Council “escalates war on cycling menaces” with new town centre ban,
saying: “We will not stop until we eradicate this behaviour”

The local authority says residents are “overwhelmingly in support of
tougher action” against people riding bikes in pedestrianised zones

by RYAN MALLON THU, DEC 14, 2023 16:23

A local council says it has “escalated” and “intensified” its “war on
cycling menaces” by implementing a complete ban on riding a bike in
pedestrianised zones, as part of a wider crackdown on anti-social
behaviour.

North Lincolnshire Council announced this week (link is external) that a
new Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) is now in place in Scunthorpe and
Brigg, following a public consultation earlier this year, introducing
stronger powers and increasing fines for what the local authority describes
as the “scourge” of “irresponsible behaviour”.

In Scunthorpe and Brigg town centres, cycling is now completely banned,
with anyone caught riding a bike in pedestrianised areas set to be
immediately handed a fixed penalty notice of £100. According to the
previous PSPO, cyclists could only be fined if they refused to dismount
when approached by an officer.

The total cycling ban comes as part of a suite of toughened anti-social
measures, which also include the outright ban of drinking in the street and
greatly increased fines for littering, fly-tipping, neglecting waste duty
of care, and graffiti.

“We will not stop until we eradicate this behaviour,” Rob Waltham, the
leader of the Conservative-controlled North Lincolnshire Council said in a
statement, issued under the headline “Council triples fines as war on
fly-tippers, litter louts, and cycling menaces intensifies”.

“People need to use one of the thousands of bins provided, get off their
bikes and push, or dispose of their household waste responsibly – it really
is not that difficult.

“We have repeatedly asked people to stop doing these things, we have
repeatedly told them how their behaviour impacts on others and, while we
are starting to see some changes, it is clearly not enough. Local taxpayers
will not pick up the bill for irresponsible behaviour.”

John Davidson, the local authority’s cabinet member for communities and
urban added: “We consulted earlier in the year on stronger measures to
tackle the scourge of anti-social behaviour and the response from the
public was overwhelmingly in support of tougher action.

“The vast majority of people don’t make the area a mess for others or cause
problems – but for the few that do we are going to hit them even harder in
the pocket, clearly they have not listened to our requests, pleas, and
demands.

“The Government provided the opportunity for us to increase the fines for
these offences, residents have supported us, and we have done.”

However, when the public consultation was launched earlier this year, the
proposed ban was heavily criticised by disabled cycling charity Wheels for
Wellbeing, who argued that they had the potential to “deepen discrimination
against cycling as a mobility aid”.

Nevertheless, Waltham maintained that the PSPO “has enabled us to protect
vulnerable communities by targeting anyone creating a nuisance or putting
themselves and others in danger”.

“The new measures will enhance those protections and I make absolutely no
apologies for doing so,” he said.

The newly implemented cycling ban in Scunthorpe and Brigg is one of many
that have come into force in town centres and pedestrianised zones across
the UK in recent years.

Earlier this month, a controversial ban on e-bikes in certain
pedestrianised parts of Coventry city centre was introduced, with the
deputy leader of the council warning that riders can expect strict
enforcement.

The new ruling, which prohibits e-bikes and e-scooters being ridden through
sections of the city centre, was approved last month, as Coventry City
Council passed a PSPO despite protestations from the West Midlands’ walking
and cycling commissioner Adam Tranter, who argued such a ban would
“discourage cycling and penalise responsible cyclists”.

Last February cyclists in Bedford staged a ride protesting a
“discriminatory” town centre bike ban, while this summer Hammersmith and
Fulham Council introduced an e-bike and e-scooter ban along part of the
Thames Path.

> More cyclists fined for riding bikes through town centre – months on from
> rider ordered to pay £1,100

A pensioner in Grimsby also made headlines when he told the council to
stick its £100 fine for cycling in the town centre “up your a***”, saying
he would “rather go to prison than give them £100”.

That particular town centre ban in Grimsby has attracted quite a bit of
attention in recent times, with some locals accusing the council of
targeting the “old and slow” and cyclists “they can get away with” for
fines.

Wheels for Wellbeing, while criticising a councillor’s “get off and walk”
advice to town centre cyclists, also called for clearer signage which
specifically states that people who use standard cycles as mobility aids
are permitted to ride in pedestrianised zones, which they say will both
reassure disabled cyclists and help reduce the risk of confrontation
between pedestrians and people on bikes.

And last month, police in Nuneaton said they had asked the council to
introduce a no cycle zone to cut out “really dangerous” cycling and
“anti-social behaviour” in the shopping area, saying that “we get a lot of
kids wheelie-ing through and it sets the wrong tone”.

<https://road.cc/content/news/council-escalates-war-cycling-menaces-ban-305667>

--
Spike

On 01/03/2024 09:38 am, Spike wrote:
>
> Council “escalates war on cycling menaces” with new town centre ban,
> saying: “We will not stop until we eradicate this behaviour”
>
> The local authority says residents are “overwhelmingly in support of
> tougher action” against people riding bikes in pedestrianised zones
>
> by RYAN MALLON THU, DEC 14, 2023 16:23
>
> A local council says it has “escalated” and “intensified” its “war on
> cycling menaces” by implementing a complete ban on riding a bike in
> pedestrianised zones, as part of a wider crackdown on anti-social
> behaviour.
>
> North Lincolnshire Council announced this week (link is external) that a
> new Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) is now in place in Scunthorpe and
> Brigg, following a public consultation earlier this year, introducing
> stronger powers and increasing fines for what the local authority describes
> as the “scourge” of “irresponsible behaviour”.
>
> In Scunthorpe and Brigg town centres, cycling is now completely banned,
> with anyone caught riding a bike in pedestrianised areas set to be
> immediately handed a fixed penalty notice of £100. According to the
> previous PSPO, cyclists could only be fined if they refused to dismount
> when approached by an officer.

What use was that?

The parallel for motor vehicles would be drunk drivers were only
breathalysed and arrested IF they refused to park up and continue their
journeys by other means, when stopped by a police officer.
>
> The total cycling ban comes as part of a suite of toughened anti-social
> measures, which also include the outright ban of drinking in the street and
> greatly increased fines for littering, fly-tipping, neglecting waste duty
> of care, and graffiti.

There was already a "total cycling ban" in those town centres. The
deficiency was in the half-hearted (if that) enforcement regime.
>
> “We will not stop until we eradicate this behaviour,” Rob Waltham, the
> leader of the Conservative-controlled North Lincolnshire Council said in a
> statement, issued under the headline “Council triples fines as war on
> fly-tippers, litter louts, and cycling menaces intensifies”.
>
> “People need to use one of the thousands of bins provided, get off their
> bikes and push, or dispose of their household waste responsibly – it really
> is not that difficult.

Littering and chav-cycling on a pedestrian reserve equated.

That man has it right.
>
> “We have repeatedly asked people to stop doing these things, we have
> repeatedly told them how their behaviour impacts on others and, while we
> are starting to see some changes, it is clearly not enough. Local taxpayers
> will not pick up the bill for irresponsible behaviour.”
>
> John Davidson, the local authority’s cabinet member for communities and
> urban added: “We consulted earlier in the year on stronger measures to
> tackle the scourge of anti-social behaviour and the response from the
> public was overwhelmingly in support of tougher action.

Chav-cycling = "anti-social behaviour".

If only more councils took the same sensible view.
>
> “The vast majority of people don’t make the area a mess for others or cause
> problems – but for the few that do we are going to hit them even harder in
> the pocket, clearly they have not listened to our requests, pleas, and
> demands.
>
> “The Government provided the opportunity for us to increase the fines for
> these offences, residents have supported us, and we have done.”

Win / win.

[Who used to say that?]
>
> However, when the public consultation was launched earlier this year, the
> proposed ban was heavily criticised by disabled cycling charity Wheels for
> Wellbeing, who argued that they had the potential to “deepen discrimination
> against cycling as a mobility aid”.

Which bit of "no chav-bikes in/on pedestrian areas" did they not understand?

Would they also agitate for Motability cars to be allowed to be driven
along the footway and through pedestrianised precints?
>
> Nevertheless, Waltham maintained that the PSPO “has enabled us to protect
> vulnerable communities by targeting anyone creating a nuisance or putting
> themselves and others in danger”.
>
> “The new measures will enhance those protections and I make absolutely no
> apologies for doing so,” he said.
>
> The newly implemented cycling ban in Scunthorpe and Brigg is one of many
> that have come into force in town centres and pedestrianised zones across
> the UK in recent years.

That should surely have been "The newly ENFORCED cycling ban in
Scunthorpe and Brigg"!
>
> Earlier this month, a controversial ban on e-bikes in certain
> pedestrianised parts of Coventry city centre was introduced, with the
> deputy leader of the council warning that riders can expect strict
> enforcement.

Good.
>
> The new ruling, which prohibits e-bikes and e-scooters being ridden through
> sections of the city centre, was approved last month, as Coventry City
> Council passed a PSPO despite protestations from the West Midlands’ walking
> and cycling commissioner Adam Tranter, who argued such a ban would
> “discourage cycling and penalise responsible cyclists”.
>
> Last February cyclists in Bedford staged a ride protesting a
> “discriminatory” town centre bike ban, while this summer Hammersmith and
> Fulham Council introduced an e-bike and e-scooter ban along part of the
> Thames Path.
>
>> More cyclists fined for riding bikes through town centre – months on from
>> rider ordered to pay £1,100
>
> A pensioner in Grimsby also made headlines when he told the council to
> stick its £100 fine for cycling in the town centre “up your a***”, saying
> he would “rather go to prison than give them £100”.

No surprise or shock. That's the way that chav-cyclists usually behave.
>
> That particular town centre ban in Grimsby has attracted quite a bit of
> attention in recent times, with some locals accusing the council of
> targeting the “old and slow” and cyclists “they can get away with” for
> fines.
>
> Wheels for Wellbeing, while criticising a councillor’s “get off and walk”
> advice to town centre cyclists, also called for clearer signage which
> specifically states that people who use standard cycles as mobility aids
> are permitted to ride in pedestrianised zones, which they say will both
> reassure disabled cyclists and help reduce the risk of confrontation
> between pedestrians and people on bikes.

But why should there be signs saying that chav-cycling is allowed when
chav-cycling is NOT allowed?

Only, I suggest, so that chav-cyclists can pretend not to have
"understood ze English".
>
> And last month, police in Nuneaton said they had asked the council to
> introduce a no cycle zone to cut out “really dangerous” cycling and
> “anti-social behaviour” in the shopping area, saying that “we get a lot of
> kids wheelie-ing through and it sets the wrong tone”.

Quite so.

What is needed is straight confiscation of chav-cycles used on FOOTways
and in PEDESTRIAN zones.

No "ifs", no "buts", no "maybes". Just take the chav-bike, toss it it
into the back of a bin-lorry and let the chav walk.
>
> <https://road.cc/content/news/council-escalates-war-cycling-menaces-ban-305667>