M521 – Motion on Cleaner and Healthier Living Conditions 2019 Watch

This discussion is closed.
Saracen's Fez
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#1
M521 – Motion on Cleaner and Healthier Living Conditions 2019, Nunchuck-master-2334 MP
This House calls upon the government to address the needs for cleaner and healthier living and working conditions.

This can be done through the addition of new cycle routes, which would help decrease the overall effects of global warming, and it would help people get fitter. Traffic lanes can either be narrowed, and one lane made especially for cyclists, or new lanes can be added.

Something also needs to be done about the amount of litter on our roads. Hygiene is one of the most important things. If the UK was made a cleaner and tidier place, it could be used for more tourists. Would any of you go back to a place that had rubbish all over the ground?

These are the propositions I choose to put forward for a better UK.
0
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 weeks ago
#2
Nunchuck-master-2334 firstly I would say that it is good to see a new MP submit a private member’s item, I hope to see you around this place quite often.

On the topic of the motion, I will have to vote no because your suggestions include more traffic congestion and wasted money on cycle lanes that are often barely used as is
0
04MR17
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 weeks ago
#3
Cycle routes wouldn't particularly be the responsibility of national government, more local government or other fitness-orientated organisations.

There are certainly measures that could be implemented against litter, though waste disposal is a local authority policy area rather than national government. But I believe that this motion highlights an important problem and there are things which the government could do in response, so I support the motion.
0
London090
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 weeks ago
#4
I'm going to vote no despite the fact that I personally think your intentions are good. I think this motion would be inefficient, just because you're making new bicycle lanes doesn't mean there's a new incentive for people do use their bicycles instead of cars.
Last edited by London090; 4 weeks ago
0
CatusStarbright
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 weeks ago
#5
Nice to see a new face proposing items. As for substance, I would not support narrowing traffic lanes for cyclists, but do generally support the creation of new cycle lanes. With regards to litter, this would be tackled either through ant-littering campaigns (locally or nationally), or councils employing people to remove litter. Volunteer taskforces could also be set up, but this would not be down to the government to sort.
0
Saunders16
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 weeks ago
#6
(Original post by London090)
I'm going to vote no despite the fact that I personally think your intentions are good. I think this motion would be inefficient, just because you're making new bicycle lanes doesn't mean there's a new incentive for people do use their bicycles instead of cars.
That's nonsense - of course there is an increased incentive to use bicycles if there are lanes designed specifically for them. Using a bicycle become significantly safer, more efficient and easily accessible.

Disagree? Go to the Netherlands.



I strongly support this - remember to send it off to division after it is debated, Nunchuck-master-2334. I will be voting for this and I encourage my fellow MPs who believe in a better, healthier nation to join me.
0
London090
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 weeks ago
#7
No it isn't nonsense, here in China there are huge spacious bicycle lanes, but there are hardly any people on bicycles. In Germany the bicycle lanes are also the pedestrian lanes, and the only reason why so many people ride their bikes is because everything is close by students go to the school closest to them and it's usually only 5-10mins away.
Last edited by London090; 4 weeks ago
0
Jarred
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 weeks ago
#8
Aye, we should do whatever we can to improve the uptake of cycling. At the moment it is not as safe as it could be in big cities like London where more dedicated bike lanes would be a huge help. Like Saunders, I immediately thought of the Netherlands on this. It works so well I lost count of the number of times I almost got cut down by a bike on my visit to Amsterdam. More cycling makes for good green policy, and perhaps there is more we can learn from the Netherlands regarding green policy.

Perhaps the options presented in this motion are not sufficient to get more people on their bikes but it’s a good enough start, and that’s all a motion needs to be

Finally, just because we reduce the number of car lanes does not always mean we worsen traffic. This may seem unintuitive, but due to flow theory, it has been observed that adding lanes to roads can sometimes made traffic worse. What I’d draw from this is that if we get more people cycling, we have fewer people driving anyway so there’s that induced demand factor at play as well here.
1
SoggyCabbages
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 weeks ago
#9
Although the intentions are admirable in this motion, I shall be voting no.

New cycle routes to help decrease the effects of global warming? Changing the layout of 100s of miles of road networks isn't cheap or quick. Although cycle lanes would increase insentives to use bicycles, this would be a slow and ardurous process in getting to a stage where it makes a significant difference. You'd have a hard time convincing many of the British public to ditch their cars.
0
Andrew97
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 weeks ago
#10
Nay, narrowing roads (especially in London) is a bad idea. Nobody drives into central London for fun, they need to be there. Plus I see cyclists often not using the segregated lanes they have at their disposal.
0
TheRadishPrince
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 weeks ago
#11
A fine motion in my opinion so I will be voting for this.
People will still be able to use cars if they so wish and I'm sure many will but giving more incentives to use bicycles in the form of more, distinct bicycle lanes and routes away from the road will encourage their use greatly. I too immediately think of the success seen in the Netherlands and hope this may promote people to cycle short distances instead of drive. I believe this motion could save money for many people, especially those struggling financially, and promote a healthier lifestyle for our nation going forward.

We will need to ensure expansion of these routes does not damage our current road system however as many parts of the country are congested and will likely remain so due to not being built for a modern population. If done carefully and intelligently this can be a great move for our country.
Last edited by TheRadishPrince; 4 weeks ago
0
04MR17
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 weeks ago
#12
I should point out now that technically this motion does not call directly for more cycle lanes. "New cycle routes" are called for, these do not specifically have to be on roads. The following sentence on cycle lanes doesn't ditectly ask for them, just puts them there as an option for the government to respond to.

I don't see opposition to cycle lanes as a reason to oppose this motion.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
TommyDH
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 weeks ago
#13
Interesting. It depends, how would this be funded? If the cost is going to be put on the shoulders of ordinary taxpayers then nay.

If it won't affect taxes then yay. As a cyclist myself I think cycle lanes are a great way to encourage people to ditch their car for their bicycle, I personally know people particularly women who don't cycle solely for the fact "it's too dangerous". I have to cycle down several A roads to get here without cycle lanes and it's often a terrifying experience for me.

So more cycle routes that are quieter and safer may encourage more women to take it up too. However before any are implemented I would like the government to consult with colleagues in the Netherlands, who have the best cycling system in the world. The concerns others have shared here that "not enough use them" is because our system is inefficient and quite atrocious, with cycle paths leading into nowhere, into brick walls, with parked cars and trees in the way etc.

I'd like to hear how this would be funded without punishing the taxpayer first though.
1
TheRadishPrince
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 weeks ago
#14
(Original post by TommyDH)
Interesting. It depends, how would this be funded? If the cost is going to be put on the shoulders of ordinary taxpayers then nay.

If it won't affect taxes then yay. As a cyclist myself I think cycle lanes are a great way to encourage people to ditch their car for their bicycle, I personally know people particularly women who don't cycle solely for the fact "it's too dangerous". I have to cycle down several A roads to get here without cycle lanes and it's often a terrifying experience for me.

So more cycle routes that are quieter and safer may encourage more women to take it up too. However before any are implemented I would like the government to consult with colleagues in the Netherlands, who have the best cycling system in the world. The concerns others have shared here that "not enough use them" is because our system is inefficient and quite atrocious, with cycle paths leading into nowhere, into brick walls, with parked cars and trees in the way etc.

I'd like to hear how this would be funded without punishing the taxpayer first though.
I'm also curious on the exact method of funding these new routes for cyclists. Perhaps cuts in some area (unsure in what) to keep tax intake roughly the same? Cuts are always a touchy subject however especially with nearly a decade of Tory cuts turning many voters sour to them so I'd be interested on a proposed financial solution with more detail from other members of the house.
0
04MR17
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 weeks ago
#15
(Original post by TommyDH)
Interesting. It depends, how would this be funded? If the cost is going to be put on the shoulders of ordinary taxpayers then nay.

If it won't affect taxes then yay. As a cyclist myself I think cycle lanes are a great way to encourage people to ditch their car for their bicycle, I personally know people particularly women who don't cycle solely for the fact "it's too dangerous". I have to cycle down several A roads to get here without cycle lanes and it's often a terrifying experience for me.

So more cycle routes that are quieter and safer may encourage more women to take it up too. However before any are implemented I would like the government to consult with colleagues in the Netherlands, who have the best cycling system in the world. The concerns others have shared here that "not enough use them" is because our system is inefficient and quite atrocious, with cycle paths leading into nowhere, into brick walls, with parked cars and trees in the way etc.

I'd like to hear how this would be funded without punishing the taxpayer first though.
(Original post by TheRadishPrince)
I'm also curious on the exact method of funding these new routes for cyclists. Perhaps cuts in some area (unsure in what) to keep tax intake roughly the same? Cuts are always a touchy subject however especially with nearly a decade of Tory cuts turning many voters sour to them so I'd be interested on a proposed financial solution with more detail from other members of the house.
This kind of detail wouldn't usually be seen in a motion, but would be expected in the government's response to the motion, or any subsequent bills. Motions aren't meant to be comprehensive implementations of new law, simply a viewpoint representing the majority of the house if it's passed.
1
TheRadishPrince
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 weeks ago
#16
(Original post by 04MR17)
This kind of detail wouldn't usually be seen in a motion, but would be expected in the government's response to the motion, or any subsequent bills. Motions aren't meant to be comprehensive implementations of new law, simply a viewpoint representing the majority of the house if it's passed.
Ah I see, thank you for the clarification!
0
TommyDH
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 weeks ago
#17
(Original post by 04MR17)
This kind of detail wouldn't usually be seen in a motion, but would be expected in the government's response to the motion, or any subsequent bills. Motions aren't meant to be comprehensive implementations of new law, simply a viewpoint representing the majority of the house if it's passed.
Thanks, you're a guiding rock

In that case I'm cautiously in favour of this motion. Carbon emissions aside, the nation is getting too fat. More people cycling is good all around. Cycling proficiency should be taught in school.
1
mr T 999
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 weeks ago
#18
Nay! I do not believe this is for the government to solve this is more of a local issue so should be left to councils to sort out.

I do not believe what's set out in the motion to reduce roads spaces to build cycle lanes. This will add to the already problem of congestion issues. Nor do I believe cyclist will use their lane and will still end up using the roads.

An example of this has been implemented in Birmingham. Where currently construction is underway to make new cycle lanes, this was done by narrowing pavements where pedestrian walk and slightly reducing the bus lanes.

Regarding littering you can use anti-littering campaigns or have volunteers group picking up litters. Again this needs to be tackled by the local councils.

BTW what party is this person from?
0
04MR17
  • Community Assistant
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 weeks ago
#19
(Original post by mr T 999)
BTW what party is this person from?
Find out for yourself.
Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
0
CatusStarbright
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 weeks ago
#20
(Original post by mr T 999)
BTW what party is this person from?
They're Labour, T.
0
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you give blood?

Yes (61)
8.65%
I used to but I don't now (17)
2.41%
No, but I want to start (265)
37.59%
No, I am unable to (167)
23.69%
No, I chose not to (195)
27.66%

Watched Threads

View All