Well done London! From the Big Ride to the streets where you live: space4cycling WILL make a difference

London Cycling Campaign's staff and hundreds of volunteers should be feeling extremely proud of themselves.  Not only did they present an impeccably organised family friendly "Big Ride" on Saturday pushing politicians to sign up to their space4cycling campaign, they've already procured pre-election promises from Councillors who will have the power to change the streets where you live.

London bathed in gloriously warm sunshine on Saturday, bringing cyclists out on to the streets in their thousands ready to have a good time, to enjoy their capital city, but to present a serious message too.  Whereas Park Lane usually drowns in the roar of motor traffic, the start of the Big Ride resounded to the tinkling of bells, music, chants and Mexican Waves.


The ride snaked past Hyde Park Corner, the Ritz Hotel, Piccadilly Circus, Trafalgar Square and Downing Street before meeting this year's Tweed Run cycling in the opposite direction on Parliament Square.  On Embankment the ride took a good half hour to pass me by as I took photos; estimates on turn out range between 5,000 and 7,500 cyclists and there were countless children there enjoying streets they wouldn't usually be able to ride on.  ITV and BBC news cameras rolled, whilst journalists scribbled from the sidelines.








London Cycling Campaign Chief Executive Ashok Sinha said, “We owe a debt of gratitude to the thousands who joined us today on our Space for Cycling Big Ride, helping to send a powerful message to London's politicians. Our city and borough leaders can be in no doubt as to the hunger there is from ordinary Londoners for streets that are safe and inviting for everyone to cycle."

As a direct result of the space4cycling campaign, all of the Councillors who will be elected in Hackney have pledged to implement the specific cycling demands in their area (which range from building quieter back routes right up to the removal of a gyratory system.)





In a very impressive show of support for cycling, every Green Party local Council candidate has signed up implement space4cycling pledges (840 candidates in 32 London boroughs) and the leader of the Green Party, Natalie Ben, joined the ride.

100% of Labour candidates in Croydon, Hackney, Hammersmith, Fulham, Lambeth and Sutton have signed up, 100% of Lib Dems in Hackney and Southwark, and 100% of Conservatives in Hackney, Bermondsey and Merton.  

Over 75,000 emails have been sent to prospective Councillors, putting the space4cycling agenda firmly in the centre of the battle for votes, with over a third of London's local election candidates agreeing to demands.

These people will be elected meaning there will be pre-election promises to be implemented; promises of slower speeds, safer cycling routes and space4cycling where you live.

Sadly only 0.2% of UKIP candidates have agreed to support the campaign, whilst none of the Christian Alliance Party's candidates have signed up at all.







But on Saturday little could dampen the spirits of the cyclists on the Big Ride.  The scores of children who came along showed who we are campaigning for, whilst a cyclist fatality in Elephant and Castle last week and a serious injury suffered by a cyclist in Shoreditch on Saturday morning itself showed why the message for a safer more liveable city is more important than ever.

It's not too late to add your voice of support: email your candidates here.

Did you enjoy the Big Ride?  The logistics cost the London Cycling Campaign - a charity - a lot of money.  If you had a good time and felt proud to be part of something making a difference on Saturday, please consider making a donation online here.  For the price of a cup of coffee you can help ensure events like this can happen again in the future.

More photos can be found on the London Cycling Campaign website here, as well as the BBC news report here and ITV's touching coverage of the recent death at Elephant and Castle here. Jason's Onion Bag blog has some great photos and snippets of speeches from all of the politicians who spoke at the Finish Line Rally here.  With space4cycling rides taking place across the UK, Bike Biz has the low down on protest rides elsewhere here.

Share |

Let the Mothers ride!

Yesterday was Mother's Day here in the UK, and it got me to thinking about Mums who cycle, and Mums who don't.  There's something about societal pressures which, I think, mean that women who do cycle with their children are still seen as something of a conundrum.  Most people would agree that cycling - and more of it - are a good thing, but there's an association with taking your kid for a ride on the roads; an accusation (in some circles at least) that you are willfully putting your children in danger.  A friend of mine experienced this recently when she was shouted at by a total stranger at traffic lights on a quiet road in Hackney.  As her baby slumbered in the bike seat mounted on her bicycle handlebars, the stranger (a pedestrian) compelled her to literally "think of her children".  Of course, knowing you're in the right and that you're not the source of danger could help to compel you to strike out by bicycle with your children more, but the instant a vehicle comes just a little too close - either through malice or a momentary lapse of attention - all notions of "being in the right" go out the window and you'd be left only with concern for your most precious of cargoes.






Needless to say I'm not a Mum so I wouldn't want to put words in to the mouths of women everywhere, but I imagine if - as a male cyclist - I sometimes feel a bit like a hard-done-by minority on our roads, then it's even harder for women, and Mums in particular.  Indeed, men make up some 79% of the UK's trips by bicycle and one of the first posts on ibikelondon, back on International Women's Day in 2010, asked "What's stopping women from cycling?"

Here in East London we are starting to see more Mums, children and older women on bicycles as bike use grows from being the sole domain of early adopters to a wider proportion of the population.  But Hackney is just one borough in the whole of London (about which all sorts of exotic ideas abound as to why it is a so-called "cycling paradise") - what about the rest of the city, and what about the rest of the UK?  Within the traditional family unit, men are still more likely to be the primary users of cars and stay-at-home Mums are more likely to be car-free during the day.  By rights (and as in the Netherlands and parts of Denmark) our streets should abound with Mums a-wheel - cycling to school, cycling to the shops, or cycling to meet with friends; but the converse is in fact true.  After the rush of morning commuter cyclists have passed, I imagine being a cycling Mum can be a somewhat solitary experience.





We know that road danger and fear of danger is a primary obstacle to more cycling, and when you've got your children (or other people's children!) with you it must certainly be the biggest obstacle.  But not wanting to be the first to be seen to be riding with kids, or on "funny" bicycles (cargo bikes), and not having somewhere to store said bikes, and cost of said bikes must also play a role, and about which much more could be done.

H.G Wells can rest easy; cycle tracks will abound in Utopia if the Mayor and TfL deliver on their bold and exciting ten year cycling strategy.  But it won't be enough to just build cycle tracks on the busiest of roads and make minor roads more accommodating of sharing with cyclists, to stand back when they're finished and hope for the best.  We're going to have to actively encourage people to consider bicycles, and show them that riding a bike can be a viable transport option for them; even if they have two, or three, or more children in tow.  Cargo bike culture will, I think, take even more encouragement.  But encourage we must; an architect friend of mine pointed out the imperative of getting more parents on bikes to me over coffee one day.  He said; "Pity the poor Soccer Mom - she is the ultimate victim of bad design.  Because in suburbia the spaces between A and B are so wide, and the roads between each are so big and fast and full of motorcars, there's no way she'll let her children ride a bike.  Thus, in order to preserve her offspring she is chained to Mum's taxi in order to give her kids the wholesome suburban life she had always dreamed of for them.  Soccer practice, ballet class, after-school club, even play dates at other houses - all must be done by car, with the kids in the back, as the roads grow ever busier, her personal time ever smaller, and all their waistlines wider."

Over the next ten years here in London I think the focus of the boroughs must be not just encouraging commuter cycling and helping TfL to deliver their routes across London, but also thinking about who is moving around their borough during the day, how they are going about these journeys, and how these journeys could be transferred to the bicycle.  It's going to be a lot of work, and will not be an easy task, but the reward for Mums and for families everywhere will be substantial. 

I've met Cycling Super Mums in Taiwan, the Netherlands, France and Denmark - there's nothing about the culture in these countries that make their mothers any less fearless or full of concern for their children than here in the UK.  But where conditions for safe cycling have prevailed, the mothers have followed...






With recent announcements and cycling news we've started, finally, to move in the right direction, but more perseverance than even before is going to be needed to get to a stage where Mums jump on bikes without a second thought (much in the same way that they might jump in to a car, or on a train, or on a bus today).  The pay-off for families would be huge, of course, but the pay-off for the country as a whole would be even bigger.  With all the changes that are going to be needed at borough level, there's going to have to be an investment  not just by TfL and local authorities, but also by local communities.  If you're a mother who baulks at the idea of taking your kids on a bike in the city, or if you're a father who'd never allow your young family to navigate London atop a bicycle then you're going to have to get involved to help bring about this change yourself - the city that I think we'd probably all like to see just won't happen without the involvement and investment of families.  It may be an uphill ride at first, but it really is time to liberate Mums.  And change, just like charity, begins at home.

Update; 11.30AM 11th March.  There's been a flurry of Twitter activity following up on this blog!  DeadDogBlog has written about her exasperation with being a Mum on a bike, proclaiming that she can't win, and CityExile proudly points out how fabulous her Mum looks on her bike, whilst Richard from TransportParadise thinks that Oxford has cracked it.  My experience of Oxford begs to differ, but I'm certainly interested to see what we can learn from the city of dreaming spires.

Share |

From early adopters to everyday and ordinary...

When monitoring trends, sociologists and marketeers like to talk about "early adopters".  They mean the people who first have the courage and the nuance to start a trend, or be the first to be seen to be doing something new or otherwise unusual. 

At the dawn of the motoring age the aristocracy were early adopters of private motor vehicle ownership; paving the way for motorisation for the masses to come later.  In technology, those of you who brought an Apple iPod more than 9 years ago were early adopters of a new way of listening to music, before we all started doing it.




I have no evidence to back me up, and I'm highly aware that the experiences I am about to discuss are limited only to one small corner of Hackney, near to where I live - but around Broadway Market I believe there is a clear pattern of people using bikes passing the "early adopter" stage and moving in to the mainstream.  6 or 7 years ago there were still lots of cyclists around Broadway Market, but they seemed to me to be primarily male, more focused on "gear", or indeed fixed wheel riders.  The fixed wheel "craze" really took off amongst the young art and design creative community in the East End and had a large scene to back it up and help to nurture it (such as specialist shops, bike polo groups etc), and long may it continue.  But as Mikael Colville Anderson of Copenhagenize fame describes in his presentation "Behavioural changes for urban cycling", the fixed wheel craze is sub-cultural (that is to say only appeals to a limited group of people) whereas when something is mainstream ("cultural"?) it appeals to all sorts of different everyday and ordinary people, and indeed is accessible to all.

Now, don't get me wrong, I rather like fixed wheel bikes, and I have no more beef with people who want to tear up the city in a single speed alley cat than I do with someone who wants to pootle to work on a Dutch upright bike.






But I am certain that we've passed the narrow-cast "craze" stage of cycling around Broadway Market and moved on to the "everyday and ordinary".  That is to say, the "sub-cultural" riders would cycle regardless of whether it was a mainstream activity or not, but perhaps the prevalence of "sub-cultural" riders in recent years has helped to encourage others to become early adopters and help to mainstream cycling.  I've talked before about Hackney and how the organic grid of cycle routes and different types of infrastructure have helped to create conditions which are inviting for cycling, but I wonder what the key factor is in helping to make cycling here seem so much more mainstream than elsewhere in London.  Note in my pictures the age range and diversity of the cyclists portrayed.  Note the lack of helmets, high visability gear and cycle-specific clothing.  I have my own ideas as to what I think are driving the move from early adopters to mainstream cyclists in my neighbourhood (regular readers won't be surprised to hear I think that design and planning have a lot to do with it) but what do you think?  Is cycling still a narrow-cast reserve of the few where you are, or, like Broadway Market, is it becoming everyday and ordinary?  If you currently cycle only in cycle-specific gear, helmets and high-vis what would convince you to change to a more leisurely European style of riding? 

As always, I'm keen to hear your thoughts!

Share |

Cycle helmet laws? On your bike, W.I!

If you close your eyes and picture the Women's Institute you'll come up with one of two images; old ladies singing "Jerusalem", making jam and stripping off for calendars, or of one of the UK's largest, most effective and powerful campaigning groups which brings local communities together and has a powerful national voice.

I rather like the WI. My local branch, in Hackney, is famously quite fierce and does some incredible work in the local community. Nationally they work to support local Libraries, legal aid for women, African education projects and bring to bear their not insignificant weight on a whole host of worthy issues.

The WI are currently deciding what to adopt as their campaigns for 2012, and the pro-helmet brain injury charity "Headway" have managed to table a resolution calling for Mandatory Helmet Laws, which has been short-listed.

Does she look like a law breaker to you?

If this is passed the WI will be obligated to lobby our national Government to introduce a national helmet law. Those of you who are well versed in cycle advocacy will already know that it would be disastrous for our fragile state of cycling levels as it is. In Australia, where helmet compulsion has been law since the 1990s, bike riding levels dropped by a third, obesity levels grew and grew (don't believe the Speedo adverts, I've lived in Oz, there's an awful lot of fatness around) and national head injury rates remained the same. That is to say, the introduction of a mandatory helmet law has been worse for public health than allowing informed adults the right to choose.

Now, I'm not saying that helmets are bad. If I was mountain biking on some crazy alpine dirt track at speed and leaping off rocks I'd definitely wear a helmet. If I was training at the velodrome on a brake-less bike, cycling round and round at many miles an hour I'd definitely wear a helmet.

A question of choice...

But out on the streets, where I choose a route that takes me down quiet back streets, where I ride a very sensible bike with excellent brakes, and go at a safe pace I don't want to always have to wear a helmet. And as an adult who is aware that there is no academic consensus as to whether small polystyrene hats designed to only mitigate against impacts brought about from cycling up to 12mph, I want the choice as to whether I should be able to wear a helmet or not.

Resolution 6 currently being considered by the WI is very very poorly thought out, but here's the thing... More men than women ride here in the UK, more adults than older people and more singles than families. The WI are exactly the sort of people who should be looking at the state of cycling in the UK and thinking "Where did we go wrong?". Their members are exactly the sort of people I would love to see having the confidence and the ability to ride every day - that's the sort of thing that keeps me campaigning. So I'm really happy to see  the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain, in collaboration with ibikelondon and the website This Big City, Cyclists in the City of London on this issue; we've written a letter to the WI members asking them to reject the mandatory helmet law motion and encouraging them instead to think about campaigning for the sorts of streets we'd all like to see where equality, safety and access for all are the norm, instead of some far off pipe dream envied from across the North Sea. The full text of our letter is below and we'd love it if you'd join us in signing too and supporting it.

Just click here and add your name!

"Dear Womens Institute"

We are writing to you today with regards to the 2012 proposed resolution (6) which the Women's Institute is current considering regarding bicycle helmet compulsion.


We at the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain welcome the fact that the Women’s Institute is taking an interest in the safety of cyclists. Far too many bicycle riders, young and old, are killed and injured on the UK's roads every year. Many more will never even contemplate something so simple as riding a bicycle - or have tried and given up - through being too scared to mix with heavy and fast traffic on Britain's main roads. We do not believe that the way to remedy this situation, and to increase cyclist's safety, is through compulsory helmet laws.

As is stated in the summary of your resolution in the pros and cons, the focus of the resolution as it stands is currently very narrow and is likely to put people off cycling; something we have already seen happen in Australia and New Zealand. Both countries adopted compulsory bicycle helmet laws in the 1990s and both now see almost a third less cyclists on their roads. Recent research published by the Health Promotion Journal of Australia found that 1 in 5 adults would start cycling, or cycle more, if such laws weren’t in place. In 2008, the New Zealand Transport Safety Minister Harry Duynhoven publicly acknowledged that such laws are putting people off cycling. Urban cycle hire schemes in Melbourne and Brisbane have struggled to find an audience, with Aukland’s equivalent folding after failing to cover its costs. This whilst equivalent schemes in Paris, Barcelona, Montreal, Toronto, Washington DC, Mexico City and London (to name but a few) have seen huge success with hardly any accidents. London’s accident rate is a minute 0.002%. It can be argued that the consequence of a compulsory helmet law is a greater risk to public health than making cycling safer in other ways.

With less people engaging in everyday exercise like cycling, as in Australia and New Zealand, the risk of obesity and the many associated health problems increases. Even if cycle helmets protect against head injuries - and it is imperative that the Women's Institute is made aware that there is no conclusive evidence or academic consensus that they do - compulsory cycle helmet laws bring with them their own negative health repercussions. Obesity cost the NHS an estimated £4.2 billion pounds in England alone in 2007, with the NHS themselves expecting a £50 billion annual cost by 2050 should current trends continue. Any motion which encourages easy, everyday exercise like cycling should be applauded, but there is not one single example of a compulsory helmet law increasing rates of cycling.

We at the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain believe in prevention rather than cure. Cycle helmets do not prevent accidents from occurring the first place and we believe it is more effective to reduce cyclist's exposure to danger rather than try and mitigate against being exposed to it.

Whilst there are opportunities to improve training for cyclists and drivers, too often it is the design of our roads, particularly our junctions, which bring bikes into conflict with larger, heavier vehicles. Many of the high-profile deaths of cyclists, particularly in London, have been women riders who were wearing a helmet, and who were experienced - neither factors which saved them when they got hit by an HGV. We believe that safe areas for people to walk and cycle should be created, particularly in populated areas where people live and go to school or work or the shops. At present approximately 75% of all regular cyclists in the UK are men; we believe that focusing on creating attractive and safe conditions for riding a bicycle have a much larger possibility of enacting positive change within society - most especially for women and families - with all the wider benefits that increased riding will bring (less congestion, less pollution, fitter population etc)

Mandating helmet use for those who are comfortable cycling in our present road conditions, whilst not considering those who would like to cycle but are too afraid is not the way forwards for a safe, successful and equitable society.

A lot of us are able to remember that when we were children, our bikes were our passports to freedom and independence. There is no reason why this cannot be the case for current generations. There are cities and countries who already achieve safe mass cycling rates; we should look to their successful examples rather than countries, like Australia, where mandatory helmet laws have been disastrous. In the Netherlands, children are still free to go to school unaccompanied, on their bikes, on average from the age of eight. That is because their roads and towns are designed to make cycling safe for all ages, from children with stabilisers all the way up to grandparents and great grandparents. The result is civilised streets and happy children. In a 2007 UNICEF study, the Netherlands came top for safest roads and child wellbeing.

The UK came 21st.

Whilst levels of cycling dropped by almost a third in Australia, obesity increased dramatically. Australia now has the fastest growing obesity rates of any developed country, with 1 in 2 people overweight. Additionally, since introducing mandatory cycle helmet laws, neither Australia nor New Zealand has seen a reduction in head injuries beyond the general trend for the population at large.

Traffic safety in the Netherlands is the best in Europe, and obesity is among the lowest of any developed country in the world. We believe that with pragmatic problem solving at the root cause, and hopefully a bit of imagination, the UK could achieve the same.

The Cycling Embassy of Great Britain is a newly formed organisation campaigning for just that. We'd be thrilled to have the WI on our side on this. Your resolution shows that you've the interests of cyclists and their safety at heart but we hope that you'll be able to think wider than just helmets and training to infrastructure based on the Netherlands model that has had proven success giving freedom of movement and empowerment to all. We'd be delighted to give you more information, or come and talk to your groups in person about the wider issues at stake. Above all, we would be honoured for you to join us in a proper cycling revolution

This letter is from the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain. It comes to you with the support of the campaigning group Cyclists in the City of London and the websites This Big City and ibikelondon. The undersigned call on the Women's Institute to reject Resolution 6 calling for compulsory helmet laws and to focus instead on creating conditions in which all members of society will feel safe and comfortable riding a bicycle

The undersigned call on the Women's Institute to reject Resolution 6 calling for compulsory helmet laws and to focus instead on creating conditions in which all members of society will feel safe and comfortable riding a bicycle:"


Share |

City cycle style? Can't it be like this everyday please?

Last Friday the City of London's historic Smithfield meat market played host to the first City Cycle Style event.  Bike manufacturers, cycle clothing designers and chic cyclists united to put on a new kind of cycle trade show, combining music, food, fashion and fun. 

There were glamorous girls kicking back in cargo bikes from Velorution, hot young guys on tricked out bikes looking dapper in spats.  The latest on offer from those fleuro-weavers Dashing Tweeds graced the catwalk as did some nice-but-a-bit-expensive panniers from Michaud.  A great range of town bikes suitable for city exploring were on view; Viva made a great impression, whilst Moulton showed off two of their very latest designs, with the stripped-down belt-driven TSR-2 especially popular with those taking test rides after the event.  All set against the iconic/ironic back drop of a couple of gleaming red London buses parked under the beautifully lit Smithfield market hall roof.

I've written before how cycling in the UK has a major PR problem surrounding the wider public's perception of people who choose to get about by two wheels.  The vast majority of people who don't choose to cycle just can't see themselves riding because they don't subscribe to the current dominant image of cyclists; that 'Lance Armstrong look'.  Perhaps events like last Friday's can go some way towards showing that you don't necessarily have to armour up in lycra, day-glow and helmets in order just to ride a bike to the shops and back.

Mikael Colville-Andersen, of Copenhagen Cycle Chic would probably be quite perplexed by there even being the need to hold such a show.  He is as equally dismissive of those who would try to set cycling's stall out as purely the reserve of sports riders as he is of people who seek to sell you 'urban cycling clothing'.  His thinking (from this blog post) is quite clear on the subject; "You have a closet filled with clothes, don't you? If you're walking about town, you'll wear them. You have clothes for hot weather and clothes for cold weather. Whatever clothes you wear as a pedestrian are suitable for riding a bicycle. You KNOW this. You were young once. You did it then....  ..If you want to ride a bicycle to work or the supermarket over short distances, you do not need 'gear'. Just open your closet."

David Hembrow, from A View from the Cycle Path, takes a different view.  Commenting on a previous post of mine about 'What's stopping women from cycling', he explained that he thinks 'cycle chic' (if you want to call normal, everyday and ordinary utilitarian cycling that) comes not from a desire by cyclists to be stylish but as a consequence of cyclists no longer being under stress.  "The hats and hi-vis come from the conditions. They're a symptom of cyclists under stress. Once cycling becomes subjectively safer, these things disappear. I don't think you can force it."  He writes eloquently on his blog what he thinks the steps are that the authorities ought to be taking to make cycling a less stressful and subjectively safe activity for all: it starts, of course, with providing top class decent cycling infrastructure everywhere, and then building on that.

Me?  I take a view somewhere in the middle.  There's no doubt that there is a sense that the bourgeois are early adopters of 'chic cycling' here in the UK.  But the idea that it somehow costs money and you have to buy another form of expensive gear to subscribe to everyday and ordinary cycling doesn't sit easily with me either. In the same breath there is no doubt that the wider public view of cycling as being a physical, sporty activity is unhelpful and events like Friday's can help to dispel that view.  All in all, Friday night's bikes and fashion show was a great showcase of the potential and opportunity that lies in cycling in the urban environment and shows that perhaps, one day, the streets of London could be filled with effortlessly cool cyclists just like Copenhagen.  Part of that will come from how people choose to present themselves as cyclists, much more will come from 'non-cyclists' taking up riding as a consequence of how our roads provide for those who do so.  Perhaps events like Friday's can be a useful stepping stone towards that path?

Share |

Cycling video round-up

The world's cycle blogs have been awash with fantastic cycle advocacy films recently, so I thought I'd post a little round-up of some of the best and most interesting:

London Critical Mass:

Regular visitors to the blog will know that the last Critical Mass in London was something special, with over 600 riders visiting the sites of the three cyclists killed by HGVs so far this year.  The London Cycling Campaign was there and put together this great little video documenting what happened:

...and in the same vein, if cyclists need a timely reminder of how we ought to protect ourselves as best we can with the way in which we ride, we could all do a lot worse than watch this short but frankly terrifying clip:

(Link from the ever-fabulous City Cycling)

From Dublin to Amsterdam via London:

I first spotted this video at Amsterdamize.  Dublin City Council sent their cycling officer Ciaron Fallon on a whirlwind tour of London and Amsterdam to see what measures were working in encouraging cycling and what more can be done to encourage the same in Dublin.  It's a great video, and what's more you might well spot some very familiar faces as he cycles around Hackney...


Beauty and the Bike: What happened next?

And so to the EXCELLENT Beauty and the Bike project from Darlington Media Campaign; after lending some lovely Ducth-style bikes to a group of girls in Darlington and asking 'why don't girls cycle in the UK', they made a film about the girl's experiences last year.  This short video follows up on the project and asks 'what happened next'? (video spotted on David Hembrow's superb blog A View From the Cycle Path)

What's stopping women from cycling?

To mark International Women's Day I joined the London Cycle Campaign's led ride around London in glorious sunshine over the weekend, and questioned why is it that on a national level 79% of all bicycle journeys are made by men.  What's stopping women from cycling?

What's stopping women from cycling? from ibikelondon on Vimeo.

This is my first attempt at making a blog entry by video - I apologise now for the shakey camera work!  Please do let me know what you think of the video, and also, what do you think can be done to bring about rider equality?

Topshop girls ride again!

That megalithic cavern of fast fashion for bright young things, Topshop, is a real friend of the bicycle it seems.

Last year they famously hosted a concession stand for young designer Amy Fleuriot, founder and designer of Cyclodelic; a London clothing and accessories label that creates striking designs for women who don't want to forfeit fashion over function when arriving by bike.  (Hint: there's no lycra here!)

Now, timed to co-incide with London Fashion Week, Topshop have launched their latest in-store spring display with a host of beautiful bicycles accompanying their models.

When passing through on Satuday I asked a staff member about the bikes - what, I wondered, was the purpose of it all?

"We just wanted some pretty bikes to go with the pretty clothes, that might make our young customers consider the bicycle without, you know, having to think they have to wear the weird stuff." she said.

Well, indeed.

There's a great inequality in cycling between the sexes here in the UK; men dominate, making up 76% of trips.  Sadly it would seem that a lot of girls give up pedal power when they reach their teenage years, and never get back on.  The Darlington Media Campaign took a group of 'non-cycling English girls' and packed them off to Bremen to try and rehabilitate the bicycle into their lives.  The results make for an astonishing film, the short version of which is below.  If you haven't seen it already I HIGHLY reccomend you do. 

I like to think that with projects like this, and with the likes of the mighty Topshop promoting cycling positively to girls, things might just improve...

Cycling's PR problem, and its serious consequences

Cycling in the UK has a serious problem, and it’s one that’s not going to go away unless it is addressed head-on. Until then there can be no mass cycling in this country, no Mums and Grans on bicycles, no utopian dream of Amsterdam-like streets with the majority gliding down it on two wheels, not four. The problem?

Image.

The majority of people in the UK just can’t imagine themselves using a bicycle on an everyday basis. The humble bicycle has become so ‘alien’ and ‘other’ that it is now the reserve purely of special interest and leisure groups. Using a bike to "go for a ride" on a Sunday afternoon with the kids is seen as just fine here (indeed a significant majority of the UK population own bicycles and do use them for this purpose), but as a practical means of transport for everyday and ordinary use? For most this is almost unimaginable. Once upon a time there were over a BILLION cycle journeys in the UK every year – now the number has fallen so low that the cyclists we see on our roads are a tiny minority. As a modal share of all journeys, bicycles have dropped to just 1% of all traffic.

Minorities are often the victims of prejudice, and prejudice is often without grounds. But the power of prejudice is a strong thing when at work and should not be underestimated. Outside of the UK’s major urban centres, people who choose to cycle instead of drive a car are seen as quirky, or poor – labels that not many people want to associate themselves with.  Racing or long-distance cyclists – the very people who have kept the cycling flame alight in this country during the bike’s lowest ebb – are seen as diet-obsessed, lycra-clad racing machines; so utterly ‘other’ that more ordinary mortals just can’t see themselves doing the same thing. And who wants to use a mode of transport where you have to dress up in funny body-hugging clothes when you can climb into your car in comfort? And sub-cultural groups of cyclists don’t always do themselves any favours either. Have you ever heard racing cyclists talking about their bikes together? It’s all top tubes and bottom brackets and campagnola and derailleurs – great fun if you’re into that kind of thing but total gobbledegook to your Average Joe. Sadly, as these few cyclists are the majority of the minority remaining, the cycle industry markets it’s products to them (as I’ve discussed here before) meaning the public face of cycling is ever more strange which in turn will lead to fewer people taking up their bikes as an everyday means of transport. No one ever watched the Tour de France scratch its way to the top of the Alps in a peloton of glistening lycra and thought "That looks like a normal way of getting to work."

Special interest cycling (racing, mountain biking, BMXing etc) is great, and a source of fun, fitness and pride to many people, but these are ultimately sub-divisions of the same minority. If the cyclists of the UK really want to see mass cycling levels something serious needs to change. The City of Copenhagen is currently aiming to have 50% of all its commuters cycling to work within the next 5 years. London is aiming for just 5%. London’s cyclists – though growing in number every day – are not seen in a positive light by many of London’s other road users. Again, the same prejudice-based principals are holding the majority back from seeing themselves as potentially joining the minority. Outside of cycling communities, London’s riders are seen as a new danger on our roads; pavement riders, red light jumpers, a nuisance or even an outright danger. Worse still we are perceived to be anarchic, untaxed and using roads to which we have no financial entitlement, as a selection of recent comment’s on London’s Evening Standard newspaper testify:

“And what is a cyclist anyway? The old man on his bike, the gang of hoodies on theirs, the Lycra-clad aggressive health freak!!! Cyclists are like cancer cells in the blood stream of life. They pay no dues and suck of others.”
- Kev, London, UK

“Selfish pigs like you [cyclists] clearly show that you have no more respect for more vulnerable pedestrians than litter”
- Jack, Highgate

“...it’s time these self-righteous, sanctimonious law breakers were brought under control...”
- John Bull, London

“They are a menace on the pavements, and I for one refuse to move out the way for them, they are scum nothing more, nothing less.”
- P Staker, London

“Cyclists: dangerous, selfish, arrogant, self absorbed, stupid, ill mannered, nasty heinous creatures.”
- Anticyclist, London

“Shame on you and all the other sweaty, 2-wheeled scum!”
- Sonia Esquilant, Maidenhead, Berkshire, UK.

People follow examples set to them, and we have all been duped into thinking we need the special gear, the funny clothes, the flashy vests, to go about our cycling way – we’ve followed the example of those few cyclists who were left in the first place. And in doing so we are differentiating ourselves from everyday and ordinary people even further and making ourselves into a minority. Even though we all know that cycling has comparable safety rates to being a pedestrian, the hostile road environment doesn’t encourage us to hedge our bets – so we wear our high-vis jackets and fluro vests just in case. A Monday morning commuter stuck behind the wheel of his car in traffic doesn’t see a person peddling by but a strange lycra-clad backside, and quietly seethes inside. Meanwhile, the middle-aged woman at the bus stop seeing us flash past in all our high-viz glory assumes that because cyclists wear all this technical safety gear, cycling itself must be dangerous, and is therefore not something for her. Pedestrians hurrying to work step out from between cars and into the road assuming that their passage is safe because they don’t hear the approach of an engine. A cyclist swerves to avoid them and rushes by at close quarters. The pedestrian – who just isn’t used to looking for people on bikes in the road – curses and accuses us of being maniacs on the road. How many "I was nearly hit by a cyclist!" stories have you heard in comparison to "I stepped into the path of an oncoming cyclist without looking"? There just aren’t enough ordinary people on bikes out there to make it worth the raising of awareness worthwhile.  It becomes the very few us, and the very many them.

If we want mass cycling in this country (and I am making an assumption here that the likes of the CTC and the LCC actually do) it’s up to us to break down the prejudices we face and show ourselves to be everyday and ordinary people. Racing bikes and fancy team strips are just fine if you’re cycling mile after mile, but there’s just no need if you are making a short hop by bike. Remember that 60% of the UK’s car journeys are under 5 miles – there’s no reason why the majority of these trips couldn’t be done in ordinary clothes on an ordinary comfortable bicycle, if only that 60% could actually imagine themselves doing so, and thought that our roads were a safe enough environment to do so. The Dutch and the Danes manage it, why can’t we? As cyclists we all know that the majority of cyclists aren’t really Lance Armstrong wannabes, and nor do we cycle in a reckless or dangerous manner. But it’s the greater public’s perception that counts. The perception of what it means to be ‘a cyclist’, the perception of how safe the roads are, and the perception of the bicycle either as a means of getting from A to B in an ordinary way, or as a quirky, specialist, enthusiast’s machine. No one would dare call us a ‘menace’, ‘heinous’ or ‘scum’ if they thought that they were talking about people like themselves.

There needs to be a little more ‘cyclist pride’ – showing ourselves to be just like the sort of people who we want to consider taking up cycling, as well as explaining the benefits of our existence to other road users (it’s either us on bikes, or an extra 2420 kilometres of nose to bumper cars on London’s roads). Maybe this would bring about the level of cyclists needed on our roads for the vehicular environment to change in our favour. Until then this country will continue to turn out badly-designed token-effort ‘for minorities’ cycle lanes like this, and prejudice and stereotypes about cyclists in our press and public conscience like this.  Who here thinks they are a member of "the cult of cycling", as opposed to just, you know, getting around town?

Know your enemies, know your limits: cyclists and HGVs in London

Cycling in London is not a dangerous activity. Contrary to popular belief not all drivers are trying to run us off the road, and not all cyclists are jumping red lights, mowing down pedestrians and flicking the finger at driver. As I’ve discussed here before, cycling is as safe as walking in Central London – I came to this conclusion using data that the media was using to portray riding a bike as being akin to chewing depleted plutonium...

But , as in everything in life, there are dangers involved in cycling, and we should do our best to address the source of these dangers and limit our exposure to risk – especially if that risk is avoidable. In my opinion, the biggest threat we face on the road are not car drivers but Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs). In 2004 twenty two cyclists were killed in the UK in collisions with HGVs. Last year alone in London, of the 13 cyclists who died on our roads nine were killed by HGVs – of those nine, eight were women. In total, HGVs account for about 45% of all London cyclist’s death, but account for just 5% of traffic. The British Medical Journal, in their 1994 paper ‘Death of Cyclists in London’ said “the risk of heavy goods vehicles being involved in accidents in which cyclists die in inner London can be estimated at five times that of buses, 14 times that of light goods vehicles, and 30 times that of cars.” Clearly, this is not acceptable. Cyclists; know your enemies.

I thought it was common knowledge amongst all London cyclists that to ride down the inside of an HGV (or a large truck or bus for that matter) is an invitation for disaster, but last week alone I saw two cyclists doing just that. Cyclists are vocal and organised in calling for their full rights on the road, and the first to point out poor driving by others - and rightly so - and yet as the stakeholders who will always invariably come off worse in any road traffic accident, we must be pro-active in recognising that our own behaviour is the first line of defence we have with which to protect ourselves. Cyclists; know your limits.

We can spend thousands of pounds on driver training and complementary safety measures on our roads, but if cyclists put themselves willingly in positions of danger, there’s very little that anyone can do about it. We need to look out for ourselves, before we ask others to look out for us.

This video from the Metropolitan Police, was produced in association with Transport for London as part of their ‘Exchanging Places’ program which gave cyclists the opportunity to sit in an articulated lorry cab and see the driver’s point of view.  Whilst a little dry, I think this video is excellent in demonstrating what the lorry driver can't see – it’s worth noting that the lorry used in the film has every conceivable type of mirror attached – far more than many HGVs (especially those operated by smaller operators) actually do.

Of course, I am absolutely against any idea of blaming the victim – many of the cyclists who have died as a consequence of HGV collisions have been accomplished cyclists acting within the law or following the cycle paths put down on the road for them (many left curb approaches to Advanced Stop Lines encourage riders to go up the inside of traffic to reach the traffic lights). Indeed, 7 London cycle couriers have died as a consequence of collisions with HGVs and lorries and it’s arguable that they are the most knowledgeable cyclists on our roads. Not all HGVs have as many mirrors fitted as the truck in the film. Even if they did there is no guarantee that the driver is looking in those mirrors as you pass by. The simple fact is this; cyclists and large vehicles sharing the same piece of road is a source of conflict – sometimes with awful consequences.

Meryem Ozekman was 37 when she was crushed to death by a lorry on the Elephant and Castle roundabout in 2009.

There is a growing awareness of this problem amongst the authorities and some measures are being brought in to try and combat the issue – there will soon be a trial allowing cyclists to turn left on red lights, thus allowing them to get ahead of the danger posed at junctions, and new trixi mirrors will be installed at junctions along the London Cycle Superhighways, allowing large vehicles to see fully down the side of their vehicles. But more can, and must, be done.

If large vehicles are going to be allowed into city centres where a large volume of pedestrians and cyclists are inevitable, standards for HGV drivers and the state of their vehicles must be improved.

The Met Police Commercial Vehicle Education Unit was set up to tackle shoddy safety standards amongst hauliers – of the 3000+ lorries it has pulled over and assessed on London’s roads since 2005, a massive 70% have been found to have illegal defects. Sadly, our Mayor Boris Johnson is scrapping this scheme – it’s duties will apparently be absorbed by the traffic Police (whose numbers have also been cut by 20% in recent years) and covered by a voluntary traffic safety scheme that hauliers are under no obligation to join. This is the same Mayor who was almost taken out whilst cycling by a truck whose rear doors were held shut with a wire coat hanger...

More must be done at higher levels to incentivise haulage firms to prioritise safety over the speed of their next delivery. The Crown Prosecution Service must bring the highest charges if a driver is proven to be at fault, unlike in the case of cyclist Anthony Maynard, who was run over from behind in 2008 by a van driver who claimed in his defence that he didn't see Anthony cycling – this was excuse enough for no charges to be brought against the driver. More recently, the tragic death of 30 year old Eilidh Cairns has made the headlines; she was crushed to death on a road that the inquest into her death deemed too narrow to pass on. The inquest also found that if the driver had adjusted his mirrors correctly, he would have been able to see Eilidh clearly. The point in the road at which the accident happened was just 2 metres wide – the driver’s vehicle was 2.5 metres, raising the question of why he was on that particular road in the first place. A verdict of accidental death was delivered.

Ms Cairns's sister Kate said “The one thing we didn't want was an accidental verdict. We agree it was not intentional but we believed it was avoidable. People in power act as though these accidents just unfortunately happen to female cyclists and people have to deal with it. There is a huge problem with female cyclists being on the streets of London with HGVs and politicians are not doing enough to address that.

“These cyclists are not soldiers going into battle. They are just women going to work and nobody is doing anything to stop this needless slaughter.”

Eilidh’s family and friends have been instrumental in increasing awareness of the issues surrounding HGVs on our streets – they have been able to have an Early Day Motion tabled in Parliament calling for MPs to consider the law as it currently stands and what could be done in the future to stop the deaths: an essential first step in having this vital issue discussed at a higher level. At present 47 Members for Parliament support it, but it needs more signatures - write to your MP using an easy online form here and ensure they are fully aware of how important this issue is and ask them to add their support to EDM 600, which can be found here.

Last word goes to Kate Cairns, Eilid’s sister: ”We need to address the source of the danger. Policies of protection are not enough. I think we should be considering future lorry design, how compatible they are with our streets and the way the fleets are managed. By supporting this EDM MPs are working towards finding a real solution. It makes sense when all benefits are taken into account”

If you are a London cyclist and have ever wobbled slightly as the enormous wheels of an HGV pass you by, my advice to you would be two things: help protect others by urging your MP to support this motion, and help yourself by staying back in the traffic at junctions when there is a lorry ahead of you – no one is ever in that much of a rush that they need put themselves in unnecessary danger.

Girls on film, and who hates bike chic?

I'm a big fan of the range of cycle chic blogs out there, the most popular of which must be Copenhagen Cycle Chic - not because they make cycling look 'cool' or 'fashionable' but because they make it normal and mainstream again and not the reserve of the sports cyclists (that is to say, cycling as a viable transport alternative as oppose to being just a sport)

All of the websites (Change Your Life, Ride a Bike is also fabulous) show that anyone can ride a bike in any way they like, women included.

One of the key findings of a recent Local Government Information Unit report found that "Women in particular were highlighted as seeing cycling as something that cannot be done as part of a normal day without time for hair styling and a change of clothing.  [But] cycling does not have to be unconventional."

Matching bag & mud guards, Paris

So I was surprised as the next (wo)man to see a cycling blog recently with the title "Bike chic; I hate it".  The post (written by a female cyclist) essentially says that unless you are cycling dressed head to toe in lycra, wrap-around shades and a helmet not only are you throwing all the efforts of feminism out of the window you are also stupid and dangerous because "it is unsafe to bike in high heels".  Now I can't speak from personal experience here but I think you are just as safe cycling in an urban environment in high heels as you are, say, in a pair of running shoes.  What's more, the idea that you are unsafe for not wearing sporting cycling gear is an absolute nonsense, and these ladies from 1899 prove it (and don't they look fabulous as they weave in and out of the traffic cones in unison?)



Cycling being perceived as a normal, everyday and ordinary way of getting around town for all?  Long may it continue!