Additions and Updates to this site www.spokes.org.uk Frames version
 

The Lothian Cycle Campaign

SPOKESWORKER 21st April 2003

May 1^st sees elections to the Scottish Parliament and all Scottish Councils. Despite the common cynicism about politicians, our experience shows that manifesto commitments sometimes are fulfilled, and that determined action by politicians can have an effect in increasing cycle use! After the 1999 Parliament elections we used the Labour promise of 'extended support for walking and cycling' to lobby vigorously - and successfully - for increased government funding for council cycle projects. It was largely thanks to an election promise in the 1980s that we got Edinburgh Council's Cycle Team created. And there is growing evidence [Spokes 84,82] that councils with policies to increase cycling, and who implement these policies vigorously, can succeed.

SCOTTISH CYCLING POLICY SINCE 1999

In Spokes 84 [page 1] we described Scottish government cycle policy since the 1999 elections. To summarise, in the first couple of years Transport Minister Sarah Boyack [also Edinburgh Central MSP] set up various financial and other incentives for Councils to do more to promote cycling. These have operated throughout the 4 years of the Parliament, and have fulfilled the 1999 Labour manifesto promise of extended support for walking and cycling. However, since Sarah Boyack was sacked late in 2001 transport ministers Wendy Alexander and then Iain Gray have largely concentrated on 'big' transport - both road building and public transport. They have not considered the consequences for walking and cycling of their decisions, and as a result Sarah Boyack's cycle initiatives are disappearing. For example, Scottish Executive staff have been transferred away from cycling to 'other priorities'; the PTF scheme which gave councils a financial incentive to undertake cycle projects is coming to an end; and encouragement of cycle use is consistently forgotten in government policy documents such as the 58-page 2003-6 Spending Plan [Spokes 83] - although it had enough space to promise every child the chance of a game of golf by age 9!!

In terms of the other parties, there has been little action on cycle policy during this Parliament. More generally on transport, Conservatives and SNP have argued vigorously for more road-building as well as rail expansion, and have opposed plans for road-user charging. The Liberal Democrats, in coalition with Labour, have taken no extra initiatives on cycling, though they did make a stand against Labour's decision to drop from the Transport Bill the power for councils to implement workplace parking charges [Spokes 78]. The SSP and Greens (i.e. Tommy Sheridan and Robin Harper) have transport policies which we are fairly happy with. During the last Parliament Robin Harper took several positive initiatives on transport, including trying to amend the Transport Bill to include a traffic-reduction strategy and powers for charging at car-based retail developments.

MANIFESTOS FOR THE 2003 ELECTIONS

All party manifestos for the 2003 Scottish Parliament elections can be found on the web. Go to Google, and use search terms such as the name of the party and Scotland manifesto 2003. For those without internet access, paper manifestos will be on sale in some bookshops, or look up the phone book for each party.

Ministers and the Executive have promised to maintain the current target to quadruple cycle use from 1996 to 2012 - but the Labour manifesto is very disappointing. Total transport funding rises dramatically, but the emphasis is heavily on big projects - rail, metro, and trunk-road construction. Local accessibility is largely forgotten. Walking is seen as a safety problem rather than as a means of transport to be encouraged, though there is a commitment to 20mph zones at all schools. The public health benefits of physical activity are to be promoted, but there is not a single mention of cycling! Spokes Labour members have clearly been less diligent than usual in influencing their manifesto!

The SNP manifesto is if anything even more disappointing, again with almost exclusive attention to 'big' transport. There is a promise of cycle routes (cities only), but no mention of walking! Nothing on slow speeds, 20-mph zones, or health benefits.

The Conservative manifesto is a real disaster area, with even more road commitments than the above, and no mention at all of walking or cycling. Council road-user charging schemes would be banned. Government would take a reduced role in promoting public health - and there is no mention of physical activity.

Of the 4 big parties, the Liberal Democrat manifesto is easily the most bike-friendly and environmentally aware. Road-building would continue, but restricted to current committals (except under specified tough conditions). There are various walking and cycling promises, and linkages made to planning policies and to public health. The main criticisms are that its huge list of detailed promises is a hotch-potch, with no overall statement/philosophy on the role of cycling/walking (and no targets), whilst the physical activity policy (like the government Task Force) overemphasises sport and gyms rather than everyday walking/cycling.

The Greens, in the shortest of the manifestos, have easily the best walking/cycling section, and a general transport philosophy clearly linked to environment and public health. Transport costs would be spread more fairly, with more use of road-user charging, and there would be a complete halt to trunk-road building.

The lengthy SSP manifesto has much to commend on transport - with walking, cycling and local access seen very positively, and even a specific promise to consult groups like Spokes! There is special emphasis on the needs of the 36% of Scottish households (higher in urban areas) with no access to a car. The M74 will be cancelled and other existing road plans reviewed.

Overall, in terms of sustainable/healthy transport, there are very clear differences between the parties, and they can be categorised as follows from Best to Worst...

HOW TO VOTE

Of course, when it comes to your vote, you will probably take into account many policies apart from transport, though transport policies also often reflect policies in other important areas such an environment, public health, and planning.

Another crucial issue to consider is whether you want your vote to be solely on principle, or whether you want it to be effective. If your favourite party has no chance of winning, should you vote for it or for a second-choice which at least has a realistic chance of defeating something worse? If you take the latter approach, then read on...

TACTICAL VOTING GUIDE

Note: this is specifically applicable to Edinburgh/Lothians area, though the general rules will apply elsewhere. It is based on the results at the 1999 elections and the recent Herald 'superpoll'.

At the election, you will have 3 votes, as below..

A. Scottish Parliament - Constituency vote. This is just like the old 'first past the post' system - you vote for one candidate for your local constituency. Note that the Greens are not standing for this vote. Normally, vote for the candidate of your favourite party. But if you know that a party you strongly dislike might win the seat, then consider voting for whoever is most likely to defeat them.. In 1999 the parties who came first and second (and third if close to the second) are...

Ed Central Lab/SNP Ed East/Muss Lab/SNP

Ed North/Leith Lab/SNP Ed Pentlands Lab/Con

Ed South Lab/SNP/Lib Ed West Lib/Con/Lab

Linlithgow Lab/SNP Livingston Lab/SNP

Midlothian Lab/SNP East Lothian Lab/SNP

B. Scottish Parliament - Regional vote (also known as 'second', 'list', or 'top-up' vote). These votes are added over a wide region (Edinburgh, Mid and W.Lothian form 'Lothians', with E.Lothian added into 'South Scotland'). They provide 'top-up' MPs for parties who get a reasonable number of votes but have few or no successes in the above 'first past the post' constituency vote. In deciding how to use your second vote...

• If you support Con/Green/Lib/SNP/SSP, vote for your favourite - all have a chance to win a top-up seat.
• If you support Labour and live in E.Lothian or Borders, vote Labour - you could win a top-up seat.
• If you support Labour and live in Edinburgh, Mid or West Lothian then consider voting for your second choice, because Labour will almost certainly win so many constituency votes that it can't get a top-up seat. But if Labour falls to the level of the SNP in the opinion polls for the constituency vote, then they may need your second vote too.

C. Council election vote. This uses the traditional 'first past the post' voting system to elect your local councillor, so use the same tactics as for the Parliament constituency vote above. The Edinburgh election is extremely important, as the biggest local issue is Labour's New Transport Initiative, with congestion charging. Despite their national policies the local Liberals are opposed (like Con and SNP). If Labour loses overall control the NTI could be scrapped. Whilst the tram (phase 1) would still go ahead with government funds, congestion would continue to grow and the new money for cycling, walking, buses, slower speeds, and other accessibility initiatives would be lost. Please question your candidates, and vote for one who supports the plans.

MORE ELECTION INFO

An analysis of Scottish Parliament manifesto statements on transport is to be published at www.transformscotland.org.uk. See also www.everyonecan.org, a campaign by 26 Scottish bodies to highlight environmental issues in the election campaign.

• Spokes member Ross Hendry has an idea for a weekend cycle event based in a West Lothian town, exploring West Lothian and its history by bike, and maybe combined with an event like Linlithgow Folk Festival, for evening entertainment. He would like to attract both visitors and locals. If you would like to attend such an event, or be involved in organising it, or just have ideas for Ross, please contact him at 01506.882356.
• Are you aged 9-18?? If so, consider nominating your school, your council, or an adult 'champion' for the Sustrans School Travel Awards. Is there an excellent new cycleroute to school, a school travel plan, or a parent or teacher who has successfully campaigned for car-reduction and slower speeds? If they win, you get a cash prize also. Hurry!! - nominations, with supporting info, must be submitted by 16 May. For details, email awards@sustrans.org.uk or tel 0117.915.0100.
• Have you been cycling in Highlands and/or Islands since 1^st Jan 2002? [including Western Isles]. If so, please help with a research project aimed at promoting more bike tourism in the area. By filling in the questionnaire you are also entered into a £100 prize draw. For a survey form, phone 0131.478.7505 [Mike Barber] or email info@george-street-research.co.uk. Please say you heard of the project through Spokes.
• Are you a medic interested in research?? Edinburgh might help solve the controversy over the value or otherwise of increasing cycle helmet use. Edinburgh has apparently been found to be the 'helmet-wearing capital' of the UK. Rather than the usual individual-casualty-based studies of the effect of helmets, Edinburgh might give an opportunity for a population-based study [which could throw some light on whether widespread helmet-wearing does or does not result in overall reduction of cyclist head injury and/or casualties]. If you are interested in such a project - especially if you have access to relevant data or know that it exists - please contact mj_wardlaw@hotmail.com. Ideally data would be needed back to the 1980s, for head injury, death and serious injury, both to cyclists and to pedestrians [for comparative purposes].
• As you may know, the UK government has again lost its nerve to the motoring lobby, this time agreeing that all speed cameras must be highly visible [though a challenge in the courts by Transport 2000 and others has partially reversed this]. Not content with this, the 'freedom' lobby has set up a web site at which speed camera locations can be logged, so that motorists who want to speed without getting caught can get advice where it is 'safe' to do so. However, anyone can log camera locations on the site, and so if you want to deter rogue motorists speeding past your door or school, why not log the existence of a camera at that point!! It only takes a minute or two, at www.speedcamerasuk.com/cameralocationform.htm. Thanks to the UK cycle campaign network for this idea.

See Diary in Spokes 84. Also...

May 1 Elections - Scottish Parliament and Scottish Councils

May 24 Spokes Mailout - Stuffing/delivery volunteers will be notified - or contact Dave.duFeu@ed.ac.uk 01506.670165.

May28 Transport Policy in the Scottish Parliament 2^nd Term conference, Edinburgh. Fee for voluntary groups £85. Details: Joanne Sibbald 455.5116. www.tri.napier.ac.uk.

Jun 7-15 ETA Green Transport Week Reducing our impact on the environment, especially via car alternatives www.eta.co.uk.

June 14-22 National Bike Week - see Spokes 84.

June 14-15 Edinburgh Treefest festival at Inverleith Park, for environmental awareness and sustainable living. Info: 332.2229 festival@four-winds.org.uk. or www.urban-alternatives.org.

Sep 22 European Car-Free Day Info: www.itwmc.gov.uk & www.eta.co.uk. There now seems doubt if Edinburgh Council will hold a 2-day event Sep 21-22 as we had thought [Spokes 84 and Spokesworker 03.03.03] - a Sunday event is definite, but the Council is in two minds about official car-free day, Monday Sep 22, though hundreds of towns across Europe will be participating. Please send your comments to council transport boss Cllr Andrew Burns [andrew.burns@edinburgh.gov.uk] - especially specific ideas as to what should be done on Monday 22nd.

Summer Biketour to Ecotopia Annual international cycle ride [this year Poland and Ukraine] for anyone interested in the environment, cycling, and community life. Ending at the annual Ecotopia festival. More info... www.thebiketour.net.

From: TRANSform Scotland <campaigns@transformscotland.org.uk>

for JAM74 [Joint Action against the M74]. www.transformscotland.org.uk

If you would like to object to the M74... modify the following draft letter to suit your views, remembering to quote the reference numbers and include your name & address. Anyone in Scotland, not just Glasgow, can lodge an objection. This is the largest transport project in Scotland, and will deprive other parts of the country funding for more sensible projects. Objections should arrive before May 12^th at: Chief Road Engineer, Scottish Executive Development Department, Trunk Roads Division 6, Victoria Quay, Edinburgh EH6 6QQ

Dear Sir,

M74 extension - ref. 2NEA/13/2 & 2NEA/13/3

I am writing to register my formal objection to the above application. I oppose this project for the following reasons:

* The project is a waste of £375-500 million of public money because it would not reduce congestion levels in Glasgow. [1]

* It would devastate already disadvantaged communities and increase traffic levels on radial roads, which would become more dangerous for children and other vulnerable road users.

* When most Glasgow households have no access to a car this is an inequitable use of scarce public resources. The funds should instead be invested in public transport alternatives.

* This motorway would generate more traffic, seriously worsening noise levels, the city's toxic air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions.

Please acknowledge receipt of this formal objection.

Yours sincerely

Name: Address: Postcode:

[1] Central Scotland Transport Corridor Studies Final Report on M74 Corridor, pp. 35-48 and Figures 5.5-5.17. The report concludes that Glasgow in 2010 with the M74 scheme built "shows a network which is more congested (even with the additional capacity provided by the M74) than in 2000." (ibid, pp. 42, 5.6.3).