No, honestly. He doesn’t just hate me – Nigel Havers REALLY hates me. He doesn’t know me from a bar of soap, but because I ride a bike he seems to know a lot about my character. And he doesn’t like me at all. Because I’m not a Cambridge undergraduate “languidly journeying through the narrow streets of the town with [my] scarves flapping in the wind” or an old maid, as conjured up by George Orwell, “cycling through the mist on [my] way to Communion”.

On Tuesday he was given an op-ed slot in London’s Daily Mail and he let fly, saying that he’s “heartily sick of the lot” of us cyclists.

And why?

Because we’re aggressive and arrogant:

Brimming with hostility, utterly indifferent to those around them, they appear to think they are above the law.

Oh yeah, and we’re all incurable outlaws who ignore red lights, ride on pavements, and go the wrong way down one-way streets.

Not green, cyan

And we’re all mock-greenies, aren’t we? I mean, take David Cameron as an example:

The emptiness of cycling’s green credentials is beautifully symbolised by Tory leader David Cameron’s habit of going to the Commons on two wheels, while his official limousine follows sedately behind, bearing his shoes and briefing papers.

I wasn’t aware that David Cameron has ever been held up as an example of good green cycling. Quite the reverse, I would have thought – “breathtaking hypocrisy” are hardly words of overwhelming endorsement.

Talk about a straw-man argument.

Pomposity and selfishness

Pomposity and selfishness runs through everything committed cyclists do.

But of course these aren’t traits of the English titled classes, are they The Honorable Mr Havers?

I’ve got nothing against gays cyclists

I am not against cycling per se. In fact, I used to cycle myself and still possess a bicycle.

Gee, I sure I’ve heard this sort of argument before, something like: “I am not against homosexuality per se. In fact, the prefects used to bugger me brainless at school and some of my best friends are gay.”

But I always made sure that I obeyed the rules of the road.

Oh sure, Nige. And you never use a mobile phone while driving either.

Exhumation

Unlike motorists, who individually pay hundreds, even thousands, of pounds a year in road tax and petrol duty, sustaining the upkeep of the network, cyclists get free use of our streets.

I can’t believe he’s exhuming this argument yet again. Once and for all Nigel – road tax, petrol tax, car registration, and license fees DO NOT cover the cost of “upkeep of the network”. I can forgive you once for being ill-informed, but to keep flogging away at this one shows that you are stupid as well as ignorant.

Inciting stuff

Just as aggravating is the way cyclists treat the pavement as an extension of the road. As I have discovered to my personal cost, if you remonstrate with them, you receive is a volley of abuse.

To remonstrate suggests that ol’ Nige may not have been exactly “genteel” himself.

At such moments, I have longed to have a stick to jam between the spokes of their wheels and bring them to a deservedly painful halt.

Oh nice one! Even if his high-pitched carping were justified, inciting violence is not really the answer. What was that again about “Gentility and modesty have been replaced by aggression and arrogance”? (Pot, meet kettle.)

Or how about endorsing the vandalisation of bicycles:

Once, at the National Theatre, I had to share a dressing room with another actor who insisted on bringing in his bicycle.

The space was already cramped enough, and there was a perfectly good cycle rack outside. But this tiresome creature had to wheel in his machine every day, claiming it would not be safe anywhere else. As I struggled to get ready, I often felt like putting a knife through the tyres.

Oh the irony. Sounds like this bloke’s bike was barely safe inside either.

Above the law?

So many of them refuse to put lights on their bikes, again implying that they are above the law

Ah, no. Not above the law – just stupid. And in the end, only threatening their own health and safety.

The good ol’ days

When a cyclist bangs on the roof of my car or scrapes my mirror without even bothering to apolo-gise, I sometimes wish for the good old days of Edwardian England, when young men would be sent to jail for swearing in the streets, causing a danger to the public or cycling without a light.

It was probably a calmer, saner world then, not one when you feared for a broken limb every time a two-wheeled monster came into view.

And while we’re at it, let’s bring back public floggings.

Cycling has-been?

Cyclists have certainly changed in recent years. They think the rest of us are idiots and that they are the gods of the road.

I wonder how long it’s been since bike has-been Nigel has got about on the bicycle that he still owns? Maybe he should reacquaint himself with his two-wheeler before he presumes to unload his bilge again – I, for one, have never ever felt like a “god of the road” when driving in traffic.

And I certainly don’t think all non-cyclists are idiots. But I’ll make a special exception for Nigel.

[via Bike Biz]

The Devine Ms Miranda is at it again. She put together a hilarious bike-bashing op-ed piece in the SMH today: “Traffic hazard ahead: vegan cyclists”.

Laugh? I nearly pissed myself. There are so many things wrong with this little screed that it’s hardly worth the effort to take it apart. Of course, Sydneysiders pedaller, Spinopsys, and lelak have already been over it as has Melbourne’s cfsmtb but I won’t let that stop me sticking my cleat in.

Skipping over the Sydney-specific stuff (about which I know little or nothing), we come to…

Amsterdam?

Thanks to Scully and an influential, pious and often militant bicycle lobby, the idea that Sydney will one day be like a large Amsterdam, with everyone riding to work in shrink-wrapped lycra, took vigorous hold, rather than being mocked as the joke it is.

Umm, has Miranda any idea what cycling actually looks like in Amsterdam? Lycra does not feature prominently (if at all). Ignorant mixed-up imagery, but not necessarily wrong – just obviously intended to be negative.

Too much, too many

Sydney has too many hills, too many narrow streets, too much traffic, too many buses, is too spread out and too hot and humid, to make riding a pushbike to work feasible for more than a handful of people.

Hills a problem? Maybe. I don’t really know much about it but Sydney is hardly in the Himalayan foothills.

But “too many narrow streets, too much traffic, too many buses” – sounds like cycling is an ideal solution to me: more cyclists and fewer cars leads to better road conditions for everyone.

And Sydney is “too spread out”, eh? This is a bit disingenuous, trying to create the impression that Sydney is full of super-commuters who have to drive from Penrith into the CBD, when in fact data from the NSW Department of Planning shows that relatively few people do that sort of thing (people who commute longer distances, especially into the CBD, tend to use public transport). Furthermore, the average distance of car commutes to the employment centres of the Sydney CBD, North Sydney, Parramatta, Penrith, and Liverpool range from 12km to 18km – that is not a difficult commuting distance for anyone with an average level of fitness.

So, to heat and humidity – let’s go to some data from the Bureau of Meterology. I’ll compare to Melbourne because I can state from personal experience that it is neither too hot nor too humid for cycle commuting here.

Mean Daily Maximum Temperature (°C)

Mean 9am Relative Humidity (%)

Mean 3pm Relative Humidity (%)

So it gets hot and humid in summer in Australia. Big deal. If there’s a problem it’s not with climate, it’s with lack of end-of-trip facilities.

Flat and boring

Bikes need to stay in flat, boring places like Canberra where nothing much happens and a laid-back public service work culture rules.

Colourful and emotive prose, but it really says more about Miranda and her Sydney-centric prejudices than anything meaningful about cycling.

The greening of the RTA

But the Roads and Traffic Authority, which was also heavily influenced by Scully as transport minister, has gone from a practical and effective organisation run by engineers to a demoralised, leaderless rabble infiltrated by green activists.

Hogwash. From the RTA “About Us” page:

The RTA manages 17,623 km of State Roads including 3105 km of National Highways. This includes facilities such as traffic lights, roundabouts, signs and linemarking. It also manages nearly 3000 km of Regional Roads and Local Roads in the unincorporated area of NSW where there are no Local Councils. It provides financial assistance to local councils to manage 18,497 km of Regional Roads and, to a limited extent, Local Roads, through funding and other support.

Other areas of RTA interest include 4787 bridges, major culverts and tunnels and nine vehicular ferries.

If that’s not an engineer-oriented organisation speaking, I’ll eat my helmet.

Back to Miranda:

Instead of concentrating on building safe roads to move the most cars in the most efficient way around our city, thus reducing pollution, petrol waste, gridlock and frustration, the RTA’s mantra has become “The Road is there to Share” – with the rights of cyclists, pedestrians and koalas deemed at least equal to those of motorists.

Ah, I see she’s applying a bit of Duffy-think there: moving as many cars as possible is a recipe for “reducing pollution, petrol waste, gridlock and frustration”. Yep, her mate Michael couldn’t have put it more absurdly.

And yes, the road IS there to share. Cyclists and pedestrians do have “at least equal” rights to motorists, actually exactly equal rights – no more, no less. But I personally can’t speak for koalas.

Mission impossible (to find)

The RTA website describes its “mission” as “delivery of the best transport outcomes balancing the needs of public transport passengers, cyclists, pedestrians …”, with motorists and “commercial operators” last on the list.

I had a bit of trouble tracking down this mission statement. In fact, the RTA web site does not feature a mission statemet at all (the closest you get is their “About Us” page). It’s actually not on the RTA web site per se, it’s in a 2002 Annual Report that you can find on the RTA web site (if you look hard enough). Hardly a current statement of the RTA’s priorities. And hardly the smoking gun.

Ex-general manager

The RTA even had a General Manager, Bicycles and Pedestrians, until Michael Costa abolished the position when he was briefly roads minister after Scully.

You’d have thought Miranda would be happy that this position has been abolished, but she uses it as further evidence of the RTA’s lack of concern for motorists. How twisted is that line of thinking?

Incidentally, why shouldn’t there be a “General Manager, Bicycles and Pedestrians”? Don’t these people use the roads? If Miranda had her way, no.

Cash cow?

Tougher penalties, lower speed limits, more traffic lights, red light cameras, speed cameras and double demerit point periods all conspire to enrage the most placid driver.

The “most placid driver” won’t be enraged at all – they won’t infringe the road rules so none of this will trouble them.

The result of this warm and fuzzy road-sharing philosophy is that driving in Sydney is now like negotiating a minefield.

She ought to try cycling in traffic for a real — rather than a figurative — “minefield” experience. You know, the sort of experience where losing a limb is a real possibility.

Newly entitled?

Newly entitled pedestrians and cyclists, and their emboldened lobbyists, behave increasingly arrogantly. Pedestrians wander across roads with iPods and mobile phones stuck to their ears, oblivious to the physics of car braking. They expect instant obedience from motorists at zebra crossings, stepping off footpaths as if cocooned by an invisible shield of righteousness, incapable of accepting that they are at least 50 per cent responsible for their own safety.

No, there’s no new entitlements – pedestrians have always had the right to “expect instant obedience from motorists at zebra crossings”: drivers are supposed to operate their vehicles in a manner that allows them to stop when a pedestrian steps out onto a crossing. It’s not like zebra crossings are exactly hidden from view.

Tulips and rainbow kisses

As for cyclists, who believed the mirage of Scully’s $250 million bike plan for NSW, with hundreds of kilometres of cycleways lined with tulips and rainbow kisses, stand by for the tantrum as the vision evaporates under the blowtorch of commerce.

I’ve no real comment about this. I just thought it was hilarious.

Her truth is out there

The truth is, jealous as we are of our share of the road, most motorists would probably happily get out of our cars and onto other modes of transport if they only worked as well.

Yeah, sure. Other options do work as well — often better — but many motorists don’t seem to be prepared to try them.

Light rail ≠ monorail

Light rail activists such as Sydney’s Lord Mayor, Clover Moore, forget Sydney has already experimented with light rail; they pretend the under-utilised, inexplicably unfashionable monorail doesn’t exist, and any murmurs to expand it are quickly silenced.

Oh come off it! The monorail is not the same as a road level tram system. And I can easily explain why the monorail is under-utilised: it costs a packet to take you nowhere useful.

The climax

She and her ilk should face facts. The road is not there to share. It is for cars. Footpaths are for pedestrians. And bike paths are for bikes, if there is any room left.

I laughed so hard my sides hurt. It must be so hard for Miranda to sit comfortably at her computer with her head jammed between her buttocks.

I dunno, if she released this into a usenet group she’d just be another bloody troll. I’ve really got to stop responding to these things, it’s too easy to tear them apart. Too easy, but too much fun.

And you thought Nigel Havers was such a jolly nice fellow. Well, if you ride a bike he hates you (try not to take it personally though). He sounds just like bloody Sam Newman and he triggered a minor flame war at the online edition of The Independent by complaining about

“Cyclists who jump red lights and ride on pavements because they’re all bastards.”

OK, fair comment about red lights – but we’re all bastards, are we? And apparently he really meant it:

Yesterday, Mr Havers was in no mood to signal a thaw in relations. Speaking from his car on a mobile phone, he said: “I absolutely hate cyclists. If they use the roads for free and they don’t have to pay any tax, they must obey the rules.

[emphasis added]

Blah, blah, blah. It’s a dead argument: cyclists do not use the roads for free – we pay taxes just like everyone else.

(And let’s not mention the law on using a mobile phone while in control of a motor vehicle.)

Nige continues (to maximise the whinge effect, read in his plummy toff accent)…

“The rules are that you stop at a red traffic light. I’m at one now and four cyclists just went through. They go up a one-way street the wrong way. And they’re aggressive if you get in their way. One just smacked the side of my car with his hand. It’s unbelievable behaviour.”

He was probably pulled up in the bike lane.

It’s all the more puzzling when, according to another correspondent, Havers is a cyclist himself. But nice work by someone at the Wikipedia entry about him:

The Honorable Nigel Allan Havers (born 6 November 1949) is a popular British actor, known mainly for his television work and hatred of cyclists.

Fame is such a fickle beast.

The velorution begins

In happier news, the same issue of The Independent carries a leading article that proclaims Revolution! Britain embraces the bicycle:

After a decade of stagnation in the number of bicycle journeys, new figures show there has been a dramatic leap in commuters and leisure cyclists focused on Britain’s cities and the burgeoning network of cycle routes. In London, trips by bike have increased by 50 per cent in five years to 450,000 per day while figures obtained by The Independent show use of the National Cycle Network, covering 10,000 miles of urban and rural pathways, rose last year by 15 per cent to 232 million journeys.

Great news, but if you begin from a low postion, just about any improvement is significant:

Despite the phenomenal growth, Britain remains near the bottom of the European league of cycle use with just 2 per cent of all journeys made by bike – beating only Spain, Greece and Portugal. The Netherlands tops the league with 27 per cent.

But I don’t intend to criticise — that sounds remarkably similar to the percentage of journeys in Australian cities…

If I had an older model car I’d just keep driving in the [cycling] lane

Followed by much laughter from the decidedly low-brow studio audience and his co-hosts. Oh, hilarity.

To his credit, Gary Lyon tried to keep things moving but Newman just had to spell it out:

Get an old sort of Valiant with a bullbar and just drive straight over the top

It’s supposed to be funny. It’s not.

Isn’t this the man who was famously run-over by his then-pregnant girlfriend? I wonder if he’d have thought it so funny if she’d driven straight over the top in an old Valiant, complete with bullbar?