Ralph
Sorry, but practical experience and real world research suggest that the
statements you've written below are not actually what happens. Indeed,
there's some very good research into transport policy and (local) government
performance that seriously undermines those statements. It's only some very
questionable research, commissioned by government, that supports those
statements.
And in my view this kind of discussion has become necessary in this forum.
I had a conversation with a member of this group the other day and our
feeling was that present research has become too focussed and inward looking
within the community of cyclists and potential cyclists, to the exclusion of
the administrative context.
For a number of years one of my concerns is that the influence of, and the
quality of interaction with, government, it's agencies and
quasi-governmental organizations associated with providing for cycling (e.g
Sustrans, Cycling England, even CTC (which also holds government
contracts)), is negatively influencing the environment for cycling in this
country...and has been over a lot of years.
The thread discussing Sustrans performance is a useful example of a
quasi-government organization (best descriptive I can come up with at the
moment) performance. My experience is that the focus of such organizations
is inward and "mission focussed"....to the exclusion of its own community
and the wider population. (I'd note that this is not confined to NGO in the
transport sector but I've seen the same characteristics in the health sector
and elsewhere....so there's a wider issue in play.)
My experience, of interactions with Sustrans, local authorities, local
police authorities and central government agencies, is similar to Ian's.
Speaking as a former central government regulator and policy researcher,
from the early to late-90's, there has been a significant deterioration in
public service standards and ethics (this is an issue with a much wider
reach, but it affects delivery of cycling). And there is a significant body
of independent academic research which supports this.
In my view we do need to closely, and critically, examine the role and
performance of government and these agencies if enhancements in service and
infrastructure, to improve safety and convenience for cyclists, are to be
made in the future. Cycling policy, development and delivery may well
provide a useful representation of public sector performance, certainly in
respect of transportation and possibly wider. (I'd note the current row
about the West Coast franchise is another example of the malaise within
government and the excutive).
Oh, and in the case of my local authority, experience, and rather a lot of
evidence, points to the opposite of what you've said...and a former chief
executive has even gone into print to complain about the culture of that
particular organization!
Quite happy to provide reams of evidence to support research in this area.
Cheers
John Meudell
-----Original Message-----
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ralph Bagge
Sent: 18 October 2012 18:50
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Sustrans
I think you should continue this discussion somewhere else too.
Local government is subject to checks and balances and officers are
answerable to elected members.
Major highways engineering works are subject to consultation.
I suggest you check your council's constitution and their overview and
scrutiny committee - details should be available on their website. Your
local councillor is at liberty to request an officer's report.
I have found with local government that asking questions to elicit facts
gets a better response than uninformed criticism.
On 18 Oct 2012, at 18:34, Ian Perry wrote:
> Thank you Nick, but this is about Society and about Cycling.
>
> It's also interesting that the officers in a council can by-pass elected
representatives when they obtain money from the civil service (Welsh
Government in this case). Is there any accountability for the money highway
engineers spend or the results in terms of safety or delays?
>
> Other than with Sustrans, there appears to have been no input in the case
I've raised by anyone other than the highways engineers, which raises
questions about the role of democracy. We can elect people, but they have
no say in key decisions! Is there any point in lobbying politicians when
highway engineers can by-pass them and do not need to justify their
decisions or actions? Communities and citizens seem to have no chance of
influencing the decisions of unelected highways engineers.
>
> Ian
>
>
|