UKIP Cycling Policy

UKIP have some excellent ideas for controlling cyclists, lets hope they
are elected next time.

Well thought out ideas are;


"Local authorities should be given additional powers to enforce a
'cyclists dismount' or 'no cycling' regulation where there are safety
concerns – such as on busy roundabouts, junctions or bus lanes, or where
the road would be too narrowed by cycle lanes and cause unacceptable
delays to traffic".

Excellent idea, keeping the roads clear for tax paying motorists.


"Ukip would consult on the desirability of minimum third party liability
insurance cover for cyclists - a simple annual flat rate registration
'Cycledisc', stuck to the bicycle frame, to cover damage to cars and
others, which are currently unprotected".

I wonder if this would cover their fridge/freezer as well?


"Ukip believes off road dedicated lanes are preferable to a confusing
maze of cycle lanes on unsuitable or dangerous roads, which is
problematic for cyclists as well as other road users".

I wonder who would pay for these? Perhaps a cycling tax?


"We support provision of cycle parking at reasonable charges".

About time cyclists paid their way.




--
Dave-Cyclists VORT
Motorists pay £46 billion a year in extra taxes, specifically so they
can use the roads.
Less than £10 billion of this is spent on roads.
Q: Do cyclists pay any specific, extra taxes in order to use their
vehicles on the road?
A: No. They are sponging freeloaders.

On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 09:11:57 +0000, Dave-Cyclists VORT
wrote:

UKIP have some excellent ideas for controlling cyclists, lets hope they
are elected next time.

Well thought out ideas are;


"Local authorities should be given additional powers to enforce a
'cyclists dismount' or 'no cycling' regulation where there are safety
concerns – such as on busy roundabouts, junctions or bus lanes, or where
the road would be too narrowed by cycle lanes and cause unacceptable
delays to traffic".

Excellent idea, keeping the roads clear for tax paying motorists.


"Ukip would consult on the desirability of minimum third party liability
insurance cover for cyclists - a simple annual flat rate registration
'Cycledisc', stuck to the bicycle frame, to cover damage to cars and
others, which are currently unprotected".

I wonder if this would cover their fridge/freezer as well?

I bet it would: a reciprocal arrangement



"Ukip believes off road dedicated lanes are preferable to a confusing
maze of cycle lanes on unsuitable or dangerous roads, which is
problematic for cyclists as well as other road users".


Excellent ideas.



Judith

"Ukip believes off road dedicated lanes are preferable to a confusing
maze of cycle lanes on unsuitable or dangerous roads, which is
problematic for cyclists as well as other road users".

A little bit of common sense from UKIP! The current on-road cycle lanes are designed to encourage undertaking and in many cases are clearly unfit for purpose.

The trouble with building safe and effective off-road cycle lanes is that they would be very expensive. There is a lot more to it than painting a picture of a bike on a footpath.

On 29/01/2014 00:56, wrote:
"Ukip believes off road dedicated lanes are preferable to a confusing
maze of cycle lanes on unsuitable or dangerous roads, which is
problematic for cyclists as well as other road users".

A little bit of common sense from UKIP! The current on-road cycle lanes are designed to encourage undertaking and in many cases are clearly unfit for purpose.

The trouble with building safe and effective off-road cycle lanes is that they would be very expensive. There is a lot more to it than painting a picture of a bike on a footpath.


And it's certain that sponging, freeloading cyclists wouldn't want to
pay for them.


--
Dave-Cyclists VORT
Motorists pay £46 billion a year in extra taxes, specifically so they
can use the roads.
Less than £10 billion of this is spent on roads.
Q: Do cyclists pay any specific, extra taxes in order to use their
vehicles on the road?
A: No. They are sponging freeloaders.

On 29/01/2014 08:20, Dave-Cyclists VORT wrote:
On 29/01/2014 00:56, wrote:
"Ukip believes off road dedicated lanes are preferable to a confusing
maze of cycle lanes on unsuitable or dangerous roads, which is
problematic for cyclists as well as other road users".

A little bit of common sense from UKIP! The current on-road cycle
lanes are designed to encourage undertaking and in many cases are
clearly unfit for purpose.

The trouble with building safe and effective off-road cycle lanes is
that they would be very expensive. There is a lot more to it than
painting a picture of a bike on a footpath.


And it's certain that sponging, freeloading cyclists wouldn't want to
pay for them.



You are SO right. And we aren't going to have to. You are! Ha ha ha ha
ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Glugg glugg!

--
My name is Dave and I am a complete ****** because I ignore the fact
that most cyclists are also motorists who pay tax and insurance. I also
ignore the fact - or rather become insulting about the fact - that
cyclists are such a low risk that they are actually given their
insurance for free.