Elections

« Back to list of all 35 questions for this election

Question 2 - we asked:

Cambridge is seeing massive housing growth, with tens of thousands of new journeys into the city expected daily. Given that building tunnels, knocking down houses, or providing new public transport is very expensive, would you agree that creating very high-quality cycling routes to encourage new people to cycle offers by far the best cost-benefit ratio for transport improvements that facilitate growth of the City and surrounding areas?

We asked this question in all 27 divisions, namely: Abbey, Arbury, Bar Hill, Castle, Cherry Hinton, Coleridge, Cottenham, Histon and Impington, East Chesterton, Fulbourn, Gamlingay, Hardwick, King's Hedges, Market, Melbourn, Newnham, Norman Cross, Petersfield, Queen Edith's, Roman Bank and Peckover, Romsey, Sawston, The Hemingfords and Fenstanton, Trumpington, Waterbeach, West Chesterton, Whittlesey North, Willingham.

79 of the 128 candidates (62%) who were asked this question responded as below.

Those candidate(s) which were elected are highlighted.

Tom WOODCOCK
(Cambridge Socialists)

Yes, but further to this we need to actively stop unnecessary freight and car journeys into the city.

David Ian AMBROSE SMITH
(Conservative Party)

Yes but other forms of transport need to be considered also.

Andrew James BOWER
(Conservative Party)

Very high quality cycling routes must be standard for new developments. However, this can and should also be the case for public transport. Elsewhere, secure cycle parking and high quality carriageway surfaces must surely be the most efficient ways of keeping existing corridors open for cycling.

Martin John CURTIS
(Conservative Party)

Cycling is part of the solution, and an important part, but investment in public transport is also important. The two have to be in balance. There is already plenty being done to promote cycling and it is already considerably safer to cycle than many would believe. Of course high quality cycle routes are important, but the question is loaded towards the Cambridge City and its surrounds and we have to think way beyond this. E question leans towards an anti-motoring and roads stance. We need to have debates about mobility and make sure that cycling is embedded into the thinking around how people move about - that is the Dutch method.

Timothy James HAIRE
(Conservative Party)

Yes. It is no suprise that Cambridge is one of the top cycling cities in the UK. It is the most sensible way to get about. But other public transport options must be availible.

John Michael IONIDES
(Conservative Party)

This is a highly leading question that fails to consider the complexity of the issues.

Richard Graham JEFFS
(Conservative Party)

We need to put commuters first to get people out of their cars. I would seek to investigate more secure cycle parking facilities and segregated, awning-covered routes to cope with our often inclement weather. Without these improvements, most would stick to the car. Measures encouraging people to cycle or use public transport are cheaper, reduce emissions and are more long-term than expanding the road network. Some people are unable to cycle so more needs to be done on public transport. Perhaps a river-based Park & Sail would be interesting to look at?

Sheila LAWLOR
(Conservative Party)

I agree that cycling routes tend to be more cost-effective than heavy infrastructure. Yet cost is not the only reason for encouraging cycling: the environmental, aesthetic and cultural benefits cycling brings Cambridge versus other modes of transport are enormous. One reason for the building of cycle lanes that I would stress is safety: as our roads become busier it is vital that we ensure there are high-quality routes on which cyclists can travel safely.

Tony ORGEE
(Conservative Party)

I do not see building tunnels or knocking down houses as the way forward. The key should be ensuring that homes and jobs are located close to one another to help minimise travel. Pedestrian and cycle routes have an importat role to play. High quality for me would mean cycleways that are segregated and continuous, by that I mean of a significant distance, not just a short piece of good cycleway then a sigificant gap before another good section.

High quality cycling routes are needed not only between Cambridge and surrounding villages, but also between significant centres of employment, for example between the Babraham Institute, Granta Park and the Genome Campus, all within a few miles radius of one another.

James Andrew STRACHAN
(Conservative Party)

Cambridge is an awkward size. It's too big to allow private cars to take the commuting workload but too small to support a large public transport system.

Fortunately, residents have used their own initiative to support a wide range of ways to use transport to get to where they want to work, shop or relax.

Cycling is an important way to get about - but not the only way.

Steve TIERNEY
(Conservative Party)

No. I think there are many forms of transport and all must be given proper consideration. Cycling is healthy and many enjoy it, but people still like and need to use their cars also. It's about finding a proper balance.

Timothy John WOTHERSPOON
(Conservative Party)

Of course.

Sandra BILLINGTON
(Green Party)
The candidate did not enter a response for this question.
Eleanor Ruth CRANE
(Green Party)

I agree that investment in transport improvements should prioritise sustainable travel modes including cycling. Money should not be wasted on large scale road projects that do nothing to address the pressures long-term, but instead put into schemes for walking, cycling and bus travel. Nationally the Green Party would ensure that at least 10% of transport spending is on securing a shift to more active travel like walking and cycling.

I would encourage the Council to support local businesses in developing green workplace travel plans, including through the Cambridge Travel for Work partnership (http://www.tfw.org.uk).

I would also like to point out that the Green Party does not support the assumption that this level of growth is desirable for Cambridge. We clearly need a strong and vibrant economy, but I would look more to a state of 'dynamic equilibrium' - planning jobs, homes and infrastructure for those already in the area, not extra people from outside.

Shaun Peter ESGATE
(Green Party)

Nothing is that simple but I would agree with that.

Brett Mark HUGHES
(Green Party)

I see cycling as a vital link for any growth in or around the city and view the slow introduction of cycling infrastructure as a great opportunity missed. People in Cambridge expect more and so do it's many frequent visitors.

Stephen Roger LAWRENCE
(Green Party)

In short, yes

Megan PARRY
(Green Party)

I agree that improving infrastructure for cycling would be the most cost effective option. Cambridge is famous for being a city of bicycles. It would be sensible to keep traffic to a minimum in the city centre to reduce pollution and improve public safety. Other public transport options should be encouraged for people undertaking longer journeys. There should be an incentive to use public transport over driving; at the moment rail travel is far too expensive.

Peter Harry POPE
(Green Party)

Yes.

Teal RILEY
(Green Party)

• South Cambs Greens Greens responded to the South Cambs local plan consultation as follows: "The plan as it stands makes an unquestioning assumption that Cambridgeshire must and will grow economically and that this means attracting more people to live in the area, with a resulting need for additional housing. We reject this. We clearly need a strong and vibrant economy, but look more to a state of 'dynamic equilibrium' - planning jobs, homes and infrastructure for those already in the area, not extra people from outside. We cannot continue indefinitely to build over our countryside, losing both agricultural land and our natural environment as we do so."

Simon David Francis SEDGWICK-JELL
(Green Party)

Yes

David SMITH
(Green Party)

Absolutely: I agree completely. The car should be seen as a highly-undesirable method of transport in and around the city of Cambridge and high quality cycle routes should be a top priority

Helen STOCKS
(Green Party)

As a whole the Green party reject the need for massive housing growth and we should plan for the creation of local jobs for local people within our current capacity. Cycling has got the best cost - benefit ratio which is why the Green Party would put 10% of the transport budget on cycling and pedestrian infrastructure, as well as, diverting money planned for large infrastructure towards it. However public transport will still play an important part of the transport system for people who can not cycle.

Linda WHITEBREAD
(Green Party)

Short answer: yes. Particularly if the cost-benefit analysis includes the health benefits of cycling and other benefits which may only have an indirect financial impact, eg less pollution

From our national manifesto:
• We would divert money currently being wasted on huge road projects and put more of the UK’s transport budget into public transport, and especially into local schemes for walking, cycling and bus travel.
• The Green Party believes that the emphasis in transport policy should be upon improving access to local facilities and everyday transport. Walking and cycling should be the first priority, followed by public transport (trains, trams and buses).
• Nationally the Green Party would ensure that at least 10% of transport spending is on securing a shift to more active travel like walking and cycling.
• We would assist businesses with green workplace travel plans.

John HIPKIN
(Independent)

Yes

Ian TYES
(Independent)

Yes. In simple terms, creating and enhancing the cycling routes and joining them up into a proper linked network, away from roads and pedestrians, would encourage more people to cycle with all the obvious benefits, and is far easier than creating any equivalent car, bus or rail routes and is far more flexible.

John Frederick BERESFORD
(Labour & Co-operative)

I certainly think cycling to work is an option to be encouraged. I used to cycle from Histon to Haslingfield and back daily when I was teaching. Where cycling is less of an option (age, disability) then good public transport links are essential. Bicycle routes are of a better quality than when I was working, and need to be encouraged, as does good provision for pedestrians (I often walk into town!).

Clare BLAIR
(Labour Party)

Yes. High quality cycle routes are very important as part of a good transport network. They should take into account the typical travel to work distance and we also need to ensure a good public transport network. Within and connecting new developments good cycle and pedestrian provision also facilitates access to shopping and leisure activities.

Edward CARLSSON BROWNE
(Labour Party)

In general, my answer would be yes.

Obviously we have to accept that new developments will require a certain amount of provision for cars. For some people, motor vehicles are a necessity for their work and for a lot of other people it’s useful to have an option. I can fit my weekly shop in a couple of cycle panniers, but if I were feeding a family rather than just myself it would be advantageous to have a boot to stick shopping bags in. And of course other people may just prefer using their cars, and it’s neither possible nor sensible to try to prevent that.

I’d also argue that it is sensible and cost-effective to provide public transport options near new developments. Labour is in favour of using already existing powers to regulate buses to provide more (and better) public transport in the county. This is particularly important when the weather is foul in winter and for those who find cycling difficult for health reasons.

Nevertheless, as much as possible the aim with new developments should be to make cycling an easy and viable choice of transportation.

Sandra CRAWFORD
(Labour Party)

I agree that the provision of infrastructure for cycling in Cambridge would be more cost effective than that for motor vehicles. Its presence would encourage more people to cycle, and lessen the need for more motor vehicle provision. I do know people who have told me that they have been put off cycling because of the dangers from heavy traffic and lack of cycle lanes, so this would be a welcome innovation.
Cycling is better for health, the environment, and the local economy.

Adam John DUTTON
(Labour Party)

It would seem likely that high quality cycle routes would offer enormous value for money: reducing congestion, the carbon budget of the county and reducing health and care costs.

Adrian John FRENCH
(Labour Party)

The current provision for cycling as a form of transport is unsatisfactory.Integrated provision for cycling,pedestrian and motorised transport has been achieved in many European countries.improved provision in this country together with policies to encourage employers to support cycling to work will make significant contributions to quality of life, health and carbon reduction.

Huw JONES
(Labour Party)

The tunnel proposal is laughable. Knocking down houses for grand road building schemes appears to increase traffic volumes without reducing congestion and without reducing environmental impacts such as air pollution. While public transport options may be expensive, they are essential, particularly for groups who might find cycling alteratives difficult or impossible. We need to recognise the advantages of solutions that integrate public transport with cycling and walking.

Noel KAVANAGH
(Labour Party)

When transport infrastructure is being planned it should include continuous, high quality cycle routes, with solar lighting on routes outside the city, to encourage people to cycle from their homes to work, to school and for leisure. The routes should be complemented by good public transport networks and provision for pedestrians. There should also be more places designated as secure areas for people to park their cycles when routes are being planned.

Ben MONKS
(Labour Party)

Commuting and leisure cycling in from Willingham, Over and Longstanton is growing. I'd agree that more accessible, safe routes are needed to sustain that growth. In keeping with Labour's manifesto for these elections, investment in decent cycling routes has to be a priority. In our area, the development of Northstowe will put pressure on the well used Busway route for cycling traffic towards Cambridge. It may be that an increase in the volume of bike traffic on the already busy roads in the north east of city at peak times may push that route to capacity. Northstowe will inevitably also mean more car traffic on already busy, often narrow roads. I'd advocate a exploring better accessibility of the current NCN route 51 as an additional route into the city from our area as well as an informed study of the possible impact of Northstowe on non-car routes in Cambridge.

Mike NETTLETON
(Labour Party)

Yes, it's obvious and essential. However, improving public transport is also essential.

Fiona ONASANYA
(Labour Party)

Whilst high quality cycling routes are a vital part of a good transport network, based on the maximum distance someone will bike for work/education/ leisure; they need to be accompanied by good provision for pedestrians and a good public transport network. Some developments are quite a distance to city centre so suburban and new settlement infrastructure is very important

Angela Mary PATRICK
(Labour Party)

Yes definitely

Dan RATCLIFFE
(Labour Party)

High quality cycle routes are an essential part of any integrated transport plan. Several planned developments in the region are considerable distances from Cambridge city centre and so cycle provision needs to be matched with improved public transport and, locally, pedestrian routes.

Paul SALES
(Labour Party)

Without good cycling and pedestrian routes and good public transport linking new developments to the city for work and leisure growth here just won’t be possible. We need the County, City and South Cambs councils to have a fully integrated plan for growth including a wide ranging transport strategy.

Peter SARRIS
(Labour Party)

Yes - high quality cycle routes are vital to ensure sustainable expansion and a healthier population.

Jocelynne SCUTT
(Labour Party)

Yes. Cambridge needs a well-integrated transport plan, including high quality cycling routes.

Cambridge needs a good public transport system, with a network that recognises that many people use public transport together with cycling as a part of their travel to work or for leisure - cycling to railway station and/or bus stops. (This is particularly important where development is relatively distant from the city, for example.)

Attention must also be paid to signage on roads and footpaths, clearly indicating 'dual use' where that exists/remains; such signage must be readily observable and properly maintained. We need, too, proper road and footpath maintenance so that cyclists, pedestrians and motorists can travel safely. Swerving to avoid potholes is dangerous for cyclists, pedestrians and motorists.

Martin SMART
(Labour Party)

High quality cycling routes are a vital as part of a good transport network based on travel to work distance (the maximum distance someone will bike to work or leisure) and need to be accompanied by good provision for pedestrians and a good public transport network.

Peter SNOW
(Labour Party)

Cycle routes are important so are pedestrian routes and a public transport network

Ashley WALSH
(Labour Party)

Providing high-quality cycling routes for new housing developments is absolutely essential, particularly because such developments mostly take place on the edges of the city. Not only do cycle routes represent a relatively inexpensive way to improve the city's infrastructure, but they also support efforts to reduce congestion, pollution, and chronic shortages of parking. Where possible, all housing developments should seek to maximise provision for pedestrians and cyclists so that we can minimise the number of cars in the city. Alongside this, it is necessary to fund a high-quality public transport system for those who are able unable to drive or to cycle and walk long distances.

Barbara Anne ASHWOOD
(Liberal Democrat)

I live on Hauxton Road directly opposite the access to Trumpington Meadows, with the Glebe/Clay Farm development just down the road. Planning currently is aimed at dissuading people from running cars by providing minimal parking space in the hope of encouraging people onto buses and cycles. If this is the case, we have to provide safe routes for cyclists, which will be considerably cheaper than providing fleets of new buses or trying to widen roads - not an option in most parts of the City.

William James BARTER
(Liberal Democrat)

I completely support investment in high-quality cycling routes. Investment in cycling is cost-effective and offers many benefits (such as reduction of carbon emissions).

For example, the Lib Dems fully support the Chisholm Trail to link Addenbrooke's to the Science Park, and have proposed £8M of investment in cycling across the area. We also need to encourage people to cycle - I fully support making cycling safer - where junctions are dangerous they need to be brought up to standard. I also support more gritting of cycleways and pavements in dangerous weather. Our alternative budget would provide an extra £200k per year to do this.

Kilian BOURKE
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes. Building world-class cycleways costs about the same amount of money as building a short road, so investing in cycling is a no-brainer, especially in congested urban areas. I would like to see all major developments include world-class cycling links to the existing cycle route network and centres of employment. Retro-fitting existing roads with better cycling provision is costly and inevitably a compromise. By putting dedicated cycle links at the heart of new developments we can build communities around sustainable transport.

Belinda Margaret BROOKS-GORDON
(Liberal Democrat)

High quality properly lit cycle routes are essential for the city to cope. It is also essential that routes are not left until the last brick is laid in new developments so that the habit of cycling is adopted early on in development.

Christopher John BROWN
(Liberal Democrat)

I think that providing high-quality cycling routes is an essential part of enabling the growth of Cambridge, given the restrictions on other infrastructure development, and that it offers good value for money. With cycling being such a popular mode of transport in the City it is important that new residents are also encouraged to get on their bikes.

Edward CEARNS
(Liberal Democrat)

I agree that strategic cycle routes should be part of a transport improvement plan for Cambridge.
The Liberal Democrat manifesto states that there would be a capital spend over a 5 year period of £4 million.
However, it needs to be recognised that not everybody is able to cycle and that a plan would need to include provision for an improved bus system too-undoing the damage that the Conservative led County’s bus cuts have inflicted. This sustainable public transport network is another of our priorities in our alternative budget.

Keith EDKINS
(Liberal Democrat)

Cycling provision is certainly AN important tool for transport improvements, but we have to admit that some journeys, some people, some weathers are never going to be feasible by bike. So public transport provision remains important too, even though the cost per person-mile is less cheerful.

Peter Robert FANE
(Liberal Democrat)

High quality cycling routes, connecting to other forms of sustainable transport (including the CGB) are very cost effective ways of reducing road congestion and are essential when new communities are being considered. I have been involved in pressing the case for section 106 funds to create or extend cycleways from NW Cambridge (via the existing M11 underpass) and Northstowe phase II (along the Oakington Road) in particular.

David Aubertin GRACE
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes, I do agree. As an environmental campaigner, I have seen the benefits when working in the Netherlands and Denmark. Cambridge is an ideal city for this approach.

Sue GYMER
(Liberal Democrat)

I like to keep things simple, lets fix what we've got and put in cycle friendly drain covers. Less potholes, better safety at junctions, good well maintained roads and paths, properly drained, gritted in the winter and lower speed limits in some residential areas.
When we have the money we can consider the grand schemes. I will be vigilant for grants from Government or Europe that encourage cycling schemes.

John David JENKINS
(Liberal Democrat)

I would agree that providing these routes to enable easy getting about and access to healthy life styles is obviously the right thing to do. I don't know about 'best cost-benefit ratio' but could believe it to be true.

Michael Thomas KILPATRICK
(Liberal Democrat)

I believe that cycle routes should attract more investment than they currently do. However, I believe that pedestrian routes should equally be better. I do not claim to have studied any cost-benefit analysis but believe that all new developments should have better cycle and pedestrian facilities. The marginal cost to new developments is clearly lower than that of attempting to retrofit better facilities piece-meal to previous poorly-designed developments and roadways.

Sebastian Gerald Molesworth KINDERSLEY
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes. It should be automatically included in every new development as a matter of course. There is no reason - and should be no excuse - for not doing so. Developers have been allowed to ignore this form of (also pedestrian-friendly) transport infrastructure to a very great extent while spending a huge amount of money on actual road. In addition, the County should oblige proper interconnection and improvements of the links between the new developments with 'old' Cambridge as a matter of course.

Maurice Leonard LEEKE
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes.

Daniel Stephen LEVY
(Liberal Democrat)

Safe, high quality cycle routes are going to be an important part of the infrastructure needed to support growth in Cambridge and the surrounding areas. The Liberal Democrats are already seeking to have £8m invested in cycling and the Chisholm Trail. If elected I would support this measure.
However, investment in other forms of travel, including facilities for pedestrians and frequent, reliable bus services will also be needed. As a councillor, I would seek to find the best possible balance between all these various facilities.

Ian Geoffrey MANNING
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes.

Robert MCLAREN
(Liberal Democrat)

I really do think the healthy option is best for obvious reasons,cycle routes are ok for able commuters,but we also must not forget the older and and not so able commuter,also too,we must not forget to spend our budget in the neglected regions,such as Wisbech,it has to be said that Wisbech cyclists too deserve money spending on these cycle routes,we too have expanded,our roads are alot more populated,we too need cycle lanes,cant wait for the Tour de France,coming to Cambridge,will maybe get more youngsters back on bikes.We do up here in Wisbech,have a cycle club called the Wisbech Wheelers,amater/pro. They are fantastic,Paul Ashby is one of their top riders,he trys to adverage 28mph where ever he goes unless there is a headwind of coarse,i know because i work with him! Less cars on the road would of coarse facilitate growth.

Lucy Kathleen NETHSINGHA
(Liberal Democrat)

yes

Andy PELLEW
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes. Ideally where new roads are planning, such as the A14 expansion, dedicated cycle ways on the new local roads will be part of the plan. Making space on existing roads can be difficult but while in the Netherlands recently I was impressed with the idea of rural roads having a single lane for cars with wide cycle ways on both sides separated by dotted lines allow cars to enter the cycle lanes to pass eachother. Maybe an idea for some of our less busy rural roads?

Barry John PLATT
(Liberal Democrat)

In my view, investment in good quality cycling routes is as important as investment in other modes of transport, and is essential if we are to encourage more road users to switch to cycling to the benefit of themselves and the environment.

David John PRIESTMAN
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes, cycling must continue to be prioritised, along with public transport options and park & ride schemes.

Amanda Joan TAYLOR
(Liberal Democrat)

Cambridge needs big investment in alternative forms of transport.

I would like to see better public transport AND better cycling provision. The Lib Dems are committed to building the Chisholm Trail to link Addenbrooke's to the Science Park and the new railway station in Chesterton, something that the Labour Party has opposed.

Neale UPSTONE
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes. In particular, I believe dedicated off-road routes are the only mass transit solution as shown in Europe.

Susan Elizabeth Kerr VAN DE VEN
(Liberal Democrat)

Yes, absolutely, no doubt. The case is overwhelming.

John George WILLIAMS
(Liberal Democrat)

Not every one can or wants to cycle so to be inclusive you must take into account all forms of transport in planning new developments. Certainly cycling should always be part of the mix, including separate cycle lines, secure cycling facilities and changing and showers for cyclists in commercial developments wherever possible.

Lord Ian BROUGHALL
(The Official Monster Raving Loony Party)

The Monster Raving Loony Party believe that the A14 should be REGRADED as the B14
This would NOT allow lorries to drive on it...
This would ensure that the lorries MUST find another route...
Having eliminated large vehicles - the bicycles could then take over....
OR...., "A Guided CYCLE Way.....

Diane Paula BIRNIE
(UK Independence Party)

I would agree with that view, yes.

Peter BURKINSHAW
(UK Independence Party)

You are asking for benefits paid for by other road users.
I would prefer more car parks.

Richard GLOVER
(UK Independence Party)
The candidate did not enter a response for this question.
Martin John HALE
(UK Independence Party)

To a certain degree, however I think public opinion should be engaged first before any major expense to ensure that their is a favourable opinion for their use. I would like to see bus lanes open to motorcycles/scooters, perhaps with a speed restriction, they are also an alternative to traffic congestion

David KENDRICK
(UK Independence Party)

Within the constraints you set, the answer is probably yes. But I do not accept the premises set in the question. Building new homes in flood plains (EG Trumpington meadows, Waterbeach) is technically feasible, but that doesn't make it sensible. By reducing flood plains, we simultaneously increase the demand for water, while reducing the 'elbow room' that flood plains provide. Thus, there will be both more floods, and more droughts in the future. What should govt do? Firstly, they should do no harm. Moving Papworth Hospital to Cambridge (or even to think of doing so) is simply daft, because of the housing shortage in Cambridge. Secondly, much of the pressure of new housing comes from population increases because of nett immigration. Nationally, we should quit the EU, and regain control of our borders. Locally, our elected representatives should oppose large scale new housing, and the weakening of the green belt, unless they can be persuaded that that would be the wish of the majority in that area.

Alan LAY
(UK Independence Party)

A safe cycling route is needed

Joe WEBSTER
(UK Independence Party)

There is some argument for this but cycling would still remain impracticable for many people. I think there is more of a case for improving public transport for those who need to get into the city for work. Bus journeys are not only rather too expensive; they are also unnecessarily tedious.

Nicholas David WILSON
(UK Independence Party)
The candidate did not enter a response for this question.

Camcycle is a non-partisan body. All candidates are given an equal opportunity to submit their views. Information published by Camcycle (Cambridge Cycling Campaign), The Bike Depot, 140 Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0DL.