|
Welcome,
Guest
|
TOPIC: Latest government move to encourage active travel: Why are local Tories out of step?
Latest government move to encourage active travel: Why are local Tories out of step?
02 Jan 2023 22:33
#6724
|
Basil Clarke  Topic Author |
Good news today for supporters of measures to encourage "active travel", ie walking, wheeling and cycling instead of driving, in the shape of the announcement below from the government. Although the sums that the government is investing in active travel pale into insignificance compared with money spent on climate- and community-destroying road schemes, the announcement shows that that the Sunak government recognises the need to "support people to choose cleaner and healthier ways to get around". It's also evidence that support for active travel wasn't just a personal hobbyhorse of Boris Johnson and his advisor Andrew Gilligan but is continuing because it makes economic sense. Curious then that local Conservative politicians have voiced implacable opposition to every single active travel measure implemented in Enfield, apart from school streets. They continue to campaign against bike lanes, low-traffic neighbourhoods, an active travel scheme outside the North Mid hospital and even the planned changes in Enfield Town, which will make the borough's focal point much pleasanter and safer for shoppers and diners.
The funding will also be used to engage under-represented groups and enable more children to walk, wheel and cycle to school. Community engagement programmes will give individuals the confidence to walk and cycle safely through cycle training, school walking groups and bike rental schemes. People will benefit from better access to jobs and education through initiatives such as outreach to schools and employment centres. Source: UK government press release[/url |
|
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation. |
Latest government move to encourage active travel: Why are local Tories out of step?
02 Jan 2023 22:49
#6725
|
Basil Clarke Topic Author |
|
Basil Clarke wrote (message 6724) :
Curious then that local Conservative politicians have voiced implacable opposition to every single active travel measure implemented in Enfield, apart from school streets. More criticism of the policies of local Conservative politicians towards active travel comes in the current issue of the Spectator, a solidly Conservative-supporting journal, in a comment piece entitled Why are the Tories so obsessed with defending motorists? The author points out that for a party that believes that people should pay up for their privileges and not expect handouts from the state: There’s no philosophical reason why the Tories should automatically oppose these measures [LTNs and the ULEZ expansion]. As a party of the market, the Tories should favour charging for the negative externalities cars cause. Motor vehicles take up space and, especially older ones, churn out pollution, both carbon dioxide and other particulates that harm health. If these aren’t being paid for by the drivers, on the basis of usage, then they are met elsewhere – either from other taxes that have to compensate, or losses to the economy from delays and from the impacts of environmental damage. If the polluter or user doesn’t pay, the externalities don’t disappear, but are socialised. The answer, he writes, is that "The Tories, however, are too reliant on drivers’ votes to let that happen", but, he says, this may not be as popular as they believe: Despite its loudness, opposition to LTNs proved to be a minority view. [...] Though they might enjoy a concentrated electoral gain, the Tories’ pro-car mindset could cost them elsewhere. Source: www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-are-the-tories-so-obsessed-with-defending-motorists |
|
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation. |
Latest government move to encourage active travel: Why are local Tories out of step?
08 Jan 2023 10:10
#6733
|
Karl Brown  |
|
Basil highlights a discrepancy between our local and national conservatives in active travel. But that’s not true country wide. I recently pointed out that Canterbury conservatives plans to make the whole city a mosaic of LTN’s and now conservative Cornwall plan to bring a 20mph speed limit to all residential streets. They cite (generic) support of the UN and the WHO, plus trials in Bath where casualty figures fell by 23% after a 20mph limit was introduced. Such a move is long overdue in Enfield. I would go as low as 10mph in dense pedestrian areas such as main shopping streets and outside public transport hubs.
|
|
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation. |