"Is that what 'we' want? A new manager/friendlier language? Or do we want the whole thing done away with? In which case who will take on some of the organisation's functions?"
Good questions.
The basic problem is that CS is something for SG to hide behind. That's not particularly a criticism of this (SNP) Government.
Politicians come and go. The system rolls forward run by central civil servants and the ones in places like Transport Scotland encouraged by various other established organisations and vested interests.
'Cycling' is irrelevant.
BUT IT SHOULDN'T BE.
Fits in with all aspects of the SNP aims for a Smarter, Greener etc. Scotland.
A prime candidate for "preventative action" that would save the NHS vast amounts in future years.
A nice(r) set of towns and cities would attract the "inward investment" and "high class jobs" that politicians want.
Etc. etc.
As I keep saying in different contexts - 'it's not (just) about cycling'.
It's about, mobility and safety and quality of life etc. which also affect people who don't cycle and even those who never would, however wonderful the 'infrastructure'.
If we can't get significant improvements in Edinburgh there really is no hope.
We live in a corner of the Western World where car ownership/use is normal/even desirable. That may be fine in a democracy if that's what most people want - if they have been offered an alternative. BUT any 'rights' of car users have to be balanced by responsibilities which, it seems, need much more enforcement and engineering to do away with more of the potentials for conflicts than any amount of advertising.
posts
