In June Spokes commented(*) on the government budget plans, Investing in You. We sought a big national cycle initiative, like the Dutch Master Plan, or, failing that, more incentive for councils to promote walking and cycling. We pointed out that the Labour manifesto commitment of 'extended support for cycling and walking' had not yet been met. Our comments achieved some success [article on web page 1]!!
In August we updated this(*), following the chancellor's promise of more money, and news of an autumn Scottish Transport Plan. We sought tight controls on road-building; high emphasis on local accessibility; widespread measures (eg rail openings and planning controls) to reduce the need to drive long distances; and help for rural living without more motorisation (eg more rate relief for shops and facilities). These comments were less successful!
The Scottish Integrated Transport Bill is now going through Parliament. Spokes made extensive comments(*) earlier in the year. The Bill has little direct on cycling, but better policy and funding opportunities should result from charges for urban road use and workplace parking, and from transport partnerships between councils. We are most unhappy the government backed down on charges for total car spaces at large retail/leisure outlets [Spokes 75].
The UK 10-year Transport Plan includes a target to triple 2000 bike use by 2010, but also huge road capacity increases. The resulting traffic growth is likely to outweigh any benefit of the plan for cyclists [CCN News Sep 2000]. The overall philosophy is antiquated - the aim seems to be to increase mobility of all types and for all purposes, rather than to increase accessibility to goods and services for all. As the experts say, it concentrates on provision of supply rather than on management of demand [STR, Summer 2000]. The Traffic Reduction Acts [Spokes 69] are forgotten, with traffic due to rise nearly 20% by 2010 [ETA Summer 2000]. Details of the Plan: www.detr.gov.uk/trans2010/plan/index.htm.
And the 'fuel crisis'! One of the few sane voices was again Iain Macwhirter in the Sunday Herald [e.g.17.9.00]. His and other useful commentaries are on the FOE website: www.foe-scotland.org.uk/nation/fuel.html. And while shoppers and commuters got on their bikes, Scotland's top downhill MTB race the SCU Aviemore championship was cancelled - confirming that cycle sport, whilst great fun, is sport, and not relevant to everyday utility and recreational cycling.
ScotRail's Dave Prescott told the Scottish Cycle Forum [21.3.00] he would investigate window-signs showing where to load bikes on the new class-170 Turbostars, but nothing has happened yet. Bike space reductions on the Far North Line [Spokes 74] resulted in ScotRail having to bring in a summer bike-van parallelling the train!! On-train bike capacity may be improved for summer 2001.
In response to Developing Scotland's Railways Spokes wrote(*) to Railtrack seeking rail re-opening and full bike-rail integration, including Safe Routes to Stations [article], bike parking and on-train space. We complained again about inadequate Waverley parking and too little at Haymarket.
The Union Canal and towpath are now fully upgraded throughout W. Lothian, with works continuing elsewhere. But a long stretch near Polmont is yet to be started.
* Send SAE for submissions that interest you
A Scottish Parliament All-Party Cycle Group has been set up, "to generate debate on cycling issues, and to promote cycling as an integral part of an integrated and sustainable transport policy, as a recreational activity, and as a major contributor to the health of the Scottish people."
Chair is Bristow Muldoon, Labour MSP for Livingston, with Irene McGuigan SNP as vice-chair. Brian Curtis of the SCDP, and a Spokes member, who took a leading role in prompting formation of the group, is secretary. Spokes has urged that its meetings should reflect its 'integrated and sustainable' objectives, with meetings on topics such as Local Accessibility, or Public Health and Local Transport, rather than solely meetings about cycle events, routes, etc.
If your MSP is interested in sustainable/healthy
transport, ask them to contact Bristow Muldoon and join the Group!
In Germany 15% of journeys to stations are by bike; in Denmark and the Netherlands 35%. And the Netherlands are investing £150m on hugely enhanced bike parking to increase this further! [Platform, Apr&Aug 2000]. Britain, in massive contrast, has under 1% of such journeys by bike.
This is the setting for the Sustrans Safe Routes to Stations project, which aims eventually to lift Britain to European figures. With 60% of the population living less than 15mins cycle from a station this must be realistic!
Chiltern Trains is promoting cycling to stations, has some overnight bike parking, bike park patrols, and is attracting more passengers without enlarging car parks! [LTT 14.9.00].
Sustrans has studied access at 100 stations, mainly near the NCN, and under a 3-year Railtrack/government pilot is carrying out 30 schemes a year. It means safer, more direct routes, good parking, signing, and even linked town centre 'station shop windows' with information, ticket sales, etc.
You can help by asking your MSP for
the project to be speeded up in Scotland, including stations useful to
you!
Newspapers carry many letters complaining that money is 'wasted' on cycle facilities. And many new schemes bring objections from individual affected motorists. But surveys of the public at large paint a very different picture!!
Edinburgh Council is about to publish its Local Transport Strategy - based on the huge 1999 consultation. This found massive public support for a strategy based on road pricing, provided the proceeds are used for public transport, cycling and walking [Spokes 75]. The document will be at: Council Info Centre, 12 St Giles St, and probably www.edinburgh.gov.uk.
The Scottish Executive summer announcement of a £5.2m SRS allocation to councils for 2000/01 was a big surprise, as SRS money normally comes only from councils' own transport budgets. It is also a signally large sum: 6 times what Scottish councils spent on SRS (from their own transport budgets) last year, and twice their own expenditure on cycling and SRS combined [Spokes survey]!
According to the Minister [SE 2367/2000] the government wants more and safer cycling/walking to school...
Our councils' survey asked about benefits,
projects and problems flowing from the scheme. The table below shows all
comments made by 2 or more of the 24 councils who answered this question.
Our survey came soon after the announcement, so some comments were preliminary.
| # | General benefits of the £5.2m SRS allocation |
| 5 | Can implement already-developed schemes sooner |
| 5 | Schemes/pilots can be developed/implemented that could not otherwise be funded |
| # | Specific project types resulting |
| 7 | SRS project/pilot (unspecified) at specific school |
| 5 | Cycle lanes/paths/networks |
| 5 | Pedestrian facilities (unspecified) |
| 5 | Road crossings (ped &/or ped/cycle) |
| 4 | Cycle racks/lockers at schools |
| 4 | Studies for future SRS schemes |
| 3 | School entries - safer and/or traffic-free |
| 3 | Walking-bus projects |
| 2 | 20mph zones |
| # | Problems/difficulties of the scheme |
| 12 | Lack of time to properly plan/develop schemes |
| 9 | Lack of time to adequately consult or work with pupils |
| 6 | One-off scheme / raises expectations unreasonably / needs rolling programme over several years |
| 3 | Council gave Education Dept responsibility for the expenditure, so may not accord with transport strategy |
| 2 | Lack of time to follow guidelines on using the funds |
| 2 | Too few staff / can't use the funds for SRS coordinator |
THE PROBLEMS
Whilst most other councils welcomed the
scheme, many had complaints, especially about timing. Announced
in late May, just before the summer holidays, the allocation has to be
spent by April 2001. Councils without well-established SRS projects could
hardly undertake the level of consultation, working with schools, and planning,
which is important for a fully effective SRS scheme. Indeed, the Scottish
Executive's own SRS guidance [see Spokes
74] urges a one-year lead-in for such projects!
A second serious problem is the one-off nature of this government scheme. Officials in councils whose past SRS commitment has been low may be reluctant to gear up to a big 2000/01 SRS effort if they suspect local councillors may refuse to fund a continuing programme the next year. Nor will they want to raise unrealistic public expectations that a 2000/01 scheme will be repeated at other schools.
Because of such problems, at least one council told us they were unlikely to use the allocation at all, whilst several others doubted they would use it in full.
Another problem is that councils do not have to use the allocation for its stated intent, though they are 'expected' to do so, and most will. The government letter to councils [6.6.00] gives examples such as 20mph zones, cycle lanes, and traffic-free school entrances, so the fact that a few councils have decided the money should be spent by Education rather than by Transport is worrying. One officer told us such spending might not be compatible with his Council's Local Transport Strategy; and another said confidentially that it may partly go to teachers' car parking spaces, rather than Safe Routes to School!
Spokes also fears some councils may use the government allocation to fund already-budgeted schemes, and transfer that money to non-SRS uses. This appears to have happened in some cases. Several councils with substantial 1999/2000 SRS expenditure have budgeted far less in 2000/01, so seem to be using the government allocation in part as replacement rather than additional. Across Scotland, councils spent £870k on SRS in 99/00, but for 00/01 have only budgeted £713k (excluding the government £5.2m).
Conversely, we compliment Aberdeen, Aberdeenshire, Angus, Midlothian, S.Ayrshire, S.Lanarkshire, and in particular W.Lothian, for maintaining or even increasing sizeable SRS budgets on top of the government allocation.
SPOKES wrote to the Minister early on about our above concerns, and we hope they will be taken on for the future.
If you want to see continuing growth in SRS work, please write to your MSP. Ask them to thank the Minister for this year's very substantial £5.2m allocation, and to seek assurance of a rolling programme of dedicated SRS funding for future years, so that councils have the incentive to prioritise SRS work, and the time to plan and consult effectively. Please send us any useful replies.
Transport Minister Sarah Boyack has set up a Scottish School Travel Advisory Group to examine all aspects of school travel, including promoting walk/cycle [SE 1933/00]. English STAG: see www.local-transport.detr.gov.uk/schooltravel/
Prizes for our competition to celebrate
the NCN opening [Spokes75] were presented by Richard
Demarco on June 17. Entries had been exhibited in Edinburgh and E &
W Lothian with the winners chosen by public balloting at each venue, rather
than by a panel of 'experts'.
 |
Our thanks to the bike shops who donated bikes as prizes: City Cycles; Edinburgh Bicycle; Bike Trax; MacDonalds.
The PA has been relaunched and hopes to work with Spokes on common interests. John Russell 229.3200 j.russell@eca.ac.uk
H Herald LTT Local Transport Today
G Guardian SE Scottish Exec. press release
SH Sunday Herald SP Scottish Parliament report
STR Scottish Transport Review
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|