ERCDT report - Don't hold your breath
Almost two years ago, the government, in the shape of the National Cycling Strategy, appointed AEA (surely not the Atomic Energy Authority?) to form the English Regions Cycling Development Team - ERCDT. Cue fanfare, drums and flashing lights. The team would investigate each local authority for how "cycle-friendly" it was, and it would award points, or bells in this case, for good provision, cycling strategies, number of cycling officers, infrastructure etc.
Great idea! Independent assessment of a region's local authorities provision for and promotion of cycling, by experts. Those LAs which provided properly for and supported and promoted cycling would get their bells rung, while those whose idea of provision is a shared use path that goes nowhere, would get their necks wrung.
Of course, this did depend somewhat on who the ERCDT regional rep spoke to: if he only spoke to the council, then he would get a rather different view than if he consulted local cycle groups. In a report from the ERCDT (Cycling policy and practice in the English Highway Authorities -The methodology and conclusions of the ERCDT assessments, July 2003) it would appear that it was almost mandatory to speak to such groups "Discussions have been held with local authority officers in relevant departments to secure additional information and clarification. Meetings with cycling groups and other stakeholders have provided further insights." It would appear that in most areas of England, the ERCDT rep did speak to local cycling groups, to get a rounded appreciation of what the council was really like.
For some reason which I find not at all clear, this didn't happen in the South-West. The ERCDT local rep, Douglas Fremlin, didn't consult with local cycling groups, even though they are extremely active and have a great deal they could contribute to the audit. He did consult Sustrans and Lifecycle (ex-Cyclewest) but both of these organisations, although fine in their own way, are providers to councils, and both have their own agendas. Neither do they represent cyclists, neither are democratic, campaigning organisations, and they are both financially dependant on the very organisations under investigation. So, either Mr Fremlin is so "expert" about cycling that he doesn't know what organisations represent cyclists, or he didn't feel like consulting them. Either way, the only people not consulted in an audit about cycling were, you guessed it, cyclists.
The ERCDT audit has been completed, and the draft report has been sent to councils for their comments, but when it's finally made public, don't be surprised if it doesn't bear much relation to reality.
Perhaps it would have been different if they'd bothered to talk to cyclists.
yours, the cynical cyclist
Farcycle
