HC Deb 11 July 1975 vol 895 cc1017-30

4.7 p.m.

Sir George Young (Ealing, Acton)

After that entirely negative performance by the Government Front Bench, I warn the Government that I look for a much more positive response to this Adjournment debate.

I can think of no better time to initiate a debate on improved facilities for the cyclist than at 4 o'clock on a Friday afternoon as London's traffic congeals into an immovable mass, and no better place than this Chamber, a stone's throw from Parliament Square, where the traffic congestion was once so bad that a British Prime Minister was forced to telephone across the world to complain to the leader of the Greater London Council about it. And as you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, inch your car into the traffic in Parliament Square at 4.35 p.m. you might well ask yourself whether some of your fellow drivers might not with advantage to themselves as well as advantage to yourself travel on two wheels instead of four.

I raise this subject on the Adjournment on behalf of the 80,000 Londoners who cycle regularly to work every day, on behalf of the tens of thousands of other cyclists who would like to do so and also on behalf of the 18 million cyclists in this country.

As an example of the potential if adequate provision is made, in Stevenage where a grade-separated system of bicycle routes has been constructed between one-third and one-half of all journeys are made by bicycle. Therefore, the potential exists and is a prize worth grasping.

In 1968 the then Mr. Ernest Marples, himself a keen cyclist, said There is a great future for the bicycle if you make the conditions right. If you make them wrong there isn't any future. Up to 1971 bicycle usage declined mainly because the conditions were wrong and the planners assumed that the car would ultimately displace other forms of personal transport. They were misguided, but unfortunately their prophecies were fulfilled because inadequate provision for the cyclist was made in the transport plans drawn up during that period.

We must remember that half the households in this country do not have access to a car. Even in those households which possess a car it does not cater for all the travel needs of the family. The escalating cost of petrol and of buying and running a car have meant a shift in its relative importance to other transport modes such as the bicycle, which can now be bought for the same amount of money as the cost of an annual road fund licence.

Although the Government have not lifted one finger to help the cyclist, there has been a dramatic growth in cycling since 1971. The proposition I wish to put to the Minister this afternoon is that if the Government's attitude where to change from one of cautious indifference to one of positive encouragement, the benefit to society in terms of energy saving, of a better environment and of the improved health of the British public would be enormous.

I refer first to energy conservation. If commuters whose homes are less than five miles from their work were to cycle to work instead of going by car, we should save about £300 million a year. The bicycle is the most efficient converter of energy to movement, as a cyclist does the equivalent of 1,600 miles to the gallon. The energy required to manufacture a bicycle is 1 per cent. of that required to manufacture a car. There is a clear advantage in terms of the use of energy.

I next refer to the environment. The bicycle is pollution-free and the least offensive of all transport modes. On behalf of cyclists I have drawn up a short shopping list, or cyclists' charter, to put to the Minister this afternoon in the confident expectation of provoking a positive response from him.

I would like to see a bicycle unit within the Department of the Environment whose job it would be to collate and disseminate information on provision for the bicycle. There are 1,700 civil servants within the Department, many working on road schemes which the country can no longer afford. Surely a dozen or so could usefully be transferred to a bicycle unit which could advise local authorities, British Rail and others on measures to encourage cycling. It could start by looking at the positive measures taken overseas to help the cyclist.

Then we come on to the Royal Parks, which are the responsibility of the Minister's Department. At virtually no cost, the Minister could make available to cyclists short cuts through the Royal parks instead of sending the cyclist round the periphery with the car. Hyde Park, for example, is used by many of my constituents who bicycle to work. They notice the preferential treatment given to motorists, pedestrians and even to horse-riders. But there are no cycle routes. Here is an opportunity for the Minister to make an imaginative and positive gesture to the cycling community and to convince it of his good faith. There are many other urban areas with open space which could be used by the cyclist at no disadvantage to anyone else.

Next I turn to safety. The major deterrent to the cyclist and potential cyclist is the risk of an accident. Many parents today are somewhat reluctant to allow their children on the roads on bicycles because of the risks of accidents. Some other recommendations, namely the segregation of the cycle from the car, would overcome the worst fears. But we still need more proficiency courses for children and more training schemes for adults and children alike to increase knowledge of the use of the cycle. The motorists must also be educated to allow for the cyclist since careless driving by motorists is the most frequent cause of accident.

My next point deals with advice to local authorities. I am sure that the day is not far off when the Minister will feel impelled to send yet another circular to local authorities. In it he could include a section on the provisions they should be making for the bicycle. He should stress that in all new developments, particularly town centre schemes—if there are any left—provision should be made not just to cater for today's bicyclist but to encourage the bicyclist of tomorrow by separating his journey from the motorist and seeing that there is adequate parking provision.

The Minister should encourage local authorities in urban areas to identify cycle priority routes suitable for use by the cyclist. These would probably be existing roads that are relatively free from heavy traffic, well signposted and preferably flat, and with suitable provision for crossing the main roads in safety. One such scheme has been drafted by Friends of the Earth for Lambeth, and it is well described in the friendly and earthy publication "Give Way" which the Minister has, of course, read and reread.

Another scheme is due to start in Portsmouth, demonstrating the feasibility of local authorities designating cycle networks. The Minister's Department should monitor and encourage these developments and urge local authorities which have done no work in this direction to get on with it.

Now I come to the controversial subject of travel allowances. At the moment employees of the central Government, local authorities and major firms, and indeed Members of Parliament, get a mileage allowance if they travel by car. If they do the same journey by bicycle, saving the country petrol, creating no noise and fumes, they receive not one penny. I ask the Minister to say whether he believes it right that there should be this official incentive to use the car and this official disincentive to use the bicycle. When he has concluded that it is, of course, quite wrong, I ask him to consider reducing mileage allowance and using the money so saved to pay a bicycle allowance to encourage the use of the bicycle on official journeys. If he wants a trial scheme, he could start with Members of Parliament, many of whom need some gentle daily exercise to keep them in proper condition.

Next I ask the Minister to consider giving the cyclist a five or 10 seconds start over the motorist at traffic lights. In Holland this measure has been introduced and it gives the cyclist time to build up the necessary speed to ensure stability before the cars start overtaking him.

No debate on improved facilities for the cyclist would be complete without paying tribute to British Rail's fearless campaign to keep bicycles from its stations and off its trains. Its first line of defence is simply to make no provision whatsoever for the cyclist at railway stations. At some of London's major terminals there is nowhere to leave a bicycle.

When that line of defence becomes untenable, British Rail retreat to its second line, namely exorbitant tariffs for leaving bicycles at stations. At my local station the daily charge for parking a car is 22p. Since one gets 20 bicycles in the space occupied by one car, economic logic would dictate a tariff of 1p per day for the bicycle. Economic logic is, however, a discipline left behind by British Rail many years ago, and the tariff for a bicycle is 17p a day—80 per cent. of the tariff for a car.

Its third line of defence is reserved for the cyclist who breaks through the first two and wishes to put his bicycle on the train. Although British Rail allows a passenger to take his luggage with him on the train for no charge, if the luggage happens to be bicycle-shaped it attracts a tariff of no less than half the adult fare. It is up to the Minister responsible for British Rail to knock some sense into it and to call for a truce in this senseless campaign against the cyclist.

The cyclist and the train make a perfect match if one wishes to encourage the maximum amount of personal mobility and at the same time discourage use of petrol.

The four final points of my shopping list all relate to British Rail. First, there should be more covered spaces at stations for bicycles. Secondly, there should be tariffs for these spaces which encourage people to bicycle to the station. Thirdly, there should be a flat fare of 20p for taking a bicycle on a train. Finally, there should be facilities for hiring bicycles at the major terminals.

There are other measures which I should like to mention in the short time available to me. Perhaps my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Mr. Steen) and the hon. Member for Newham, South (Mr. Spearing) will catch your eye, Mr. Deputy Speaker, and raise some of the points that I have not had time to mention.

The bicycle has the potential to provide the majority of the British people with a quiet, cheap, clean, healthy and flexible form of transport.

With the measures that I have outlined, the potential can be achieved, and some of the rusty 13 million bicycles and some of the equally rusty 18 million cyclists can play their part in tackling the economic crisis and improving the environment in our towns and country. We all look to the Government to give a lead.

4.17 p.m.

Mr. Nigel Spearing (Newham, South)

I congratulate the hon. Member for Ealing, Acton (Sir G. Young) on raising this subject today and particularly on the way in which he has presented his case. He must have been influenced by the election address of his opponent in the last General Election but one, in which many of these arguments were put forward.

I declare an interest because I use a bicycle quite a lot. It is interesting to note the number of people, especially young people, who cycle. Young people today are far more sensible than their elders about the use and hire of bicycles and, therefore, perhaps, use the National Health Service less because of the fitness that they gain from cycling.

The alternative mobility system which the bicycle plus the train provides is important for those who move around on their own taxable incomes. Unfortunately, as the hon. Member for Ealing, Acton said, British Rail is stupid, shortsighted and pig-headed on this matter. The cycle plus the train is the quickest and most convenient link between two places. However, British Rail does its very best to stop that link.

I support the hon. Gentleman's idea of a 20p flat fare. Years ago one was not even charged half fare for a bicycle. There were zone charges of a nominal amount. This month British Rail has sent out booklets to 10 million homes in a new drive for more passengers. The Press release says: British Rail is mounting a massive campaign throughout July to persuade people to travel by train, by getting information about services and fares into some ten million homes The booklet talks about: Drive a car at the end of the line". but does not say anything about bicycles. In my area of London we could well do with this 20p fare. Young people from Stratford, Barking and East Ham could go on the electrified line on a Saturday and Sunday—the trains are not well used—pay the flat fare, have a cycle in the country and come home. I am not sug- gesting that they should necessarily have a cheaper return fare than they would pay normally, but the fact they they cannot do this because of the stupidity and bone-headed nature of British Rail makes this publicity drive, which it is now promoting, even more questionable than it otherwise might be.

4.19 p.m.

Mr. Anthony Steen (Liverpool, Wavertree)

I, too, congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, Acton (Sir G. Young) on raising what on the face of it appears often to many people a somewhat frivolous subject but which is, I suggest, a very serious subject to which the Minister should pay due regard, and especially to the suggestions made by my hon. Friend, and should take some understanding into his Department of the importance of this subject to the health of the nation.

First, I should like to declare an interest. Like the hon. Member for Newham, South (Mr. Spearing), I am one of the few "authentic" Members who actually uses the cycle as his ordinary means of conveyance. My experience stems from my cycle tourist club days of some 10 years ago. I am now a 10-miles-a-day man, five days a week, cycling from Earls Court to Westminster, in all weathers, at all times of the day and night.

The problems confronting cyclists in London are shared by cyclists in many parts of the country. First, there is a bad pollution problem, particularly in summer. There are not enough scientific inventions to deal with the problems facing the cyclist—unless he wears goggles and a clothes peg over his nose to help him block out the fumes, which are very serious if one is cycling in streets which are narrow and closed to air circulation.

Secondly, the Minister should take steps to see that the phasing of traffic lights is not such as to discriminate against the cyclist travelling at 12 m.p.h. If a cyclist seeks to travel in any of the main thoroughfares going out of London, he often finds himself caught on the red phase. This happens over and over again. As to the Russian roulette situation around Hyde Park Corner or Buckingham Palace, steps should be taken in such situations to establish cycle lanes. There have been a number of serious accidents in major cities caused by cyclists being caught between vehicles in such busy circulations of traffic.

Thirdly, there is inadequate provision with regard to parking and the provision of traffic lanes. Whilst cars and taxis treat the cyclist with deference, bus drivers are a little less careful of cyclists in bus lanes. Will the Minister confirm that bicycles can be used in bus lanes and that this is his intention?

Cycling is good for one. It is good for the country. Whilst one saves the nation's energy, one is using one's own supply. As transportation costs increase, more and more people will turn to pedalling.

I support my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, Acton in suggesting that a cycling unit be established in the Department by the Minister with the aim of gaining a focus and an interest in all transport legislation which is laid before the House and to see that cyclists' rights are preserved and maintained.

4.23 p.m.

The Minister of State, Department of the Environment (Mr. Denis Howell)

It is very interesting that the hon. Member for Ealing, Acton (Sir G. Young), the hon. Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Mr. Steen) and my hon. Friend the Member for Newham, South (Mr. Spearing) have taken advantage of the last half hour this week to raise this very interesting matter. My only regret is that we do not have more time to discuss it. I absolutely agree with their basic case. I am sure that we can return to the subject on other occasions when we shall have more time to deploy the various points that have been raised.

The hon. Members have raised the question of safety. Very regrettably at present—and this largely makes their case—cycling is much the most dangerous method of travelling around this country, in 1973 alone there were 4,757 deaths, of which 2,041 were of children. Of those casualties 80 per cent. took place in urban situations, which again underlines the difficulties and the need for some special arrangements if local authorities will take them in hand.

I hope, therefore, that on the safety ground local authorities will look at the question of special cycle lanes—although obviously, with our present economic difficulties and with a cut-back in many local authority services imminent—this is hardly the time for Parliament to be urging local authorities to fresh expenditure. However, as and when they can do it, I hope that they will.

I was interested in the suggestion of differential timing at traffic lights. That would be a costly operation. In principle, if we are to encourage people to take up the cycle, there is a lot to be said for it. However, it would mean that one would first have to give pedestrians the right to go when a special light changed to green, and then allow another 10 seconds for cyclists, and the remainder for the motorists. I do not know quite how the motoring public would take that. But it is an interesting suggestion and perhaps there will be opportunity at some time for an experiment. We could not suggest that the very expensive business of changing all the traffic lights to bring that about could be undertaken now, but, as I have said, it ought to be thought about for the future.

I was interested in what was said about British Railways. Some hard things were said. I was asked to knock some sense into them. Thankfully, the Government have no responsibility for the individual management policy of British Railways. I have very little hope or confidence in an organisation which forces the travelling public to drink coffee out of cardboard cups, as I shall unfortunately experience when on the train to Birmingham in about half an hour. The hon. Member for Ealing, Acton, in his campaign to get British Railways to make facilities available for cyclists, might be able to do better than some of us have managed to do.

British Railways have an obligation to have a proper charging policy. My Department in general supports the line taken by hon. Members. Indeed, my officials wrote to British Railways asking what their policy was. They wrote on 30th January and had a reply on 4th March. I cannot convince the House that the reply adds up to very much. I find it difficult to think that we shall be able to encourage many people to take their cycles on trains if we allow differential charging region by region. That is what British Railways say they intend to do.

I agree that British Railways should make parking space available for bicycles just as they do for motor cars, although many people feel that the provision for car parking is inadequate. Indeed, space for cycles is totally non-existent in many areas.

Hon. Members have declared their interests. I forgot to declare mine. I speak also as Patron of the British Cycle Federation and President of the British Professional Cyclists' Association. I hope that hon. Members will understand the basic support that I give to them.

I think that we must have a little sympathy for British Railways. The brake van capacity in trains has been reduced because of the change of traffic. Therefore, the opportunities for large numbers of people to take cycles on trains is also reduced. I can only hope that the cycling organisations and hon. Members will not aim all their arrows at the Government, but, having regard to the distinction in management policy which this House has always placed on the nationalised industries, will contact those in charge of the managerial affairs of British Railways.

There is something to be said for traffic lanes. I believe that these can be provided better in new towns like Stevenage where they are starting from scratch. It is difficult to provide separate traffic lanes in the middle of Birmingham, Manchester or London, although it would be helpful and interesting to have some experiments in that direction.

I cannot accede to the request that my Department should set up a separate cycling advisory unit. We are being asked to cut down on the numbers of civil servants. We already have a traffic advisory unit. I believe that traffic should be looked at as a whole. It would not help to have an advisory unit for cycling and to divorce cycling from other traffic considerations and advice. I think that it would be sensible for the traffic advisory unit to turn its attention more to the possibilities inherent in cycling.

Reference has been made to the Royal parks and whether facilities could be made available for cyclists. This is beginning to happen. This summer, for the first time, a special route of four and a half miles is being provided in Richmond Park. This circular route is likely to be attractive to cyclists. Use can also be made of other roads across the middle of the park which are not open to cars. I do not suggest that is the end of the road. At any rate, it is an interesting start that progress is being in that respect in Richmond Park.

The hon. Gentleman also raised an interesting question about whether industry and the House would change the mileage allowance facility. The logic of what he said was that if we paid people a bigger allowance to cycle than to ride in a car, we should pay them an even bigger allowance to walk. That would lead to a very dicey situation. I do not think that hon. Members generally would support that proposition. Certainly I do not think that people in industry would support it.

Sir George Young

I hope that the Minister did not misunderstand what I said. I did not suggest that the bicycle allowance should be higher than the car allowance. I suggested that the car allowance should be reduced to provide the savings to pay people an albeit modest allowance to travel by bicycle.

Mr. Howell

Speaking on behalf of 98 per cent. of hon. Members who find the present mileage allowance totally inadequate to cover the cost of driving their cars on parliamentary business, I must say that I cannot encourage the hon. Gentleman in that direction. However, it was a brave try and an interesting suggestion.

Returning to the question of road safety and education, to which I attach great importance, there are three development projects already being undertaken. The RoSPA Road Safety Education Development Unit is totally funded by the Department at a cost of £36,000 a year over three years. It consists of three seconded teachers and a research director, and its aims are to disseminate and assess road safety teaching materials. Policy is decided by a steering committee of educationists and road safety experts which is chaired by a member of my Department.

The Transport and Road Research Laboratory curriculum unit at Reading University is organised on a research contract by TRRL at a cost of about £20,000 a year over three years. It consists of two researchers aided by a small team of teachers and is producing a curriculum for schools in road safety, which I am sure will be welcomed by all hon. Members. The first stage of its report is in draft.

The Department contributes about £6,000 a year to the evaluation side of the Health Education Unit which is mainly funded by the Health Education Council at a teachers' training college in Clacton. It, too, has a three-year programme and is producing a curriculum for schools in health education which contains a section on road safety. The cycling aspect of it might be further strengthened. Arrangements are now being made to publish the first stage of its report, and the second stage is in draft.

Mr. Steen

Will the Minister confirm that he will ask his Department to consider the possibility of introducing cycling lanes in London and other major cities? Would it be possible to convert existing bus lanes so that cyclists might use them, or is that already Government policy?

Mr. Howell

Bus lanes are matters for local authorities. The Government have no power over what local authorities do about the roads in London. The best way to deal with the matter is to ask the Traffic Advisory Unit of the Department to give increasing attention to the need to encourage people to cycle, and the best way to do that is by making cycling on the roads safer. That is the key to the issue.

I accept that large savings in petrol and energy would be effected if we could get more people to travel by cycle. An even more important consideration from my point of view as the Minister responsible for sport is that hardly anything would improve the nation's health more than getting people out of cars and buses and on to bicycles. One realises from the increase in the incidence of deaths from coronary and heart trouble how unfit the nation is. There would be dual benefits for the nation if we could proceed even a short distance along the road which the hon. Gentleman wishes us to take.

I hope that we shall return to this subject many times in future and that this debate will have the effect of encouraging Ministries and local authorities to adopt a forward-looking policy.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at twenty-five minutes to Five o'clock.