Elections

« Back to list of all 8 questions for this election

Question 4 - we asked:

Do you support the Prime Minister's statement that cycle provision should be designed in to all new road schemes from the beginning? How would you support this?

We asked this question:

4 of the 6 candidates (67%) who were asked this question responded as below.

Those candidate(s) which were elected are highlighted.

Rupert READ
(Green Party)

Yes, but the current government's actual implementation of this policy has been practically non-existent so far.

In my view it should also be expanded to cover all new housing estates. Looking at Northstyowe: currently-planned cycling-provision is woefully-inadequate.

If the A14 goes ahead (Greens believe this hugely expensive scheme will not solve the problems on that corridor), then it is essential that proper 4m-wide cycle provision is provided along its whole length, including proper crossing points. Bridges for cyclists and people on foot should also be provided, restoring previously-severed connections.

Greens want to up cycling funding nationwide to £30 per head: see http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/latest-news/green-party-pledges-to-spend-30-per-head-per-year-on-cycling-168633 - this would mean we could actually fund what under the LibDem-Con Govt has been little more than aspiration.

Daniel ZEICHNER
(Labour Party)

I absolutely support this, although I have been very disappointed at the PMs lack of progress on this issue. That is why I am so glad the new Labour-run City Council have partnered the “20s Plenty” campaign to slow down the speed of inner-city traffic in areas of particular vulnerability for cyclists. As your MP for Cambridge, I will strengthen these partnerships to ensure we extend cycling safety networks across as much of the city as possible.

Julian Leon HUPPERT
(Liberal Democrat)

Emphatically yes, and it was based on one of our Get Britain Cycling recommendations, that all new development schemes, road or otherwise, should have a statutory requirement for cyclists’ and pedestrians’ needs to be considered at an early stage.
Far too often, facilities for pedestrians and bikes are late add-ons to schemes, resulting in poor quality provision, if any. Many road schemes are extremely expensive, but it is often not that expensive to change them to be more friendly to non motor vehicles at the start, whether by providing parallel routes, facilitating well-designed crossings, or making use of disused space. For example, the old A14 route going through Huntingdon could easily be used for cycle access when it is declassified – the road will then be far wider than the usage would require, and the cost would be comparatively small.

Keith Alexander GARRETT
(Removing the politicians)

What is the overall plan for the country? Is this part of it? How much joined up thinking has gone into this? Is he just trying to win votes from cyclists who are happy to grasp at any crumbs they can get? This statement is meaningless without a solid commitment to actually do it. Between that statement and a contractor putting down stones onto a road how has the vague goal of 'should' been adhered to?

Plan our future. Don't play with it.

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.