Entitled cyclists are about to get even more insufferable
Solihull Council is testing a new kind of “intelligent” traffic light. Top marks to those who can guess what’s so clever about them: they can be programmed to prioritise cyclists over other kinds of road user.
It’s bad enough that the info system on my new VW slams on the brakes when it spots a 30mph sign on a motorway – only it’s not on the motorway itself, but a slip road. It’s obvious that drivers are given a hard time, even by their own cars.
Solihull’s innovation is bound to cause upset among the many motorists who already think that Lycra-wearing speed merchants rule the roost. Towns and cities are full to the gills with security cameras, and yet this section of the on-the-move community routinely ignore red lights without punishment. They’re not gracious about their favoured status, either. Expect a torrent of foul-mouthed abuse if you innocently chance to get in their way.
Don’t think I’m anti-bicycle. I used to ride one myself and loved it. The hobby only abruptly ceased when the last of my vehicles was stolen from outside my house, despite the fact that it had only cost me £10.
I only occasionally return to the joy of the activity, so rich in memories of childhood, when cautiously pedalling a TfL hireling to St Bartholomew’s the Great – God, I hope, will protect me from the manifest dangers of crossing London by this means, most of which come from two-wheeled, fast-moving urban warriors in helmets who have little patience with a Womble like me.
Unfortunately, age-related hearing loss does not blot out everything they say in passing, some of which is ripe. As timorous as Ratty when describing the Wild Wood, I fear the open highway and stick to cycle lanes. Bless the mayor of London for introducing so many of them.
Or bless him up to a point, because another side of my brain says that there is something wrong in all this. The Covid pandemic, when cycle lane networks were aggressively enlarged so that cyclists could keep socially distanced when pedalling to work, was taken as an excuse to displace the motorist.
Living in central London, I sometimes supported the result. Better air quality was desirable, and I loved the idea of more outdoor dining space after parts of roadways were blocked off to help restaurants stay in business. But while the 20mph limit might save lives, it adds to the general buggeration, meaning that cars are only used for long trips.
I don’t begrudge areas that have kept some restrictions in place, as long as it benefits the wider community. So what if that means that some car journeys take a minute or two longer? For once I am on the side of the angels – the greenest of all beings, since they leave no footprint, carbon or otherwise, and travel on their own wings.
I’ve even campaigned for improvements to our neighbourhood that would reduce traffic along an important road, shabby at present but the natural hub of the community. The council is now set to implement a plan that will widen pavements and restrict traffic, necessary because of the sheer number of people who either live nearby or come to offices every day.
But there is an important difference between these civic acts and the changes pushed upon the people of Solihull. Cycling is by necessity a niche mode of transportation. The vast majority of people intending to travel outside of highly urbanised areas rely on their cars. Privileging a small minority of hobbyists at the expense of everyone else seems to be a prime example of the finger-wagging war on motorists waged across Britain by council and transport officials.
Note that this war is undeclared. There is little democratic mandate for many of these changes. Gumming up car traffic to the point that driving habits have radically altered does not appear to be an accidental side effect, so much as a deliberate policy on the part of those implementing transport reform plans.
I doubt that Solihull has consulted widely over its traffic light shenanigans. Motorised bicycles and skateboards travel at a speed that could endanger human life and don’t give the users much exercise – and yet presumably the lights will go green for them, too.
The unfairness of preferring one group over another is riling. More transparency, please, or feelings will over-boil.