Cycling article in Telegraph.

Discussion in 'UK and Europe' started by Simon Mason, Sep 8, 2004.

  1. Eiron

    Eiron Guest

    JohnB wrote:

    > Eiron wrote:
    >
    >>JohnB wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>95% of the riders who have taken our training over this summer (to the
    >>>National Standards) have said they will cycle more as a result.

    >>
    >>What is the new "National Standard?"

    >
    >
    > It is a comprehensive set of National Standards for Cycle Training and
    > Instruction that have been under development over the last couple of
    > years and introduced this year.
    > They have been created by the CTC with funding from and the support of
    > the Department for Transport and the Department for Health, in
    > cooperation with a wide range of partners including RoSPA, Association
    > of Chief Police Officers, National Cycling Strategy Board, and many others.
    >
    > Almost every aspect of running cycle training is covered, from setting
    > up a scheme to delivering the training and monitoring its effectiveness.
    > They include best practice regarding risk assessments, child protection,
    > customer care, first aid, cycle maintenance, teaching techniques,
    > session planning, insurance and so on.
    > The cycle training covers levels from complete beginner to advanced
    > cycling and is rightly heavily influenced by John Franklin's Cyclecraft.
    >
    > I believe it is one of the most important positive developments to have
    > happened in cycling in recent years and one of the best ways to
    > encourage more people to start cycling or to help them return to
    > cycling.
    > For more information you can contact the CTC at: http://www.ctc.org.uk/
    >
    > John B
    > http://www.hampshirecycletraining.org.uk/


    Thanks.

    Next question, not answered by the above or the CTC website:

    What training does a cyclist get under the new "National Standards?"
    Any information about the tests and qualifications?
     


  2. Jack Ouzzi

    Jack Ouzzi Guest

    On 9 Sep 2004 05:59:10 -0700, [email protected] (Dave Kahn) wrote:

    >"Rich" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<PZL%[email protected]>...
    >
    >> This sounds just like a Travelwise project to me, where residents are given
    >> individual advice about how to make their travel more sustainable. Tried
    >> successfully in many parts of the UK, Australia and NZ ISTR.
    >>
    >> The fact that the Torygraph decided to make a story out of it is indicative
    >> of nothing other than the fact that they were short of a good story or two
    >> for that edition.

    >
    >And of course the £60,000 is for the whole scheme; it's not all for
    >cycle training. The journalist gets the response he wants by asking a
    >dishonest question: "Do you think spending £60,000 on cycle training
    >for 400 households is a good use of public money?"


    Journalist ................... dishonest question ????

    Dave, surely not ............... you have just shattered my illusion
    of this great species ............... ;-)
     
  3. On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 21:24:55 GMT, "Cicero" <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >
    >"Martyn Bolt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]
    >> from the way the original article read the spokesperson isn't a
    >> Councillor but a profesional officer.
    >>
    >> A Councillor attacked the proposal saying people didn't need any help
    >> planning journeys etc.
    >>
    >> That's why they are all stuck in the same traffic jams at teh same
    >> time, because they don't need any help, it's every one stuck in the
    >> jam that needs it.
    >>
    >> Selective interviewing by the paper? Or are all the residents of that
    >> area pensioners?

    >
    >==================
    >Four interviewees - aged 43, 74, 63, 57 - looks like 25% pensioners.
    >
    >Milkinder Jaspal, the council's transport spokesman is actually Councillor
    >Milkinder Jaspal, Labour Cabinet member with responsibility for transport.
    >
    >Given the kind of working patterns of most people it's difficult to envisage
    >any major change in journey plans. People have little choice about the time
    >they travel to work.
    >
    >Cic.
    >


    Most people find it hard to envisage any alternative simply because
    they can't be arsed to try.

    I live in a below average area for public transport and have the most
    chaotic and unpredictable working life yet I've managed perfectly
    without a car for some months now. And saved £2500 into the bargain.

    Yes, it means radical behaviours such as getting on a bus or, by God,
    walking distances of, gosh, half a mile.

    I have no time for people who claim they have no alternative to the
    car. The majority of trips are under 5 miles and most of the
    population *do* have adequate public transport available. Those who
    live out in the deep sticks with long travel times and no PT do so
    entirely because they like that lifestyle.
     
  4. JohnB

    JohnB Guest

    Eiron wrote:
    >
    > JohnB wrote:
    >
    > > Eiron wrote:
    > >
    > >>JohnB wrote:
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>>95% of the riders who have taken our training over this summer (to the
    > >>>National Standards) have said they will cycle more as a result.
    > >>
    > >>What is the new "National Standard?"


    <snip description>

    > Thanks.
    >
    > Next question, not answered by the above or the CTC website:
    >
    > What training does a cyclist get under the new "National Standards?"
    > Any information about the tests and qualifications?


    Coincidentally, I've just loaded a FAQ to my site :)

    I hope you will find an answer to your question (albeit brief).

    John B
    http://www.hampshirecycletraining.org.uk/
     
  5. JohnB

    JohnB Guest

    "[Not Responding]" wrote:
    >
    > Most people find it hard to envisage any alternative simply because
    > they can't be arsed to try.
    >
    > Yes, it means radical behaviours such as getting on a bus or, by God,
    > walking distances of, gosh, half a mile.
    >
    > I have no time for people who claim they have no alternative to the
    > car.


    From last week's Basingstoke Observer:

    "A woman broke down in tears at Basingstoke Magistrate's court after
    learning she was to lose her licence after drinking and driving."
    "Diane Amber was charged with failing to give a breath test and
    resisting arrest after driving the 25 meters she HAD to travel to get home".

    Good she was done. But the incredible thing is that she just *HAD* to
    drive 25metres.
    It really beggars belief.

    FWIW the rest of the report went on:

    "The 45-year-old mother-of-three was stopped on the A340 after leaving
    the Fox and Hounds car park, just a few yards from her home on Wednesday
    August 11."
    Police asked her to give a breath sample but she refused and said 'I'm
    not doing that, I'm going to bed'."
    "She then tried to run away but was restrained by police who pinned her
    to the bonnet of their car and arrested her. The court was told how days
    before her arrest Ambler had been thrown from a horse which had then
    stepped on her head leaving her in need of stitches."
    "When the magistrates told Ambler she would be banned from driving for
    twelve months, fined a total of £150 and ordered to pay £34 court costs
    she broke down in tears."

    I haven't laughed so much for a long time.
    Was the excuse 'I had to drive home coz a horse stepped on my head'?

    John B
     
  6. David Hansen

    David Hansen Guest

    On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 19:54:47 GMT someone who may be JohnB
    <[email protected]> wrote this:-

    >Police asked her to give a breath sample but she refused and said 'I'm
    >not doing that, I'm going to bed'."
    >"She then tried to run away


    So, she was probably capable of walking 25 metres then.

    >The court was told how days
    >before her arrest Ambler had been thrown from a horse which had then
    >stepped on her head leaving her in need of stitches."


    Presumably an attempt to get sympathy.

    Did she have stitches? I though they were out of fashion now.

    >"When the magistrates told Ambler she would be banned from driving for
    >twelve months, fined a total of £150 and ordered to pay £34 court costs
    >she broke down in tears."


    I find it difficult to have any sympathy for this miserable
    specimen.


    --
    David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
    I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
    prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
     
  7. >I find it difficult to have any sympathy for this miserable
    >specimen.


    I have no difficulty at all in having none whatsoever for the whinging fool.

    Cheers, helen s



    --This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
    to get correct one remove fame & fortune
    h*$el*$$e*nd**$o$ts**i*$*$m*m$o*n*[email protected]$*a$o*l.c**$om$

    --Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is switched off--
     
  8. JohnB

    JohnB Guest

    David Hansen wrote:

    > >The court was told how days
    > >before her arrest Ambler had been thrown from a horse which had then
    > >stepped on her head..."

    >
    > Presumably an attempt to get sympathy.


    My estimation of horses' intelligence has gone up immeasurably.

    John B
     
  9. Ian Smith

    Ian Smith Guest

    On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 19:54:47 GMT, JohnB <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Good she was done. But the incredible thing is that she just *HAD* to
    > drive 25metres.
    > It really beggars belief.


    Some time ago we had a article in teh local freebie paper about some
    poor persecuted motorist - apparently, the traffic has got so bad that
    it's now quicker for him to _cycle_ the quarter mile to the newsagent
    every morning rather than drive! Shock! They should do something
    about it, apparently.

    regards, Ian SMith
    --
    |\ /| no .sig
    |o o|
    |/ \|
     
  10. Simon Brooke

    Simon Brooke Guest

    in message <[email protected]>, JohnB ('[email protected]')
    wrote:

    > "[Not Responding]" wrote:
    >>
    >> Most people find it hard to envisage any alternative simply because
    >> they can't be arsed to try.
    >>
    >> Yes, it means radical behaviours such as getting on a bus or, by God,
    >> walking distances of, gosh, half a mile.
    >>
    >> I have no time for people who claim they have no alternative to the
    >> car.

    >
    > From last week's Basingstoke Observer:
    >
    > "A woman broke down in tears at Basingstoke Magistrate's court after
    > learning she was to lose her licence after drinking and driving."
    > "Diane Amber was charged with failing to give a breath test and
    > resisting arrest after driving the 25 meters she HAD to travel to get
    > home".
    >
    > Good she was done. But the incredible thing is that she just *HAD* to
    > drive 25metres.
    > It really beggars belief.


    That is unbelievable. You wander out of the pub - hell, _we_ live more
    than twenty five metres from the pub, it must be all of fifty - you
    know you're a bit the worse for wear, you know walking home will take
    you less long than hunting through your pockets for your ignition keys,
    what do you do?

    Do you:

    (a) walk home, knowing you can pick your car up in the morning? or
    (b) get in the car and drive?

    OK, how many bets that she'll drive down to the pub next week?

    --
    [email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

    ;; how did we conclude that a fucking cartoon mouse is deserving
    ;; of 90+ years of protection, but a cure for cancer, only 14?
    -- user 'Tackhead', in /. discussion of copyright law, 22/05/02
     
  11. Terry D

    Terry D Guest

    DSK wrote:
    > Terry D Wrote:

    <Snip stuff that Terry D wrote, good as it was>
    >>
    >>Terry D

    >
    >
    > Fair point, some people are and would be happy to jump on a cycle and
    > feel OK and ride as though they do have a couple of brain cells. There
    > are also likely to be folks who feel too vunerable and others who
    > wouldn't mind a bit of a helping hand to get started. Those that need
    > a helping hand may as well be offered that help afterall, but it should
    > be optional rather than essential.
    >
    >


    Reading the rather limited selection of statements from members of
    public in the Telegraph article, it would appear that the general public
    are unaware of the fact that they have a problem. For example Doreen
    Eades, 74, said:

    "It sounds like a complete and utter waste of money.
    I cannot think of any adult who needs to be taught how to ride a bike
    properly...."

    If Doreen is representative of the way people in Tettenhall view
    cycling, then no-one in the area is going to volunteer themselves for
    cycling lessons because they feel that they do not require any further
    training.

    If Milkinder Jaspal, the council's transport spokesman, is right when he
    says-

    "I know £60,000 seems like a lot of money, but it will be well worth it.
    ...... cycling officers were a key part of the project and cost
    relatively little to train. .....A lot of people have a perception that
    cycling on the roads is very dangerous, ....A lot of cyclists are not
    aware of the rules of the road and how they've got to behave on the road."

    -then we have to assume that the residents of Tettenhall are no
    different from folks I speak to round Guildford. Many are convinced that
    cycling on roads, in traffic, is just too dangerous to be contemplated.
    Mr Jaspal's problem, I fear, will be persuading his targeted population
    that cycle training can work and roads + traffic are not as dangerous as
    they think. There is also the large group who "would like to start
    cycling to keep fit, but <supply random excuse here>". Would any
    training plan ever reach these people at all?

    --
    Terry Duckmanton.

    http://homepage.ntlworld.com/terry.duckmanton
    A website mostly dedicated to cycling
    http://tduckmanton.bravejournal.com
    A daily log of my cycling exploits
     
  12. Nick Kew

    Nick Kew Guest

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Simon Brooke <[email protected]> writes:

    > That is unbelievable. You wander out of the pub - hell, _we_ live more
    > than twenty five metres from the pub, it must be all of fifty - you
    > know you're a bit the worse for wear, you know walking home will take
    > you less long than hunting through your pockets for your ignition keys,
    > what do you do?


    Hehe. We have three pubs in the village, at distances ranging from
    less than 25m up to maybe a quarter of a mile from the front door.
    But the local *good* pub is three miles across the moors. Since
    the footpath is in parts unsuitable for cycling and pleasanter than
    the road, I sometimes walk to that.

    > (a) walk home, knowing you can pick your car up in the morning? or
    > (b) get in the car and drive?


    B*ggars belief that she drove there in the first place, dunnit?

    Article implied she was a horsey type. So obviously a law-abiding
    citizen and very far from the criminal classes. Why weren't the
    police doing their real job?

    --
    Nick Kew
     
  13. Jack Ouzzi

    Jack Ouzzi Guest

    On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 19:54:47 GMT, JohnB <[email protected]> wrote:

    >"[Not Responding]" wrote:
    >>
    >> Most people find it hard to envisage any alternative simply because
    >> they can't be arsed to try.
    >>
    >> Yes, it means radical behaviours such as getting on a bus or, by God,
    >> walking distances of, gosh, half a mile.
    >>
    >> I have no time for people who claim they have no alternative to the
    >> car.

    >
    >From last week's Basingstoke Observer:
    >
    >"A woman broke down in tears at Basingstoke Magistrate's court after
    >learning she was to lose her licence after drinking and driving."
    >"Diane Amber was charged with failing to give a breath test and
    >resisting arrest after driving the 25 meters she HAD to travel to get home".
    >
    >Good she was done. But the incredible thing is that she just *HAD* to
    >drive 25metres.
    >It really beggars belief.
    >
    >FWIW the rest of the report went on:
    >
    >"The 45-year-old mother-of-three was stopped on the A340 after leaving
    >the Fox and Hounds car park, just a few yards from her home on Wednesday
    >August 11."
    >Police asked her to give a breath sample but she refused and said 'I'm
    >not doing that, I'm going to bed'."
    >"She then tried to run away but was restrained by police who pinned her
    >to the bonnet of their car and arrested her. The court was told how days
    >before her arrest Ambler had been thrown from a horse which had then
    >stepped on her head leaving her in need of stitches."
    >"When the magistrates told Ambler she would be banned from driving for
    >twelve months, fined a total of £150 and ordered to pay £34 court costs
    >she broke down in tears."
    >
    >I haven't laughed so much for a long time.
    >Was the excuse 'I had to drive home coz a horse stepped on my head'?
    >
    >John B


    There may be a couple of things wrong with the reporting in these
    posts .........................

    Case 1 the lady could well appeal, as under law (don't quote me, it's
    very technical) there is a certain distance that has to be driven and
    25 meters would not count. If she was prosecuted for being 'drunk in
    charge' that is another matter.

    Case 2 (and indeed case 1) 'failing' to provide carries a mandatory 18
    month ban (on the premise that if you refuse to provide - you are
    aware that you are over the limit - are you could well be extremely
    over the limit !! - unless of course the 'failing to provide' is for
    medical reasons .............

    I sat for over 10 years as a magistrate, and could write a 'book of
    excuses' of probably volumes ..............

    Were you aware that most motorists that speed at over 100 mph on
    motorways ALWAYS have sick mothers / wives/ children they were rushing
    to see .....

    I resigned from the bench in protest at the appaling state of the
    Criminal Justice System in this country!! Shame really as I considered
    myself one ofthe very few ordinary 'street wise' magistrates who sat
    for the good of the community, rather than the power and status most
    magistrates think it gives them .............
     
  14. Tony W

    Tony W Guest

    "Danny Colyer" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    >
    > Seems like an excellent use of taxpayer's money to me. I think the
    > council spokesman was spot on:


    And the Tory Councillor demonstrated that he is a complete prat.

    A scheme like this has worked exceptionally well in (from memory) Perth,
    Australia -- cutting congestion to the benefit of all road users.

    Typical reaction of the brain dead drivers.

    T
     
  15. Dave Kahn

    Dave Kahn Guest

    [email protected]omcom (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > >I find it difficult to have any sympathy for this miserable
    > >specimen.

    >
    > I have no difficulty at all in having none whatsoever for the whinging fool.


    She should have lived up to her name and ambled home.

    --
    Dave...
     
  16. Dave Kahn

    Dave Kahn Guest

    [email protected]omcom (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > >I find it difficult to have any sympathy for this miserable
    > >specimen.

    >
    > I have no difficulty at all in having none whatsoever for the whinging fool.


    She should have lived up to her name and ambled home.

    --
    Dave...
     
  17. Simon Brooke

    Simon Brooke Guest

    in message <[email protected]>, Jack Ouzzi
    ('[email protected]') wrote:

    > On Thu, 09 Sep 2004 19:54:47 GMT, JohnB <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>"[Not Responding]" wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Most people find it hard to envisage any alternative simply because
    >>> they can't be arsed to try.
    >>>
    >>> Yes, it means radical behaviours such as getting on a bus or, by
    >>> God, walking distances of, gosh, half a mile.
    >>>
    >>> I have no time for people who claim they have no alternative to the
    >>> car.

    >>
    >>From last week's Basingstoke Observer:
    >>
    >>"A woman broke down in tears at Basingstoke Magistrate's court after
    >>learning she was to lose her licence after drinking and driving."
    >>"Diane Amber was charged with failing to give a breath test and
    >>resisting arrest after driving the 25 meters she HAD to travel to get
    >>home".
    >>
    >>Good she was done. But the incredible thing is that she just *HAD* to
    >>drive 25metres.
    >>It really beggars belief.
    >>
    >>FWIW the rest of the report went on:
    >>
    >>"The 45-year-old mother-of-three was stopped on the A340 after leaving
    >>the Fox and Hounds car park, just a few yards from her home on
    >>Wednesday August 11."
    >>Police asked her to give a breath sample but she refused and said 'I'm
    >>not doing that, I'm going to bed'."
    >>"She then tried to run away but was restrained by police who pinned
    >>her to the bonnet of their car and arrested her. The court was told
    >>how days before her arrest Ambler had been thrown from a horse which
    >>had then stepped on her head leaving her in need of stitches."
    >>"When the magistrates told Ambler she would be banned from driving for
    >>twelve months, fined a total of £150 and ordered to pay £34 court
    >>costs she broke down in tears."
    >>
    >>I haven't laughed so much for a long time.
    >>Was the excuse 'I had to drive home coz a horse stepped on my head'?

    >
    > There may be a couple of things wrong with the reporting in these
    > posts .........................
    >
    > Case 1 the lady could well appeal, as under law (don't quote me, it's
    > very technical) there is a certain distance that has to be driven and
    > 25 meters would not count. If she was prosecuted for being 'drunk in
    > charge' that is another matter.


    I _think_ that you are wrong. For a 'drunk in charge' offence I believe
    you don't even have to switch the engine on. Road Traffic Act, 1988,
    chapter 52, paragraph 4, subsection 2:

    4.-(1) A person who, when driving or attempting to drive a motor
    vehicle on a road or other public place, is unfit to drive through
    drink or drugs is guilty of an offence.

    (2) Without prejudice to subsection (1) above, a person who, when in
    charge of a motor vehicle which is on a road or other public place,
    is unfit to drive through drink or drugs is guilty of an offence.

    There would be no need for a subsection 2 if you had to actually drive
    the vehicle, as subsection 1 would cover it.


    --
    [email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

    The trouble with Simon is that he only opens his mouth to change feet.
    ;; of me, by a 'friend'
     
  18. Robert Bruce

    Robert Bruce Guest

    mae <[email protected]> wedi ysgrifennu:

    > (2) Without prejudice to subsection (1) above, a person who, when
    > in charge of a motor vehicle which is on a road or other public
    > place, is unfit to drive through drink or drugs is guilty of an
    > offence.
    >
    > There would be no need for a subsection 2 if you had to actually drive
    > the vehicle, as subsection 1 would cover it.


    I've always wondered whether this means that I'm not allowed to have a
    couple of drinks while using the camper van. Is a campsite a public place?
    What about 'wild camping' on common land? (Though in the latter case I would
    tend not to drink in case we were 'moved on' either by plod or hordes of
    locals with pitchforks and flaming torches).

    --
    Rob

    Please keep conversations in the newsgroup so that all may contribute
    and benefit.
     
  19. Peter Clinch

    Peter Clinch Guest

    Simon Brooke wrote:

    > I _think_ that you are wrong. For a 'drunk in charge' offence I believe
    > you don't even have to switch the engine on. Road Traffic Act, 1988,
    > chapter 52, paragraph 4, subsection 2:


    Someone I know[1] lost his license being sat in his driver's seat with
    no engine going.

    Pete.

    [1] that is I really do know them, and it happened, rather than FOAF
    anecdote.
    --
    Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
    Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
    Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
    net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
     
  20. Mike Quin

    Mike Quin Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, Peter Clinch wrote:

    > Someone I know[1] lost his license being sat in his driver's seat with
    > no engine going.


    Anecdotal, but I've heard it's possible to be considered drunk in charge
    of a vehicle simply by being in possesion of the keys (even if you are
    just sleeping in the back).


    --
    Mike Quin
     
Loading...
Loading...