-
CE needed to go, BC has a Bikeability dept. which could easily expand if required.
BC is delivering Biikeability training and has just begun Training instructors as an ITP (and has applied to bevcome an ITO with the other 20+ organisations. BC was late on the scene, is no where near the level of delivery of Bikeabilty training as many of the established schemes and has, unfortunately, stood on the toes on some schemes (out of London) and so is not well liked amongst some national standard organisations.
I was never clear why a sports organisation aiming to promote cycle racing in all its forms and win gold medals for team GB iis getting involved in Cycle Commuter training rather than sticking to what it does well.
-
Maybe because there isn't such a divide as we previously thought, participation often leads to competition. Even if, in most cases, it doesn't, then there's still many reasons for all cycling in the UK to be within the interest of BC.
When the skyride local rides were launched, I thought they were a joke, and they were not popular in that first year, but look at them now, fully booked all the time, with more ride leaders being trained and more routes being planned every month. -
[press release[
The Government today announced the abolition of Cycling England which is expected to take effect from the end of March 2011. The implications of this decision for the future of cycling were outlined by the governing Board]
[Critically the decision to abolish Cycling England threatens the future of National Cycling Proficiency training, Bikeability. This scheme currently receives £12 million p.a. through Cycling England from the Department for Transport. Over 90% of all local authorities are involved in and benefitting from the programme, as are over 50% of all School Sports Partnerships – of which every school in England must be a part. While the Under Secretary of State has indicated that the Department for Transport will maintain support for the scheme, there are as yet no details as to how this will be effected
Phillip Darnton, Chairman of Cycling England, said “While the abolition of Cycling England is bitterly disappointing, we are relieved by the Minister’s statement on September 27th that “Bikeability is safe”. However, neither the Minister nor DfT officials will discuss either the level of funding or the scale of their future intentions for cycle training. We will be pressing for clarification as soon as the Comprehensive Spending Review is published on October 20th. Discontinued funding would mean a new generation lost to cycling, and a risk of increased accidents through lack of proper instruction. This prospect is alarming in its implications for childhood obesity and the environmental impact of a further increase in car trips to school]
[Projects funded by Cycling England are all delivered by local groups, as part of locally determined plans. Their achievements include]27% increase in cycling trips in three years in supported Cycling Demonstration Towns (against a national trend that has been declining consistently for 50 years)
174% increase in trips to school by bike where school cycling programmes are in place.[/COLOR]
Nationwide revival of cycling proficiency training, such that almost 300,000 young people every year now gain the confidence to cycle in modern traffic conditions, growing up with cycling as a life skill.
Economic modelling by the Department for Transport has calculated a benefit to cost ratio for these programmes of between 3:1 and 5:1
The Government has indicated that in future, local authority cycling schemes will be supported though a ’Local Sustainable Transport Fund’. Cycling England Board Member Lynn Sloman commented: ‘If the Government is to build on the last five years’ progress in getting more people cycling, it will need to do more than simply allocate grants. Cycling England’s experience is that in order to get results, you need to cut through the red tape, and really support, engage, enthuse and challenge. You need to combine the energy and passion of the cycling NGOs with the expertise of professional local authority teams; you need to share ideas and experience; and you need visionary leadership. We appeal to the Government to recognise this challenge.’
notes to eds
[COLOR=#ff0000]1. Cycling England was established in 2005 as an independent body to get ‘more people cycling, more safely, more often’. It has a Board comprising representatives of cycling NGOs (British Cycling, CTC and Sustrans) and specialists in health, education and sustainable transport. In 2009/10 it had a budget of £60 million, the majority of which was allocated in grants to local authorities, NGOs, train operators, National Parks and other bodies for practical cycling projects; further funds were allocated to a technical advice service, available to all local authorities. It has minimal overheads, with a staff team of three people, no offices and an overhead of less than 0.1% of its budget. The abolition of the body will lead to an estimated saving of £200,000 pa/B.C should be able to provide Bikability as part of their braoder remit.
Ultimately the cost of this stuff to central Government is peanuts compared with road building schemes.
The thing is Skydancer, the only people who actually get to try and push the suits in Westmonster are the Philip Darntons of the world who used to be in big Business, the rest of the organisations are cycling around Parliament square happily on the bikes when utter Twats like Hammond go 200 yards in a Limo -
[URL="http://www.bikebiz.com/news/33018/LibDem-Minister-kills-Cycling-England"][/URL]
Cyclists, however, from March 2011, will be sidelined. No longer will cycling have an umbrella body which can talk directly, and with authority, to Government departments.Charlie, do we need a govornment quango appointed by govornment to talk to government about cycling? To what extent to the advocacy groups such as LCC, CTC , Sustrans talking and able to present a united voice on improving conditions for cyclists?
Is there a confederation of advocacy groups that meet and agree key messages such as lowering speed limits accross UK, driver culpability as default in any crash etc... easy ones to agree I imagine.
Time to start talking i think -
Charlie, do we need a govornment quango appointed by govornment to talk to government about cycling? To what extent to the advocacy groups such as LCC, CTC , Sustrans talking and able to present a united voice on improving conditions for cyclists?
Is there a confederation of advocacy groups that meet and agree key messages such as lowering speed limits accross UK, driver culpability as default in any crash etc... easy ones to agree I imagine.
Time to start talking i thinkThe present government is clearly more likely to want to discuss issues with an unrepresentative government funded and appointed body than with bodies that are paid for by and represent cyclists, which is precisely why they are disbanding it. This government has no interest in talking to cyclists and even less in listening to them.
-
Maybe because there isn't such a divide as we previously thought, participation often leads to competition. Even if, in most cases, it doesn't, then there's still many reasons for all cycling in the UK to be within the interest of BC.
Perhaps. i remember when BC introduce Go-ride in competition with national Standard level 1 training. LAs bought go-ride in some instances and pissed off some NS / bikeabilityn organisations especially because NS level 1 was clearly preparation for the road (so one handed riding was taught as a means to signal to road users. In go-ride one handed riding was in order to lift a water bottle from a cage. It wasn't intened to promote commuting and was deemed a BC talent spotting excersise )
-
Perhaps. i remember when BC introduce Go-ride in competition with national Standard level 1 training. LAs bought go-ride in some instances and pissed off some NS / bikeabilityn organisations especially because NS level 1 was clearly preparation for the road (so one handed riding was taught as a means to signal to road users. In go-ride one handed riding was in order to lift a water bottle from a cage. It wasn't intened to promote commuting and was deemed a BC talent spotting excersise )
Firstly, it's not in competition from BC's POV. And secondly it teaches a range of skills required to ride a bike in many environments, with a view (but not exclusively) to competition. I often work with Sustrans Bike-It officers who have reached the limit of what they can do when Schools decide to take the kid's riding further.
One handed riding is just a part of balance and co-ordination as a technique, ever seen a TDF rider take a bottle? or a club rider pointing out potholes to his buddies?
Go-Ride is especially useful for primary children who, lets face it, are going to be doing their riding on non-technical off-road terrain and not mixing it with HGVs down the Uxbridge road. It's cycle coaching, not instruction.
-
Go-Ride is especially useful for primary children who, lets face it, are going to be doing their riding on non-technical off-road terrain and not mixing it with HGVs down the Uxbridge road.
and NS training IS to promote on road cycling and showing them that if they know what they're doing they can ride to mates or school in the bus lane on uxbridge road with minimum risk.
(In fact whenever we teach in schools in ealing we make a point of snaking down uxbridge road and they go back to school chuffed with a story to tell their mates)
-
As I said, haven't seen many 6 year olds cycling to school.
I don't wish to be confrontational or belittling of other programs (I'll leave that to everyone who seems to have a problem with BC) but I don't see why we can't work together positively.+1 for cooperative sentiment
(NS training level 1+2 is aimed at 8-10 year olds and some are beginning to cycle to school and know how to. Problem is their parents who don't cycle and are unnecessarily scared)
-
I've done both National Standard training and L2 with BC. I find it easier to engage kids i work with in Go Ride type drills as an alternative to L1. Reason being if i turn the field into an MTB trail for the kids they love it so it's easier to keep them on task.
It's just cones on field instead of cones on tarmac but makes a huge difference!That said, there's so a fair bit of crossover between the 2 and i think both are really good for developing bike handling skills for kids and adults. Slow Race anyone? :)
-
The "problem with BC" comes about because BC doesn't want any other organisation promoting cycling to exist, particularly membership organisations.
It's not unreasonable from either side but it's far more about income generation than advocacy. -
I've done both National Standard training and L2 with BC. I find it easier to engage kids i work with in Go Ride type drills as an alternative to L1. Reason being if i turn the field into an MTB trail for the kids they love it so it's easier to keep them on task.
It's just cones on field instead of cones on tarmac but makes a huge difference!That said, there's so a fair bit of crossover between the 2 and i think both are really good for developing bike handling skills for kids and adults. Slow Race anyone? :)
I'm involved in both too. The difference I find is that the kids who come to Go-Ride are already developing into cyclists and want to improve their riding - quite often to race. It's always going to be easier to engage these kids anyway. Many of the kids who come on the Bikeability training are on a brand new (poorly assembled) bike bought for the occasion and there isn't the time available in the training to properly engage them in the sport. A lot of money is being spent training kids who will never realistically ride on the road and a lot of money is being made by organisations managing to sell this training to LA's and councils as essential for every child. Maybe it will give them an awareness that they will carry through into their adult car driving life and be worth the money?
-
@skydancer - I agree that the biggest limiting factor stopping L2 trained kids actually utilizing their training, is their uneducated parents. Would be good to invite parents to the training sessions. Though I realise many wouldn't be able to make it due to work etc, or just wouldn't want to be shown up by their kids!
Just out of interest (genuinely!), Clwydian and rhb (and anyone else), where have you been involved in Go Ride sessions?
-
@Clwydian"A lot of money is being spent training kids who will never realistically ride on the road and a lot of money is being made by organisations managing to sell this training to LA's and councils as essential for every child."
Im not sure what you regard as " a lot of money", but I can assure you that other than maybe a very few commercial providers there isnt much money being made right now,
and the cull of free flowing funds that has been enjoyed for the last 2 ish years will sort out the wheat from the chaff.In perspective overall provision of this part of schooling still costs peanuts in Governmental spending, that is an argument about priorities.
Additionally, youre comments raise the question of what is essential education for children?
tommorrow I will be delivering 2nd of 3 level 1 control skills sessions to 8 year old kids at a school in Poole, Dorset.
The enjoyment, physical activity and alternative learning they get from it is unique, any teacher worth their salt knows this.@J.C
I started the link between B.C and Sustrans Bike It schools doing Go- Ride in 2008 in Luton, Bedford area.
Has been slower here in Dorset but we have B.C area Coach delivering Go Ride in the area now, and Link to Bike it schools starting early 2011.
any way not at work now Im going back to House Music Thread
p.m me -
@skydancer - I agree that the biggest limiting factor stopping L2 trained kids actually utilizing their training, is their uneducated parents. Would be good to invite parents to the training sessions. Though I realise many wouldn't be able to make it due to work etc, or just wouldn't want to be shown up by their kids!
would be even better to fund adult cycle training / offer doctor bike sessions and maintenance training get adults feeling confident and confortable riding with their children,. They also allow the young peole to ride.
It's a fairly well kept secret but any adult in London can get subsidised training if they so wish and prepared to fill in a monitoring form ...
-
@J.C yeah were all stoked about that, some good news amongst the gloom.
Just to chuck a bit more in the mix, one of the main questions is where does cycling promotion go now? big events like the Skyride make towns look 'with it' cost ya 70k for a day and are full of win for a day (plus officer for a year to boot), but how do you match that against project hands on delivery to lots of individuals and families?
and does marketing cycling really work compared to proper deep investment?
(actually dont sweat that last one...........) -
@JC - Coventry. Similar to *m.f but not the same level of success as local cycling clubs weren't willing to host junior cyclists (Stratford and Solihull are not local enough) so we couldn't establish the club links. Did get about 9 or 10 teachers through onto the ACAT course though so they could run sessions in schools.
Already looking at similar this year in Bury where there's a Cycle Speedway go ride club and so more hope of linking schools to them.
Are you involved in some way also JC?
-
@m.f Yes, I meant commercial providers but probably shouldn't have assumed that everywhere is being run the same way as Wales - where I am.
I agree that cycle training is an excellent activity. That's why I'm involved in Go-Ride and as a club volunteer. It sounds like you get more opportunity to provide progression than I do with the national standard though. Here the emphasis is on getting to L2 in the minimum time. -
you must have seen this? light relief
YouTube - Monkey Dust - Cyclists
skydancer
rpm
cliveo
rhb
tricitybendix
Clwydian
JC-
Post a reply
About
Cheerio Cycling England then
Posted by
You are right about that.