RossH

It's good but it excludes everywhere without a regional mayor. BCP (Bournemouth Christchurch Poole) got turned down as part of Heart of Wessex in the first devolution tranche. Now we have a two tier system with regional mayors getting all the focus and funding and the rest of us left behind.

Or more likely both

So your assertion is that a driver running over a pedestrian on an informal zebra crossing may not have committed the offence of, at least, careless driving? Interesting take. Rule H2 of the highway code says pedestrians not only think they have priority, they actually do have priority.

Another thing that confuses me - why do EVs still have large bonnets? The motors are tiny so surely there are huge design advantages (for pedestrian safety and practicality) to have really short bonnets?

Fuel duty cut/freeze was the stupidest tax cut ever. Drivers did not appreciate it at first and now think it is a sort of right that it remains frozen every year. Cost the treasury £billions, no real political benefit and now the government is unwilling to reverse at the risk of upsetting motorists.

Drivers have an absolute responsibility not to run over pedestrians so I think the law covers it. H2 of the HC already gives pedestrians priority so what is the harm in actually marking that priority?

Fine. We should make all urban roads 20mph then.

Belisha beacons are expensive and pointless. H2 of the HC gives pedestrians priority so why not mark that priority? The best solution is a continuous footway but where that is not possible, "informal" crossings should be used.

Local Conservatives in the BCP area talk about nothing else but drivers rights and "war on the motorist". We even have a local motorists (read anti-cyclist) campaign group propped up by Conservatives and Reform activists. The right still thinks there are votes in opposing active travel.

I am NEVER voting Labour again with Starmer as leader. No morals, no vision, no conviction. Conservative economic policy with Reform immigration policy just chasing votes wherever he thinks they might be.

What Labour do not seem to realise is that they are not stopping "Labour" voters going to Reform, they are creating NEW Reform voters. By moving the whole conversation on immigration right, they move the Ovington window and normalise racism and prejudice.

But why life imprisonment? This false equivalence between the risks of cycling and driving is unhelpful. Motorists have been convicted of basically using their vehicle as a weapon and not got life. What could a cyclist possibly do to get life?

The average custodial sentence for death by dangerous driving is 4 years and 7 months. I can't find a single example of a driver being sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence. As cycling is far less dangerous than driving, why would we possibly need this new law?

Or "why are all the parties fighting so hard for the votes of racists and bigots?" Every single person I know who votes reform, is doing it based on racism and prejudice, and this should not be encouraged by Labour. There was a time when extreme views would be shamed and marginalised.

There was a time when political parties had principals and tried to attract voters. Now they have think-tanks and policy groups trying to chase "what voters want" to the lowest common denominator. Now we have three parties all offering the same anti-EU, anti-migrant, anti-net-zero rhetoric.

It's lovely - looking forward to using it! Please can we have some bigger buffers in future, ideally planted. Bit nervous about kids cycling next to traffic in contraflow.

Absolutely this. I usually vote LD or Green but lent my vote to Labour to (successfully) unseat the incumbent Conservative. I was hoping for Socially Liberal, Environmentally friendly policy. What I got was Tory-lite. Not voting Labour again under Starmer and this policy platform.

Sure, the devil is in the detail but the broad fact remains that no heat pump owner should see x4 between gas and electricity price. A well installed heat pump should win against a gas boiler every time on running costs. I use an Octopus smart tariff and heating costs are 75% of previous gas boiler.

Two issues. There are specialist tariffs that reduce the "spark gap" significantly. OVO currently charges 15p/kWh for heat pumps making them MUCH cheaper than gas. Second the gas price is volatile and trend is increasing. Once electricity £/kWh decoupled from gas, it will be cheaper and stable.

Yet the fossil fuels lobby has seeded public opinion, falsely, that heat pumps don't work, are unreliable or are expensive to buy and run. Even the BBC cancelled a heat pump podcast because it is "controversial". Nobody questions the ability of a fridge to cool food so why a fear a heat pump?

The lesson labour should learn, is you can't beat Reform by moving to the right. What they will probably try to do is double down on anti-immigration rhetoric and backtracking on net zero. The ovington window shifts ever rightwards.

The human race is screwed. The number of people replying to arguments with AI responses and claiming it is "proof" of something. AI just amalgamates stuff it finds into a coherent response, it doesn't care if it is right or wrong. Read the evidence yourself people!

I support your cause but, sorry, I cannot donate while anti-cycling campaigner John Stewart is still a trustee.

If it was part of a wider response to a road safety review - e.g mandatory speed limiters for cars, longer bans for dangerous driving and removal of the "exceptional hardship" loophole, I would agree. On its own it has nothing to do with road safety and is just red meat for anti-cycling campaigners.

Sure, we can micromanage our way to slightly better terms clause by clause but each small improvement is one more step towards alignment with the EU. What is to be gained by this approach? What value does any divergence from the EU bring? Just cut short this painful process and rejoin.

Absolutely. You only have to look at who's asking for this law. It's not voters, road safety campaigners or lawyers. It's the right wing media, Tory peers, motoring lobbyists and Mr Poophole. Labour falling into their culture war trap, like they did with trans rights.

More important than prison sentences for cyclists or drivers, are driving bans for dangerous driving. Too many examples of very short bans for very dangerous driving or no bans at all due to the "exceptional hardship" loophole. Lifetime bans for all dangerous driving convictions please.

Will just be some minor improvement to some very technical subclauses in the current deal. Unless we, as a minimum, rejoin the single market, it will just be PR with no real benefits. The majority now want to rejoin the EU so why not just get on with it?

Sorry to hear that. Really annoys me all the people who drive on to their property forwards, presumably because it's easier, knowing they will later have to reverse out over a pavement and road with limited visibility. How hard is it to reverse onto your driveway?

So why are we doing nothing to decarbonise transport? No investment in Active Travel, pushing back phase out of ICE vehicles, keeping the discount and freeze on fuel duty. Starmer even saying he's "on the side of drivers" which is pretty close to Sunak's "war on cars" narrative.