CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Keith Brown

(33 posts)
  • Started 11 years ago by Min
  • Latest reply from Wilmington's Cow

12

  1. Min
    Member

    May as well have his own thread (I don't think there is one already).

    Our beloved Car Minister was on the BBC this morning after they showed a clip of POP and talked about improving the infrastructure for cyclists.

    He sat there with a sneer on his face and said that although he was grudgingly throwing a few pennies in the direction of cycling he was going to continue to spend all the money on roads (apart from a wee bit for trains) because, and I quote - "cyclists use the roads too"

    So there you go, all those majorly expensive roads and bridges form which cyclists are actually banned are for our own good.

    When are we getting a proper Transport Minister?

    Posted 11 years ago #

  2. SRD
    Moderator

    He had the gall to claim that scotland needs 'Modernisation' which in his mind means motorways.

    Fascinating to me how nationalist movements - which are sometimes thout to be romanticising and nostalgic - are actually almost always obsessed with modernisation.

    I feel a blogpost...and maybe even a full fledged article ...coming on.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  3. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Modernisation also includes electric cars remember. He was all over the Scottish news last night being driven at a ridiculously slow speed around Knockhill in a Tesla sports cars (and those things can shift) to announce the extension of charging points.

    I remember the claim, a year or so back when it was first announced that electric cars would be getting boosts (from Richard, sorry, Phil Hammond) that it would help to ease congestion. Which put in my mind that electric cars must someone be smaller than petrol cars...

    There's such a bizarre dichotomy here. On the one hand build more and bigger and faster* roads so that more people can feel the need to use cars; on the other hand, 'ooh, we need to reduce greenhouse gases'. So leccy cars can fit the bill of more cars to use the roads, but less polluting because we're also getting energy from more windfarms. But it ignores other car factors such as cities simply being nicer places to be without the constant slow movement of large items of metal and glass making it harder to walk or cycle round.

    At least they'd be quieter I guess...

    Keith Brown though, every time he appears on my television, within seconds I'm having to fight the urge to throw something at the screen.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  4. chdot
    Admin

    Also -

    On the Radio Scotland piece he said 'the Scottish Government's 10 per cent goal isn't an official target, merely a "shared vision".

    Not sure who he's sharing that with...!!!

    Posted 11 years ago #

  5. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    I'd imagine with Salmond, which became a discussion of "We're never going to make this target, how can we get out of it, ah, say it's aspirational!"

    Well, if you shoot for the stars and miss you'll still get the moon. Which I think means future policy is that cycle lanes will be made out of cheese. You'd better brie-lieve it!

    Posted 11 years ago #

  6. Calum
    Member

    @chdot: Don't worry, though: when 2020 comes around and cycling has a 2% mode share, an exciting new shared vision of a 10% cycling mode share by 2030 will be established. This will be achieved by widening the M8 to 10 lanes in each direction, extending it right into Edinburgh city centre (on top of Shandwick Place and Princes Street would be ideal), and smashing another brand new motorway right along High Street in Glasgow (finally completing that city's thrilling ring road). It is evident that this investment in vital new motorway infrastructure will completely empty the existing roads of cars and thus enable mass cycling. It will happen. Just you wait.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  7. kaputnik
    Moderator

    cyclists use the roads too

    The Type of Roads that Keith Broon likes to spend billions building (M74 extension, Forth replacement crossing, A9, A96 doubling, A82 "upgrades") are not the sorts of roads that cyclists will be using. In fact, they're legally prevented from using the first 2 and would have to have some sort of a death wish to use the 3rd and 4th.

    The vision that Keith and his kin have is not far removed from the 1960s vision of atomic powered hovercraft for all and having Fairey Rotodynes flying directly in and out of our city centres, offering a 20 minute Edinburgh-Glasgow service and most importantly, wide expansive motorways with hovercars gliding serenly over them.

    IDEA.

    Motorway central reservations to get wind turbines to help Keith charge his electric cars.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  8. minus six
    Member

    Keith has all the default prejudices perpetrated by the mainstream media

    "people" drive cars

    "cyclists" pedal on bikes

    Only the opinion-shaping media editors could force Keith to recognise and examine his transport prejudices

    Fat chance of that happening anytime soon

    Posted 11 years ago #

  9. Arellcat
    Moderator

    What was that phrase used by certain politicians about promoting cycling? "Pushing against an open door"?

    We may be doing exactly that, except someone has bricked up the corridor just inside because the space had to be cleared for a brand new hyperspace bypass.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  10. cc
    Member

    I'm not going to vote SNP until they see sense on transport.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  11. Min
    Member

    SRD He had the gall to claim that scotland needs 'Modernisation' which in his mind means motorways.

    Fascinating to me how nationalist movements - which are sometimes thout to be romanticising and nostalgic - are actually almost always obsessed with modernisation.

    Yes it is weird, being car obsessed is very 1950s/60s isn't it? It is completely the opposite of modernisation in fact but you have to just use the word anyway so people will go along with it.

    WC Keith Brown though, every time he appears on my television, within seconds I'm having to fight the urge to throw something at the screen.

    I find myself balling my fists and there aren't that many people with a face I just want to punch. In fact just him I think. Not even Jeremy Paxman is that smug.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  12. crowriver
    Member

    I saw him on Newsnight last night and shouted a few choiuce insults at his visage. It was galling to see the arrogance of the guy, and the sheer lack of imagination. He's verging on the moronic. Resembled a delighted wee laddy when he was in the racing car, I wanted to wipe that smile off his face.

    Then they had to pile injury onto insult and force me to gaze upon the shrew like features of Mr. rent-a-quote NEIL GREIG of IAM! I was pretty much apoplectic by then.

    That Gordon Brewer can be right sadist, inflicting these cretins upon us all.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  13. crowriver
    Member

    P.S.:- the Scottish government ought to change KB's title to Minister for Motorways, High Speed Rail, and Chuff Off To Everything Else.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  14. crowriver
    Member

    But in a BBC Scotland interview, Keith Brown made it clear that cycling infrastructure was just one area competing for investment.

    He said: "What we're actually involved in is modernising Scotland's transport infrastructure. It's my view that for decades it's been under-invested in.

    "For example, we don't have motorways between our cities, which we should have in a modern, developed country.

    "I know the road projects are contentious for cyclists, but we had to improve the roads around Aberdeen, we had to complete the M74, and we must have resilience when crossing the Forth. These things can't wait."

    The Scottish government has no plans to ring-fence 5% of its transport budget for cycling projects. And it says the goal of having 10% of journeys made by bike is a "shared vision", rather than an official target.

    So now the new Forth bridge is just for 'resilience'? It's not actually a replacement but a supplement? Freudian slip by KB, methinks.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-21366881

    Posted 11 years ago #

  15. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    I'm hoping he means 'resilience' in the sense of loads of people are against it but they're crashing on anyway ignoring all that hullabaloo.

    Just what is 'modernising' about building bigger roads? As SRD has said the obsession with cars is very 50s/60s (and a very aspirational 80s kinda thing - but then I'll blame Thatcher for anything). And why does the list of 'transport infrastructure' that needs to be modernised not include any trains, public transport and so on? 'Transport infrastructure' does appear to be a euphemism for 'bigger, faster roads'.

    I'm fast coming to dislike Keith Brown almost as much as Nicola Sturgeon.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  16. mgj
    Member

    Weirdly, my early 1970's car seems to cope with Edinburgh's road surfaces much better than most modern cars do.

    We could have had no second Forth crossing, but it would have meant closing the existing bridge to anything heavier than a car, and limiting flow. Resilience is a euphamism for duplication, its just that the duplicates will now be nearby rather than over in Kincardine. The Forth Bridge will of course, now outlast them all.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  17. Arellcat
    Moderator

    I know the road projects are contentious for cyclists...

    I fail to see why the Scottish powers-that-be are happy spending boggling amounts of GDP on high speed car and high speed rail, yet have completely failed to parallel that with cycling, high speed or otherwise.

    I want a route I can use to cycle to England, to Glasgow, to Inverness, that does not involve encountering motor vehicles of any sort and is fit for me to pedal at up to 40mph, without constant interruptions of gates that I can't fit through, turns that make me slow right down and waste my energy, and junctions that deprioritise my mode of travel; routes that are specifically engineered so that I need not travel in fear of my life thanks to political handwringing, and routes that are kept safe for use in the height of summer and the depth of winter.

    Do that, KB, and I might not be so angry.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  18. minus six
    Member

    I know the road projects are contentious for cyclists

    contentious for cycling, NOT cyclists

    wake up, keith

    its about getting people to cycle

    ditch your tunnel vision of nippy wee fringe lobbying groups

    Posted 11 years ago #

  19. bdellar
    Member

    @o_0: You've hit the nail on the head there. He regards cycling infrastructure as there to help out the 0.1% of the population who cycle and complain about how bad it is, and NOT to help everyone else cycle.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  20. SRD
    Moderator

    it certainly doesn't occur to him that bikes and buses reduce congestion and make it possible for him to zip around in his car.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  21. minus six
    Member

    just heard keith's "contentious" interview on the radio

    the tone could not have been clearer:

    "I know cyclists moan, but they ought to live in the real world. We need more motorways. That's where all the moneys going. End of."

    Posted 11 years ago #

  22. Instography
    Member

    So the 10% target is officially dead.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  23. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    I wish politicians who thought of people in binary terms either cyclist or motorists could be seen as dinosaurs but I suspect Keith Brown knows he's safe politically as long as he assumes his voters always drive and never cycle. Everyone favourably disposed towards cycling should display a sticker to that effect on their cars. Maybe that would get the message across.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  24. crowriver
    Member

    Something like: "My other car's a bike".

    Posted 11 years ago #

  25. crowriver
    Member

    So the 10% target is officially dead.

    Not only that, the extra Forth bridge is officially a "spare" for "resilience". Just in case, because who knows, eh?

    Posted 11 years ago #

  26. neddie
    Member

    In New Zealand (and the US I think) it is common to put stickers of 'white stick men' on the back of your car to represent your family (you know a man, woman and a couple of kids & dog...).

    The thing is, you can also get 'stick man' stickers of man, women and child on bikes.

    Wouldn't that be a great way to indicate your cycling allegiance?

    Posted 11 years ago #

  27. neddie
    Member

    And here's a pic of said stickers:


    car stickers

    Posted 11 years ago #

  28. Instography
    Member

    I leave a bike rack permanently attached to the back of my car.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  29. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Snap.

    My roof bar mounted rack and bike carriers are basically permanent attachments.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  30. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Some people put little stickers of symbolised fish on the back of their car to represent Jesus. I had a lecturer at uni who had one, but they had drawn little feet on the fish and written Darwin inside the body.

    Posted 11 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin