"Aren't we all stakeholders?"
Well yes - all pedestrians too.
It's always a balance between consulting 'chosen' groups/individuals and having a 'public 'consultation'.
I'm sure you've heard the phrase 'consultation fatigue' - often the result of being asked similar questions by different consultants which (sometimes...) results in another report and no discernible action.
I was at one of the 'stakeholder events' that 'informed' the current draft. The most interesting thing was the clear evidence of very different views within the council about priorities.
Specifically a split between the idea that more money/effort should be put into areas where people already cycle - notably the city centre or places where cycling is less common.
I'm not saying that this was a major part of the discussion or that they are irreconcilable, but it was a useful/interesting illustration of how people interested in 'cycling' don't have a unified view.
"Where's my copy?"
Links above.
This version of the report omits the council contact details and it's suggested (by Spokes) that comments are sent to them to be combined as the official Spokes response.
This may or may not suit you (and others). It could be seen as 'restrictive', but the reality is that all the comments would land in the inbox of one particular official. Of course CEC should have many more walk/cycle staff - that may be a result of this process.
posts
