The Lothian Cycle Campaign

See also diary in Spokes 79. Other cycling events may be found on the Internet at http://www.scottishcycling.co.uk/events.

Jul 20 Climate Change Critical Mass Ride A mass bike ride around Edinburgh's 'Climate Change Landmarks', to mark the July 14-23 UN climate change negotiations in Bonn. Although scientists suggest that an early 60% emissions cut is vital, the cut being negotiated is just 5.2% - and with exclusions such as aviation and international freight! Meet 5.30pm, Festival Square. Decorations etc welcome. Cmarks8625@aol.com.

Railway Walks - note these are walks, not cycles, organised by Railway Ramblers, who investigate/explore disused rail lines. Many of these lines are existing or potential walk/cycleroutes.

Aug 11 Railway Walk Bathgate-Drumgelloch Meet Bathgate Station 0848 on arrival of 0818 from Edinburgh. 01506.842897.

Aug 23 Railway Walk Bathgate-Livingston Meet Bathgate stn 1748 on arrival of 1718 from Edinburgh. 01324.625816.

Sep 20 Railway Walk Bonnyrigg-Penicuik Meet Waverley 1730 for Lothian bus 82 from N Bridge to Penicuik. 01324.625816.

Aug 15 Rail Passenger Committee for Scotland Public meeting at Dunblane. Your chance to raise issues such as inadequate on-train bike spaces and signing; or the need for safe routes to stations. Time/place from RPCS 0141.221.7760.

Sep 13 Tourism without Traffic conference, Birmingham. Normal fee £200, but some cheap places for voluntary organisation representatives. Details: 020.7582.0128.

Sep 16 Pedal for Scotland Glasgow-Edinburgh annual sponsored ride. 0131.657.4393. www.pedalforscotland.co.uk.

Sep 17-21 VELO-CITY International Cycle Conference Edinburgh & Glasgow. Papers for the conference have already been received from nearly 50 countries! Details: www.velo-city2001.org or 0141.434.1500. Volunteers/skills needed - if you can help contact imaxwell@gn.apc.org or 0131.669.6542.

Sep 22 European Car-Free Day www.eta.co.uk 020.8946.0912. Although quite a few UK councils are participating this year, Edinburgh Council has now reversed its previous intention and will not take part - due, they say, to opposition from Grassmarket Traders and residents (the Grassmarket was to be made car-free for the day), and to insufficient council resources.

Also proposed earth car-free day: www.carfreeday.com. (date?).

• Bike holidays - Gordon Arms Hotel, Fochabers, between Aberdeen/Inverness, welcomes cyclists. No cyclist discount, but they are happy to provide details of the 'many cycle routes' in the area. 01343.820508 www.gordonarmshotel.com.

• The Edinburgh City Car Club appears to have been rescued. Our thanks to all members who wrote to councillors following our article [Spokesworker 3.2.01] pointing out its symbolic importance for Council transport policy - as well as the impact on those who have already adjusted their lifestyles to use the Club. Whereas previous operators Budget seemed to see it solely as a potential future commercial opportunity, the new operators, Smart Moves, appear genuinely committed to the principle of such a scheme. Further info: 024.7623.6292 www.smartmoves.co.uk; email info@smartmoves.co.uk.
• Despite very bad weather, the Spokes bike breakfasts (Central and Gyle) were a great success. The first-ever Gyle breakfast attracted 45 cyclists; whilst the Central one also attracted five MSPs - including Bristow Muldoon, Chair of the All-Party Cycle Group; and Robin Harper green MSP. Also new MP and former Council transport convener Mark Lazarowicz, and new Council transport convener Cllr Andrew Burns [official title Executive Member for Transport!] We were absolutely delighted that Cllr Burns stayed the full 2 hours. If you have cycling/transport issues to raise with the council, try a letter to him! (he likes to use e-mail) [and copy us the reply please].

• We may not have reported that the long-awaited St.Andrews-Guardbridge cycleroute opened in late 2000, avoiding the very heavily trafficked A91. This was a sorely missed path on LEPRA St. Andrews charity rides, particularly in the days when ScotRail could carry more cyclists than it can now! Details and other Fife routes: www.fife-cycleways.co.uk
• ScotRail has confirmed that the new North Berwick rolling stock will be 'less well planned' for cyclists than they would have liked [Spokes 79], although they "remain committed to improving accessibility of our services for cycling, and capacity on trains for regular cycle use" [letter 11.6.2001]. A good opportunity to raise such issues is the RPC public meeting in Dunblane - see diary 15 August.
• Robert Brown MSP is pressing for a rail station for the new Parliament. Please congratulate him and also urge him to press for improved walking and cycling access, including the 'Parliament Way' walk/cycle link to Princes St and Waverley. It is utterly disgraceful that whereas private developers have to fund appropriate access to new developments, the government is refusing to do this itself for Scotland's top new prestige building! Write to Robert Brown MSP, Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh EH99 1SP. Copy us your letter and the reply.

• All councils in Scotland have been allocated additional money for this financial year [2001/2002] for cycling, walking and safer streets - Edinburgh gets £277,000. Further sums had already been allocated for the following 2 years [Spokes 79]. Edinburgh is now drawing up a prioritised program, and they welcome suggestions. Note this must be capital expenditure - such as cycle and pedestrian facilities, traffic calming etc; not for recurrent expenditure. Send your suggestions a.s.a.p. to Matthew Simpson [above], copied to Spokes. (OR e-mail) Decisions on the 01/02 money have to be made very rapidly. Following Spokes lobbying the council may include removal of the redundant stone overbridge at Telford Drive, from which kids dangerously harass users of the North Edinburgh path below; the area could be opened out to improve safety, and we have suggested including proper links from the path to the nearby Western General Hospital.

East Lothian gets £55K - cycle officer Paul Ince, John Muir House, Haddington EH41 3HA 01620.827661

Midlothian £50K - cycle officer Dave Kenny, Council Offices, Buccleuch St, Dalkeith EH221DJ 0131.271.3492

West Lothian £95K - cycle officer Graeme Malcolm, County Buildings, Linlithgow EH49 7EZ 01506.775296.

• Edinburgh council is consulting on an A702 Merchiston Place to Gillespie Crescent Action Plan. There is an exhibition ending 13 July at Eric Liddell Centre, 15 Morningside Road (9am-9pm weekdays; Sat 10-4); also at 1 Cockburn St in working hours. Also on www.edinburgh.gov.uk. Send your comments by 18 July to: Ewan Kennedy, A702 Action Plan, City Development, Freepost SCO4882, Edinburgh EH1 0BR, with a copy to Spokes soon so we can take your views into account [or phone Sandy 551.2663].

• The new cycle lanes at Haymarket have proved highly useful for some cyclists [eg Morrison St to A8] but problematic for others [eg A8 to Torphichen St]. The Council will shortly be auditing the success of the scheme, so please send comments and suggestions now to Matthew Simpson, cycle officer, City Development, 1 Cockburn St, EH1 1ZL, copied to Spokes. (OR e-mail)

A recent article in the British Medical Journal [23.12.2000] by Malcolm Wardlaw of Glasgow raised considerable controversy over cyclist safety. The article may be found on the Internet at http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/321/7276/1582. It claims...

• cycling safety campaigns have destroyed faith in the bicycle as a safe means of transport, thus reducing cycling, compromising public health, increasing the risks, and decreasing road skills
• cyclist deaths have increased since the introduction of helmets
• cyclists fare best when they act as and are treated as drivers of vehicles, rather than being segregated
• increasing the number of cyclists is a straightforward way of making cycling much safer. It is a method we know works, as it has already worked in other countries.

Subsequent to the BMJ article, Malcolm Wardlaw has written to Spokes with related ideas on injury trends, on which he would like any feedback. His letter is printed below. If you have comments or suggestions, please contact him at 92 Drymen Road, Bearsden, Glasgow G61 2SY or M.Wardlaw@btinternet.com.

3rd June 2001

Dave,

Since my BMJ paper was published, I have done some more detailed analysis of injury trends for different road users in Britain. This has produced some strange results. I thought it might be useful to pass them onto SPOKES for discussion/reference.

The number of (reported) road accidents does not change much over time, rather, it is the consequences that have declined over the last thirty years. For instance, in 1970, there were 23,000 cycling accidents, which resulted in 400 deaths. In 1999, there was the same mileage of cycling detected as in 1970 (progress!) and again there were 23,000 cycling accidents, but this time there were "only" 170 deaths. On paper, cycling appears to have got much safer over the last thirty years. Is that true? Are we just more sensitive to danger nowadays?

When you compare car occupants with cyclists, you get some really weird results. Going back to 1970, there were 1.74 deaths per 100 reported cyclist casualties, as given above - but there were 1.85 deaths per 100 reported car user casualties.... It's true. In that year, there were about 160,000 people reported injured in car accidents, 3,000 of whom were killed. Eh?

It gets stranger. In 1999, for cyclists there were 0.7 deaths per 100 reported casualties. For car users there were still 0.8 deaths per 100 reported casualties. Across three decades, cyclists have been less likely than car users to be killed in a road accident, and if you compare the improvement over those 30 years cyclists have the better safety record, for their risk of death in a road accident fell by 60%, whereas for car users the risk fell by only 57%.

If you ask Jo/Joelle Bloggs whether they are better off having an accident in a car or on a bike, I doubt whether less than 100% would say they were better off in a car. But it appears that's not so. Cars are far stronger built than thirty years ago, and you have to wear a seatbelt, but despite that, the thin air that surrounds us cyclists has proved to be a more effective safety feature. The illusion of security provided by a car must be self-defeating, and all that sacrifice by crash-test dummies must have been futile. That must be why car insurance is going up so fast - and why traffic often feels more aggressive than it used to.

The above points do not mean that cycling is safer than being in a car, because cyclists get into accidents more frequently than drivers do. But averages can be misleading. Half of cycling is by males under 30, and children don't drive. Such factors bias the comparison. I doubt that cycling here is more dangerous than driving in the average European country, and it is definitely safer than driving in France.

Those who might be tempted to believe that cycle helmets have helped cyclists to get ahead are advised to prepare themselves for dismay. Cyclist injuries have worsened since helmets became popular. We are talking about a 25% jump in deaths after 1994. The attached charts display just how decisive and uncharacteristic has been the deterioration in the injury record [ed - not printed here due to lack of space]. My BMJ paper makes this point, but the charts are too small to do the matter justice. Such a result would fit with helmet users holding a greatly exaggerated estimate of the protection in a road accident (which many undoubtedly do, thanks to poor medical research getting splashed across the media). It is possible some other factor caused the increase in deaths, but I'm damned if I can think what it is.

What does all this mean? Well, I'm not completely sure, which is why I'd be interested to obtain other opinions. Just because cyclist injuries are not as bad as they were does not mean cycling has actually got safer. There is nothing like the number of teenage cyclists actually out on the roads that there used to be. Back in the seventies you could cycle in peace through Glen Coe; you certainly can't do that now. On the other hand, memory is not objective; perceptions are not necessarily accurate. Traffic congestion might not be a bad thing if it slows vehicles down. To some extent, we have retreated from the busiest roads and controlled the danger that way. But perhaps the scare-mongering of the last decade has induced in us all a jitteriness towards traffic? I don't ever recall being much bothered by traffic when I was a teenager back in the late 70s/early 80s, and I never had a crash, so it can't all have been youthful indifference to risk. It has to be said that pedestrian injuries have not improved nearly so much as cyclists', despite which, concerns about walking safety are not so intense as for cycling. So I tend to feel the general perception of greater danger is mostly illusion, provided you stay off fast roads used by trucks. However, the sense of creeping decline in our choices, the increasing need to plan to avoid fast traffic, these perceptions are probably true enough.

What do we do about it? My private belief is we have just one thin chance. If we can make cycling popular enough that there is a general will to improve road conditions, or at least preserve a network of quiet, unhectic routes, then we'll be in with a chance against the truckers and the rat-run brigade. We should avoid making ourselves unpopular with the wider society. We need to eschew presenting cycling as a dangerous activity, especially in the way we dress...... It's wheeled walking really. Hope all this is of value and interest to the SPOKES community.

Kindest regards, Malcolm Wardlaw