeys

• Number of streets per year which have reintroduced 2-way cycling

• Challenge them on every statement they make e.g. cyclist error

• Boris (TfL) produce quarterly report – what has been achieved, and what can be expected in the next 3 months.

• Whip them!

• The Mayor could highlight best practice across all London boroughs and actively encourage all communities to respond and engage (ultimately name and shame) (The biking boroughs at £30k per year doesn’t muster).

• How about an independent commission to monitor how well he’s doing? And to monitor all levels of government – they can’t pass the buck.
  – Cycling England did some of that holding local authorities to account on spending.

• Quality audit for cycle facilities – could be based on what Dutch Fietsersbond [Dutch Cyclist’s Union] have been developing

• Encourage discussion between different levels of government. Forum of local and national government so as to avoid tendency in which one camp sperately blames the other and no action is taken.

• Focus on individual promises and track each one, e.g. Boris has been allowed to get away with woolly promise of ‘something’ at Vauxhall Cross and Greenwich and nobody’s quite sure what he was on about.

• Track ‘cycling is booming” speeches, press releases v. 3 year rolling average modal share.  See Joe Dunkley’s blog for graph of soundbites versus cycling rate

• On street survey of opinions – what impression do people have (qualitative)

• Fact checking and evidence

• Keep emphasising what cycling can do for them

• Number of children walking to school and cycling

• Identify/agree key indicators for each manifesto point and do annual review e.g. has TfL done enough to bring in HGV safety technology – NO!

• DfT (Baker & Penning) will blame everything on local authorities who
  a) Have no money
  b) Are given crap instructions by DfT
  c) Are constrained by crap rules, laws etc e.g. bicycle specific traffic lights

• Dft casualty stats compared to DfT cycle counts…

• Survey subjective opinion of safety. Ask your readers “Would you feel safe cycling in borough X?” etc and compare the results.

• Write letters t local and hyper-local media showing how individual politicians have or have not delivered on their promises.

• Video capture and disseminate widely when they say things contrary to the pledges they made in April 2012.

• Record and track cycling numbers.

• Boris will say it’s up to local communities to decide (e.g. when 20 mph introduced) but he should hold LA’s to account and get their feedback on what works.

• Money allocated to real facts on the ground.

• Identify clearly measurable indicators and get politicians to endorse them.

• Ask people what they think – use interactive mapping – this has been used successfully in Copenhagen and Hounslow

Local councillors and local government representatives have the final say on how money is spent in their area; how do we reach them and convince them this is important?

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.

• Remind them they can ‘tick so many boxes’ by investing in cycling : health, air quality, obesity, air quality, transport numbers, economy, better public spaces, climate change

• Ask them to lead 10 children on a cycle-ride across the borough. If they are not comfortable the problem is not solved

• Getting readers to keep writing/e mailing councillors/political reps

• Getting people to support cycling in the first place should automatically make it an issue councillors want to take on board.

• Make sure focus is always on enabling their population (electorate) to benefit from using bicycles, NOT about (existing) cyclists

• Cost benefits of cycling/walking -reduced NHS bills, potholes, more local shopping

• Survey your readers about safety in each area and ‘name and shame’ the worst and praise the best

• Politicians care about their relative standing, so produce league tables of casualty rates and subjective safety

• Learn from mayor of Mexico city – make them cycle to work once a month

• Look at the benefits of other road users too, particularly walkers, safety of kids etc.

• They worry about not getting re-elected so run stories , persuade them that they can encourage cycling for the benefit of their electorate without losing votes

• Name and shame bad design and engineering companies

• Give them solutions- help them

• Convince councils that cycling is central to delivering liveable cities and is in their economic interest – note current decline of traditional town centres

• Refer to their strategic objectives I.e. sustainability, high street regeneration and ensure this linked to why cycling is important to help.-yes cycling needs to be seen as ‘strategic’, this helps empower councillors to challenge demand for e.g. Parking

• Suggest that all interventions are not costly. ‘except cyclist’ signs under every ‘no entry’ sign is cheap as chips or should be.

• Prove by example

• Steal it

• If your street goes 20 mph we will cut council tax by 2% because we know that money will be saved!

• Residential car parking is always a heated debate. More cycling will ultimately help in this regard.

• Name and shame bad councils – seems to have worked in Waltham Forest. Public embarrassment the only way to get past the complacency (and corruption frankly) of many rotten boroughs, of all stripes, where councillors have jobs for life.

• Get them to cycle through identified hotspots and explain how these locations could be made more people-friendly.

• Corporate man slaughter

• Attention to Dutch protests of 60s/70s demanding cycle improvements – improvements possible with political will.

• Cyclists spend 10-15% more in shops – +ve for local economy

• More protests/media pressure

• Cycle friendly streets encourage more frequent shopping. High streets benefit

• Simply list pros of cycle friendly environments

• Point out that it will encourage people to shop local(ish)

• Spending on making toads safe for cycling improves hem for pedestrians, older people, children, public transport users – most of the population

• Get them out on bikes in their local areas

• Don’t. Use local government to enforce standards and make sure local government does things properly

• Economic benefits of reducing traffic/increasing bikes in local areas/towns/cities

• Talk about poor choices especially wasted money

• Point out that it’s the only way to solve their parking problems

• When there is a death, single them out!

• Use legislation that is there – prove we know what it is and how to hold them accountable to it

• Select one ward to ‘Go Dutch’ and see what happens

• Invite them (or even pay them) to book on David Hembrow’s cycling study tour Drenthe, The Netherlands. Next tour September.

• Events like Skyride show how popular cycling is, especially for kids and families when a safe space is provided. Politicians under-estimate how much support there is for cycling.

• Allow children (as the next generation) to speak directly to politicians/policy makers about how the current design/management of streets inhibits their freedom, makes them less active, independent, etc [intergenerational justice issue]

• Explain how streets safe for kids to cycle = less pressure on public transport

• More cycles and fewer cars means the roads suffer less damage and cost less to repair

• Cost : benefit ratio – best value is walking and cycling

• Get them on to bikes

• Walking and cycling are different. Therefore no shared pavements

• Section 106 and Community Infrastructure Levy – but other cash flow needed

• Norman Baker has given a directive to all councils to improve cycling but NO funding. On already squeezed budgets this is not seen as a priority

• Challenge them to tour their area by bike

• Cost of obesity/lack of physical activity e.g. Enfield £58 million a year for obesity

• Start at the top. Department for Transport models on ‘value’ and ‘economic benefit’ completely ignore people on bikes. A taxi passenger is ‘valued’ at 5x a bike rider! If the DfT changes the valuation = more money for local councils

What are the priority issues that need to be addressed to make London and other cities fit for cycling?

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.

• Ambitious and definitive cycling targets for +10/20 years

• Cycling provision (e.g. safe storage and showers) in planning regulations for new buildings, especially offices. – precedent for new San Francisco law

• Visible and quick changes when feedback/issues raised by cyclists (and accepted as justifying action)…

• Subjective safety: feeling that it is safe enough for children

• Safe enough for the 8 – 80 year old to be happy cycling.

• Investment, investment, investment – specifically stop the free travel for 60-64 year olds and invest in public realm (cycling and walking) instead. The Freedom pass costs wandsworth £56m or £560 m per annum – accept that this is controversial but for the benefit of their grandchildren

• Take a look at Bristol’s 1 hour street closure every afternoon after school!

• Get more people to run Saturday cycle clubs in schools. In Bromley the Saturday GoRide is so popular there is a waiting list and they can’t get enough club leaders. They are splitting it in two to give it to more kids but with less attention each.

• Make traffic law enforcement a priority.

• Road crime is real crime.

• Get more police on bikes.

• Recognise that some travel modes present more danger to the public and act accordingly in enforcement.

• Take on the Evening Standard and take on their anti-cycling stance.

• Congestion charge £25 a day

• Deliveries to shops before 7 a.m. and after 12 p.m.

• Obsession with motor-capacity: there is so often no excuse for motoring in cities

• 1000 Londoners killed in 10 years on our roads. How many speeding or driving carelessly tickets have been issued by the MET!

• Speed. Junctions. Lorries.

• Impose Congestion Charging – not referendai which people can gainsay

• Reduce speed – 20 mph as default speed i all residential and urban streets.

• Police ASLs properly.

• Policing of motorcyclists’ behaviour is needed. Encroachment by motorcyclists on cyclelanes/ASLs is now endemic.

• Address perception of road danger as well as actual danger, at source

• Congestion charging outside London

• Reduce parking – if you have to walk half a mile to get to your car you think twice before using it.

• A journey is as bad/good as the worst part of it – too often there are ok bits joined by seriously unpleasant barriers

• Subjective safety

• Home zones <10 mph

• Going Dutch

• 20 mph

• Rush-hour lorry bans

• Reform police/CPS/courts. Currently they don’t care.

• Get Boris to change the cycle prevalence target – 5% modal share by 2026 is too small and far too far away.

• Make roads less accommodating of car usage and let the rest take care of itself e.g. Hackney and permeability.

• Dutch-style infrastructure and road laws of course. Coupled with community cargo bikes!

• Proper punishment of death by careless and dangerous driving

• Making respect on the road the norm….less adversarial

• Enforcement!

• Discourage unnecessary overtakes – pinch points, 20 mph zones, narrow lanes.

• Easier to mix transport – leave bikes at rail station, take bikes on trains etc.

• Cycle storage (residential) on-street so that its as easy tp take the bike as the car.

• Shared spaces with pedestrians. Badly organised ones are creating a division that is stopping the debate getting beyond the ‘inconsiderate cyclist’ stereotype.

• Introduction of assumed liability as in many European mainland countries.

• Segregated facilities on main road networks

• Traffic calming more important than specific bicycle infrastructure.

• Speed and volume of motor traffic

• Cycle lanes that are fit for volume of bikes. Better roads with fewer potholes.

What are the short, medium and long term opportunities to make London and other cities fit for cycling?

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.

• Adopt a road danger reduction/traffic harm reduction approach – move away from roa safety wth sole focus on KSIs

• Showers, drying rooms, lockers etc in all new/refurbished offices

• Encourage employers to make their cycling facilities a feature of their recruitment (works for me)

• Every government office to have a designated cyclist or more

• Short – ‘permeability’ measures – cycle parking, 2-way cycling, direction signs, modal filtering, allowing courteous cycling in parks, urban greening – attractive places

• Medium – driver liability, 20 mph everywhere, driver training

• Long – segregation on busy arterial roads

• Bring back restrictions on the number of car parking spaces in any new development. Dont allow councils to stop people tying bikes to railings – and privately managed building/land

• Reform compensation system and introduce stricter liability – that would drive safety investment forward

• Short term – relaxation of DfT guidance which now makes it easier to have 2-way cycling, introduce 20 mph limits, both at very low cost

• Long – changes to DfT rules to come in line with other countries with higher levels of cycling

• Cycle lanes that carry legal force (stud them out like in Barcelona)

• Make all bus lanes 24-hour to give a simple initial solution  to giving cyclists some space (and let cyclists use bus infrastructure)

• Short – all state procurement contracts to require motion sensors, cameras and sideguards on lorries

• Medium – require share of magistrates and judges to commute by cycling

• Copy Hackney – but remember ‘Hipster’ demographic not really found in rural Hampshire

• Track shop rental values in pedestrian and cycle friendly areas and routes

• Make sure traffic signals detect cyclists especially in the rain

• Long-term – stuff the internet/technology enables us to do next: who knows???

• Long term – plan land use to support local businesses and services

• Age of austerity – value for money makes sense

• Long term – look for town centres regeneration programmes that can be supported/shown to have worked due to cycling changes and get involved – make Kingston, wandsworth, Greenwich etc as ‘local hubs’ for cycle network as well as radial superhighways.

• Medium Mayoral election 2016, general election 2015

• Short: fix the guidelines

• Medium: provide the money

• Long: build it

• Accept that it is a long-term goal… but make sure short-term changes add up to long-term goals incrementally.

• Short/medium: decent communication! Signs, signals that are comprehensive and visible to ALL road/street users

• The Olympics show that restricting lane use etc is possible when there’s political will – why not zil lanes for cyclists?

• Quick segregation on major roads using cones as in Chicago/New York

• 20 mph on all bridges – what’s the downside?

• Boris has been stalling on a new road safety plan for London (see Mayors Question Time) Call him out on it.

• New TfL road schemes are still ignoring cycling. These are schemes where they are already digging up roads and spending millions, so noexcuse not to take chance to put in great cycle infrastructure.

• Build cycling facilities into all road maintenance schemes

• Improve major roads and junctions

• Traffic calm residential roads

• Short – make existing lanes usable for cyclists – less parked vehicles in them.

• After olympics make Games Lanes into cycle lanes

• Short-term – awareness/education

• Medium term – infrastructure

• Long-term – culture

• Ban lorries during days, not nights as at present.  Will reduce risk in commuting hours and ease congestion.  This is a quick and easy short term measure. – But cyclists at night are even more at risk.

• Learn from the LCN (London Cycle Network) – why didn’t this £110m project deliver?

• Convert quiet residential streets to have home-zone style play-areas, seating etc and make space for this by increasing zip car and cargo bikes to be shared communally (take out some on-street car parking spaces to make room)

• Short – enforce existing lanes/laws

• Medium – bring existing infrastructure up to Best possible standard

• Long – dutch-style solutions – not just segregation but calming, reduction of traffic/speed/through routes

• More experiments – even if just short term in first instance e.g. no car days, temporary lane closures etc. Opportunities for people to experience alternative futures and perhaps like them!

• Short – more flitered permeability, cheap, easywins to close off residential streets to through traffic

• Medium – reclaim carriageway space for segregated cycle tracks. The space is there!

• Long – Unwinding/demolishing giant road schemes and restoring space for parks.

• Short-term: return to car free days every Sunday over the summer not just once a year if that!

What articles should the Times commission to encourage non-cyclists to support the aims of the 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.

• Look at the side effects of more people cycling such as less traffic and much nicer places in town centres when there is less traffic.

• How much traffic jams are costing to businesses – particularly during the day when women are driving

• The cost benefit of cycling in health, reduction of pollution, congestion, LESS POTHOLES which cost a fortune to repair.

• The benefit to local shops – pedestrians and cyclists use local shops more

• Less accidents by slower speeds and better communities when people are in the streets not in cars

• Diary of a newbie cyclist – challenge readers to take it up and follow their experiences.

• Try not to be too London-centric (although congratulations on catching out the Standard badly with the campaign!).

• How millions of people were able to get through London without cars for the jubilee so encourage a debate on car free Sundays

• The impact of transport costs and lack of choice for the low waged

• Case studies  – go and see some completed schemes, interview local politicians and scheme beneficiaries

• Awards – best cycle-friendly council

• Find out which councils are delivering increases in cycling and how

• What evidence of economic benefits, e.g. new businesses supported by cycling e.g. markets and shops

• Show the huge range of people who cycle now and break the ‘cyclist’ stereotypes

• Run an article on people who don’t cycle here but will in Holland etc and get them to explain why (e.g. my parents who are now lecturing me on how good Amsterdam is)

• To publish statistics of pedestrians as well who are killed/injured by cars – people are very anti-cyclists as they fear them

• To establish that not all cyclists jump red lights or cycle dangerously

• Explain in terms of clear goals….clean air, – kill the school run – social equity!

• Educate people about greater efficiency of bikes in terms of road space used (also lower speed limit = more road capacity = shorter journey times)

• Stories that question what sort of streets people want?  Do they want their kids to play on the street outside their house?

• History of ‘Stop der kindermort”/social change in Holland

• Highlight how a city safe for cycling is a city safe for children and older people and everyone in between

• Get non-cycling celebs to try cycling through central London (or in the suburbs for that matter)

• Get a Dutch embassy rep to ‘reimagine’ various London streets along Dutch standards

• Compare UK cities to other pro-bike places like New York and Sydney: get some international competition going

• The experience of the ‘Beauty and the Bike’ girls in Darlington – teenage girls learning to love getting around independently, cheaply, healthily.

• Mums finding a solution to the school-run nightmare – or wishing they were brave enough /it was safe enough to start the solution themselves

• Articles which set out visions (including pictures of how things might be different) of how our streets could be much better (for everyone) if much less motor-centric and ‘place’ functions given more prominence

• Highlight the fact that only 5% of adults in England get the bare minimum of physical activity needed for health (Health Survey for England 2008) and that walking and cycling for transport are the best evidence-based way to increase physical activity

• Show them how much money they could save (and explain direct/indirect subsidies for other modes) – potential link to moneysavingexpert.com

• “normal” family  cycling using cargo bikes! Appeals to normal people who think bikes aren’t practical – they can be

• Why ‘subjective safety’ should be considered – i.e. it is safe but we should feel comfortable cycling

• Positive emotional persuasion rather than only use of cyclist tragedies e.g. children cycling to schools, childhood obesity, urban inclusion, restoring communities

• Whole family cycling

• Women’s cycling

• Free range kids

• Health stuff

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