short sighted policy changes

[jonesy]

I was actually talking about the LTP. I'm guessing dellzeqq was too, as he has experience of campaigning on these issues, as do I, with considerably fewer years. I described the LTP as a wish list of schemes and think that entirely conveys how seriously the council takes them. Some of these include pretty large schemes going upto about a million pounds, others are in the thousands or tens of thousands of pounds.

I know you were. The LTP is the main bidding mechanism for capital funding. Although the LTP will also identify revenue activities like travel plans and cycle training, it doesn't directly provide funding for them.

 

[dellzeqq]

...well if I can clarify my point. I can accept bikeability, but the rest is tosh. London has spent £140 million trying to hide cyclists on routes nobody wants or uses, and there are a dozen town in the Southeast I could think of that have spent smaller sums to even less effect. So that's the hard measures. As for the soft measures - most of that is jobs for the boys and girls. The Big Lottery stuff is windowdressing.

The battle isn't in cycling policy, it's in planning policy. As we suburbanise all of southern England, and give permissions for more and more retail tin sheds with vast car parks, we kiss goodbye to sustainability and conviviality. And put a limit on cycling. We may have won in London, but in Restofthesoutheastland it's dire, and getting worse.