New rules for mass cycling events in New Forest from National Park Authority

Daily Echo: New rules for mass cycling events in Forest New rules for mass cycling events in Forest

A CRACKDOWN has been launched in a bid to reduce the impact of mass cycling events in the New Forest.

It follows a flood of complaints about the speed and number of cyclists in the most recent event as well as a bid to sabotage the event by protestors, which put entrants' lives at risk.

The National Park Authority (NPA) and other organisations in the district have published a comprehensive blueprint for organisers of the events, which often attract more than 2,000 entrants.

It is hoped the blueprint will balance the needs of the cyclists with the wants of the residents.

The latest event, the New Forest Spring Sportive, sparked a new round of controversy after saboteurs tried to disrupt the ride by throwing nails across the route and 18 cyclists were banned from all future events after urinating in public.

Last year the NPA and other organisations published a revised cycling charter in a bid to banish bad behaviour.

Now the same team has produced a draft charter that provides the organisers of mass cycling events with a long list of do's and don'ts.

The document contains advice on a range of issues, including how to liaise with local communities, provide effective marshalling and ensure that residents are able to supply plenty of feedback.

An NPA spokesman said: “The New Forest is unique in that it is a working forest with forestry, farming and equestrian activity on its narrow roads and tracks. Great care is needed to avoid unnecessary conflict and ensure the safety of all.

“We are confident that event organisers will find the charter useful and implements its recommendations.”

To read the draft document, visit the New Forest NPA website.

Comments (52)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:23pm Thu 1 May 14

Franks Tank says...

Anything in the charter about idiots not throwing tacks on the road, spraying mud on the road, tearing down direction signs or driving aggressively?
Mmmm....
Thought not.
Anything in the charter about idiots not throwing tacks on the road, spraying mud on the road, tearing down direction signs or driving aggressively? Mmmm.... Thought not. Franks Tank
  • Score: 7

1:28pm Thu 1 May 14

Frank28 says...

The NFNPA can issue advice for cyclists, but they are powerless to control, or prevent cyclists turning up one weekend and cycle along a pre-determined route. Such events that pass through areas where wild animals roam freely, means that cyclists use the roads at their own risk. Cyclists are well aware of their surroundings, and will resent being told what they can and cannot do.
The NFNPA can issue advice for cyclists, but they are powerless to control, or prevent cyclists turning up one weekend and cycle along a pre-determined route. Such events that pass through areas where wild animals roam freely, means that cyclists use the roads at their own risk. Cyclists are well aware of their surroundings, and will resent being told what they can and cannot do. Frank28
  • Score: -5

1:34pm Thu 1 May 14

saint61 says...

Tour De France - Yorkshire 2014
Giro D'Italia - Belfast 2014

These are what you call GRAND TOUR events. The New Forest can't even hold an amateurs' event.

Maybe Wiggle and the NPA need to ask these authorities how they stage such events because they certainly can't do it themselves.
Tour De France - Yorkshire 2014 Giro D'Italia - Belfast 2014 These are what you call GRAND TOUR events. The New Forest can't even hold an amateurs' event. Maybe Wiggle and the NPA need to ask these authorities how they stage such events because they certainly can't do it themselves. saint61
  • Score: 8

1:48pm Thu 1 May 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Franks Tank wrote:
Anything in the charter about idiots not throwing tacks on the road, spraying mud on the road, tearing down direction signs or driving aggressively?
Mmmm....
Thought not.
Why would it? The document is aimed at organisers of events. I'm assuming the organisers of the last cycling event didn't specifically ask people to throw tacks on the road. I'm assuming the document doesn't contain anything about not stealing bikes, or setting fire to homeless people, or any number of other things that are outside the scope of the organised event, and beyond the control of the organisers.
[quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: Anything in the charter about idiots not throwing tacks on the road, spraying mud on the road, tearing down direction signs or driving aggressively? Mmmm.... Thought not.[/p][/quote]Why would it? The document is aimed at organisers of events. I'm assuming the organisers of the last cycling event didn't specifically ask people to throw tacks on the road. I'm assuming the document doesn't contain anything about not stealing bikes, or setting fire to homeless people, or any number of other things that are outside the scope of the organised event, and beyond the control of the organisers. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 11

1:56pm Thu 1 May 14

alanrr says...

sounds NIMBYish here......the forest is for all to enjoy.....and who hasn't urinated in the open (hopefully without displaying themselves to the world)......the animals certainly do it so can't see a real problem there.....the wrongdoers are the idiots that endanger others and animals with their laying down of tacks etc..
sounds NIMBYish here......the forest is for all to enjoy.....and who hasn't urinated in the open (hopefully without displaying themselves to the world)......the animals certainly do it so can't see a real problem there.....the wrongdoers are the idiots that endanger others and animals with their laying down of tacks etc.. alanrr
  • Score: 5

1:57pm Thu 1 May 14

Franks Tank says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
Anything in the charter about idiots not throwing tacks on the road, spraying mud on the road, tearing down direction signs or driving aggressively?
Mmmm....
Thought not.
Why would it? The document is aimed at organisers of events. I'm assuming the organisers of the last cycling event didn't specifically ask people to throw tacks on the road. I'm assuming the document doesn't contain anything about not stealing bikes, or setting fire to homeless people, or any number of other things that are outside the scope of the organised event, and beyond the control of the organisers.
OK, maybe there should be a special charter instructing stroppy incomers, residents and locals how to be civilised.
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: Anything in the charter about idiots not throwing tacks on the road, spraying mud on the road, tearing down direction signs or driving aggressively? Mmmm.... Thought not.[/p][/quote]Why would it? The document is aimed at organisers of events. I'm assuming the organisers of the last cycling event didn't specifically ask people to throw tacks on the road. I'm assuming the document doesn't contain anything about not stealing bikes, or setting fire to homeless people, or any number of other things that are outside the scope of the organised event, and beyond the control of the organisers.[/p][/quote]OK, maybe there should be a special charter instructing stroppy incomers, residents and locals how to be civilised. Franks Tank
  • Score: 5

2:12pm Thu 1 May 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Franks Tank wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
Anything in the charter about idiots not throwing tacks on the road, spraying mud on the road, tearing down direction signs or driving aggressively?
Mmmm....
Thought not.
Why would it? The document is aimed at organisers of events. I'm assuming the organisers of the last cycling event didn't specifically ask people to throw tacks on the road. I'm assuming the document doesn't contain anything about not stealing bikes, or setting fire to homeless people, or any number of other things that are outside the scope of the organised event, and beyond the control of the organisers.
OK, maybe there should be a special charter instructing stroppy incomers, residents and locals how to be civilised.
Excellent idea. We could call it 'the law'.
[quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: Anything in the charter about idiots not throwing tacks on the road, spraying mud on the road, tearing down direction signs or driving aggressively? Mmmm.... Thought not.[/p][/quote]Why would it? The document is aimed at organisers of events. I'm assuming the organisers of the last cycling event didn't specifically ask people to throw tacks on the road. I'm assuming the document doesn't contain anything about not stealing bikes, or setting fire to homeless people, or any number of other things that are outside the scope of the organised event, and beyond the control of the organisers.[/p][/quote]OK, maybe there should be a special charter instructing stroppy incomers, residents and locals how to be civilised.[/p][/quote]Excellent idea. We could call it 'the law'. Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 12

2:24pm Thu 1 May 14

Mr E says...

If they want to get serious about enforcing any rules then charge a significant refundable deposit that is forfeited if rules are broken.
If they want to get serious about enforcing any rules then charge a significant refundable deposit that is forfeited if rules are broken. Mr E
  • Score: 10

2:26pm Thu 1 May 14

peregrine73 says...

Confine cycling to specific areas of the Forest,you virtually can't walk anywhere in the New Forest without being passed by a cyclist,heathland,mi
ddle of incloseures, there is always a cyclist!,and often more very noisy cyclists.The unique New Forest has to have some undisturbed areas for its rare wildlife to live, its seems that the balance of leisure activities specifically cycleying has gone to far in recent years.
Confine cycling to specific areas of the Forest,you virtually can't walk anywhere in the New Forest without being passed by a cyclist,heathland,mi ddle of incloseures, there is always a cyclist!,and often more very noisy cyclists.The unique New Forest has to have some undisturbed areas for its rare wildlife to live, its seems that the balance of leisure activities specifically cycleying has gone to far in recent years. peregrine73
  • Score: -12

2:30pm Thu 1 May 14

Franks Tank says...

Charlie Bucket wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
Charlie Bucket wrote:
Franks Tank wrote:
Anything in the charter about idiots not throwing tacks on the road, spraying mud on the road, tearing down direction signs or driving aggressively?
Mmmm....
Thought not.
Why would it? The document is aimed at organisers of events. I'm assuming the organisers of the last cycling event didn't specifically ask people to throw tacks on the road. I'm assuming the document doesn't contain anything about not stealing bikes, or setting fire to homeless people, or any number of other things that are outside the scope of the organised event, and beyond the control of the organisers.
OK, maybe there should be a special charter instructing stroppy incomers, residents and locals how to be civilised.
Excellent idea. We could call it 'the law'.
I think you might be on to something there.
[quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Charlie Bucket[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: Anything in the charter about idiots not throwing tacks on the road, spraying mud on the road, tearing down direction signs or driving aggressively? Mmmm.... Thought not.[/p][/quote]Why would it? The document is aimed at organisers of events. I'm assuming the organisers of the last cycling event didn't specifically ask people to throw tacks on the road. I'm assuming the document doesn't contain anything about not stealing bikes, or setting fire to homeless people, or any number of other things that are outside the scope of the organised event, and beyond the control of the organisers.[/p][/quote]OK, maybe there should be a special charter instructing stroppy incomers, residents and locals how to be civilised.[/p][/quote]Excellent idea. We could call it 'the law'.[/p][/quote]I think you might be on to something there. Franks Tank
  • Score: 8

2:52pm Thu 1 May 14

Charlie Bucket says...

Mr E wrote:
If they want to get serious about enforcing any rules then charge a significant refundable deposit that is forfeited if rules are broken.
Hey! Stop having sensible ideas! Get him, everyone!
[quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: If they want to get serious about enforcing any rules then charge a significant refundable deposit that is forfeited if rules are broken.[/p][/quote]Hey! Stop having sensible ideas! Get him, everyone! Charlie Bucket
  • Score: 6

3:14pm Thu 1 May 14

saint61 says...

peregrine73 wrote:
Confine cycling to specific areas of the Forest,you virtually can't walk anywhere in the New Forest without being passed by a cyclist,heathland,mi

ddle of incloseures, there is always a cyclist!,and often more very noisy cyclists.The unique New Forest has to have some undisturbed areas for its rare wildlife to live, its seems that the balance of leisure activities specifically cycleying has gone to far in recent years.
what a dk
[quote][p][bold]peregrine73[/bold] wrote: Confine cycling to specific areas of the Forest,you virtually can't walk anywhere in the New Forest without being passed by a cyclist,heathland,mi ddle of incloseures, there is always a cyclist!,and often more very noisy cyclists.The unique New Forest has to have some undisturbed areas for its rare wildlife to live, its seems that the balance of leisure activities specifically cycleying has gone to far in recent years.[/p][/quote]what a dk saint61
  • Score: 2

3:17pm Thu 1 May 14

sburman says...

Frank28 wrote:
The NFNPA can issue advice for cyclists, but they are powerless to control, or prevent cyclists turning up one weekend and cycle along a pre-determined route. Such events that pass through areas where wild animals roam freely, means that cyclists use the roads at their own risk. Cyclists are well aware of their surroundings, and will resent being told what they can and cannot do.
First: I am not a cyclist.
Of course the New Forest is a public access facility and how many days of the year do these cyclists `Hog` the local roads.
By far the most cyclists probably do show respect & responsibility to their surroundings but it is the small, but widely reported, minority, that think they have the right to anything they like and thus spoiling the occasion for all.
The same goes for the locals (and not all the people who `complain` are locals ), it is only the noisy minority that spoil it for the many.
Many local events take place which clog up the roads, Carnivals, Fun Fairs, Circuses, Car rallies, Country Fairs, Steam Rallies, Sports event, Etc. etc., and most of them leave a wake of mess behind them, but they don’t seem subject to this sort of widely reported stupidity.
[quote][p][bold]Frank28[/bold] wrote: The NFNPA can issue advice for cyclists, but they are powerless to control, or prevent cyclists turning up one weekend and cycle along a pre-determined route. Such events that pass through areas where wild animals roam freely, means that cyclists use the roads at their own risk. Cyclists are well aware of their surroundings, and will resent being told what they can and cannot do.[/p][/quote]First: I am not a cyclist. Of course the New Forest is a public access facility and how many days of the year do these cyclists `Hog` the local roads. By far the most cyclists probably do show respect & responsibility to their surroundings but it is the small, but widely reported, minority, that think they have the right to anything they like and thus spoiling the occasion for all. The same goes for the locals (and not all the people who `complain` are locals ), it is only the noisy minority that spoil it for the many. Many local events take place which clog up the roads, Carnivals, Fun Fairs, Circuses, Car rallies, Country Fairs, Steam Rallies, Sports event, Etc. etc., and most of them leave a wake of mess behind them, but they don’t seem subject to this sort of widely reported stupidity. sburman
  • Score: 13

3:36pm Thu 1 May 14

vpharm says...

Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers! vpharm
  • Score: -11

3:41pm Thu 1 May 14

sotonwinch09 says...

vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
You don't pay tax to use the roads either! What you pay is Vehicle Excise Duty. This is based on emissions and charged accordingly. Cyclists have no emissions so do not need to pay. Smart cars, electric cars and emergency services vehicles don't pay either.
[quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]You don't pay tax to use the roads either! What you pay is Vehicle Excise Duty. This is based on emissions and charged accordingly. Cyclists have no emissions so do not need to pay. Smart cars, electric cars and emergency services vehicles don't pay either. sotonwinch09
  • Score: 11

3:43pm Thu 1 May 14

Dover Saint says...

vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
Oh dear here we go again. Nobody pays road tax any more. In fact you are nearly 80 years behind the times. This is a quote from Winston Churchill in the subject: "Entertainments may be taxed; public houses may be taxed; racehorses may be taxed…and the yield devoted to the general revenue. But motorists are to be privileged for all time to have the whole yield of the tax on motors devoted to roads. Obviously this is all nonsense…Such contentions are absurd, and constitute…an outrage upon the sovereignty of Parliament and upon common sense."
[quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]Oh dear here we go again. Nobody pays road tax any more. In fact you are nearly 80 years behind the times. This is a quote from Winston Churchill in the subject: "Entertainments may be taxed; public houses may be taxed; racehorses may be taxed…and the yield devoted to the general revenue. But motorists are to be privileged for all time to have the whole yield of the tax on motors devoted to roads. Obviously this is all nonsense…Such contentions are absurd, and constitute…an outrage upon the sovereignty of Parliament and upon common sense." Dover Saint
  • Score: 5

4:13pm Thu 1 May 14

befriendly says...

I think it's more of a health issue for the locals. They see all these fit and healthy people enjoying themselves and think I'm liable to die before them because I'm such a lazy, miserable sob; well lets put an end to them getting fit around me.
I think it's more of a health issue for the locals. They see all these fit and healthy people enjoying themselves and think I'm liable to die before them because I'm such a lazy, miserable sob; well lets put an end to them getting fit around me. befriendly
  • Score: 0

4:17pm Thu 1 May 14

Franks Tank says...

vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
There are approx 3 million vehicles on the road today that (legally) don't pay VED, what are you suggesting we do about all those "free loaders"?
[quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]There are approx 3 million vehicles on the road today that (legally) don't pay VED, what are you suggesting we do about all those "free loaders"? Franks Tank
  • Score: 8

5:09pm Thu 1 May 14

Quizbook says...

vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
How many times do we have to say it ?
Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937.
We all pay for roads through general taxation.
[quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation. Quizbook
  • Score: 7

5:11pm Thu 1 May 14

Torchie1 says...

saint61 wrote:
Tour De France - Yorkshire 2014
Giro D'Italia - Belfast 2014

These are what you call GRAND TOUR events. The New Forest can't even hold an amateurs' event.

Maybe Wiggle and the NPA need to ask these authorities how they stage such events because they certainly can't do it themselves.
Probably because Wiggle want to make as much money out of the participants as possible with minimal outlay from the organiser. Start applying for road closures, various permissions and a Police presence and it will mean an entrance fee that few will be prepared to pay.
[quote][p][bold]saint61[/bold] wrote: Tour De France - Yorkshire 2014 Giro D'Italia - Belfast 2014 These are what you call GRAND TOUR events. The New Forest can't even hold an amateurs' event. Maybe Wiggle and the NPA need to ask these authorities how they stage such events because they certainly can't do it themselves.[/p][/quote]Probably because Wiggle want to make as much money out of the participants as possible with minimal outlay from the organiser. Start applying for road closures, various permissions and a Police presence and it will mean an entrance fee that few will be prepared to pay. Torchie1
  • Score: 4

5:12pm Thu 1 May 14

bigfella777 says...

And if they break the rules what can they actually do? Nothing except ban the event.
And if they break the rules what can they actually do? Nothing except ban the event. bigfella777
  • Score: 0

5:18pm Thu 1 May 14

Torchie1 says...

Franks Tank wrote:
vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
There are approx 3 million vehicles on the road today that (legally) don't pay VED, what are you suggesting we do about all those "free loaders"?
Just sit back and content yourself with the knowledge that they are all doing it legally and your tax is subsidising it. Did you know that the rolling threshold for historic vehicles which don't pay any VED, has just rolled on to allow another years worth of production to enjoy the highway for free? Al that without a requirement for an MOT and cheap insurance to boot. Happy days.
[quote][p][bold]Franks Tank[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]There are approx 3 million vehicles on the road today that (legally) don't pay VED, what are you suggesting we do about all those "free loaders"?[/p][/quote]Just sit back and content yourself with the knowledge that they are all doing it legally and your tax is subsidising it. Did you know that the rolling threshold for historic vehicles which don't pay any VED, has just rolled on to allow another years worth of production to enjoy the highway for free? Al that without a requirement for an MOT and cheap insurance to boot. Happy days. Torchie1
  • Score: 2

7:07pm Thu 1 May 14

Buzzard2 says...

My wife just said to me, "It is all just a lot of very stupid men sobbing because they are not allowed to play with their toys."

And you know what? She's absolutely right.
My wife just said to me, "It is all just a lot of very stupid men sobbing because they are not allowed to play with their toys." And you know what? She's absolutely right. Buzzard2
  • Score: -4

7:21pm Thu 1 May 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Buzzard2 wrote:
My wife just said to me, "It is all just a lot of very stupid men sobbing because they are not allowed to play with their toys."

And you know what? She's absolutely right.
Who? The people complaining about the cyclists? Or the cyclists? In either case, your wife is wrong as it's not just men but also women and children but is completely wrong if she meant the cyclists.
[quote][p][bold]Buzzard2[/bold] wrote: My wife just said to me, "It is all just a lot of very stupid men sobbing because they are not allowed to play with their toys." And you know what? She's absolutely right.[/p][/quote]Who? The people complaining about the cyclists? Or the cyclists? In either case, your wife is wrong as it's not just men but also women and children but is completely wrong if she meant the cyclists. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -7

7:36pm Thu 1 May 14

Solomon's Boot says...

How about some rules for the **** motorists on New Forest roads too?
How about some rules for the **** motorists on New Forest roads too? Solomon's Boot
  • Score: 4

11:53pm Thu 1 May 14

Positively4thStreet says...

Quizbook wrote:
vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
How many times do we have to say it ?
Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937.
We all pay for roads through general taxation.
Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"?
Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary.
That's why the little round paper document,representin
g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc"
The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes.
Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate?
And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?
[quote][p][bold]Quizbook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.[/p][/quote]Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default? Positively4thStreet
  • Score: -2

12:12am Fri 2 May 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
Quizbook wrote:
vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
How many times do we have to say it ?
Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937.
We all pay for roads through general taxation.
Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"?
Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary.
That's why the little round paper document,representin

g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc"
The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes.
Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate?
And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?
Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quizbook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.[/p][/quote]Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?[/p][/quote]Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

12:34am Fri 2 May 14

Positively4thStreet says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
Quizbook wrote:
vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
How many times do we have to say it ?
Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937.
We all pay for roads through general taxation.
Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"?
Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary.
That's why the little round paper document,representin


g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc"
The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes.
Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate?
And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?
Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.
Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years.
You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie
d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads?
Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quizbook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.[/p][/quote]Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?[/p][/quote]Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.[/p][/quote]Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years. You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads? Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy. Positively4thStreet
  • Score: 1

12:51am Fri 2 May 14

Esteban09 says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
Quizbook wrote:
vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
How many times do we have to say it ?
Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937.
We all pay for roads through general taxation.
Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"?
Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary.
That's why the little round paper document,representin

g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc"
The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes.
Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate?
And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?
You really are so unbelievably stupid. Go and get your IQ tested.
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quizbook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.[/p][/quote]Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?[/p][/quote]You really are so unbelievably stupid. Go and get your IQ tested. Esteban09
  • Score: -6

6:37am Fri 2 May 14

Drhysted says...

vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
You've come late to the party I see.

Entrants to all events held by UKCE display clear numbers. Yes they are easy to see, if you can't get your eyes tested.
[quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]You've come late to the party I see. Entrants to all events held by UKCE display clear numbers. Yes they are easy to see, if you can't get your eyes tested. Drhysted
  • Score: 3

7:25am Fri 2 May 14

peregrine73 says...

saint61 wrote:
peregrine73 wrote:
Confine cycling to specific areas of the Forest,you virtually can't walk anywhere in the New Forest without being passed by a cyclist,heathland,mi


ddle of incloseures, there is always a cyclist!,and often more very noisy cyclists.The unique New Forest has to have some undisturbed areas for its rare wildlife to live, its seems that the balance of leisure activities specifically cycleying has gone to far in recent years.
what a dk
Very detailed and informative reply saint 61,but then yours usually are!
[quote][p][bold]saint61[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]peregrine73[/bold] wrote: Confine cycling to specific areas of the Forest,you virtually can't walk anywhere in the New Forest without being passed by a cyclist,heathland,mi ddle of incloseures, there is always a cyclist!,and often more very noisy cyclists.The unique New Forest has to have some undisturbed areas for its rare wildlife to live, its seems that the balance of leisure activities specifically cycleying has gone to far in recent years.[/p][/quote]what a dk[/p][/quote]Very detailed and informative reply saint 61,but then yours usually are! peregrine73
  • Score: 4

8:45am Fri 2 May 14

Positively4thStreet says...

Esteban09 wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
Quizbook wrote:
vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
How many times do we have to say it ?
Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937.
We all pay for roads through general taxation.
Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"?
Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary.
That's why the little round paper document,representin


g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc"
The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes.
Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate?
And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?
You really are so unbelievably stupid. Go and get your IQ tested.
Truth hurt does it?
[quote][p][bold]Esteban09[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quizbook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.[/p][/quote]Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?[/p][/quote]You really are so unbelievably stupid. Go and get your IQ tested.[/p][/quote]Truth hurt does it? Positively4thStreet
  • Score: 2

8:54am Fri 2 May 14

camerajuan says...

Any chance of clamping down on the speed of drivers how cause more damage than any Wiggle/Sportive? I know there's "the law" but do they really care enough to prosecute all the drivers who break it?

Are there campaigns against it?
Any chance of clamping down on the speed of drivers how cause more damage than any Wiggle/Sportive? I know there's "the law" but do they really care enough to prosecute all the drivers who break it? Are there campaigns against it? camerajuan
  • Score: -1

9:15am Fri 2 May 14

Torchie1 says...

camerajuan wrote:
Any chance of clamping down on the speed of drivers how cause more damage than any Wiggle/Sportive? I know there's "the law" but do they really care enough to prosecute all the drivers who break it?

Are there campaigns against it?
If they care enough to rigorously enforce the speeding laws, who knows what could be next on the agenda, bicycles ridden on the road at night without lights, bicycles ridden through red lights............. be careful what you wish for.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: Any chance of clamping down on the speed of drivers how cause more damage than any Wiggle/Sportive? I know there's "the law" but do they really care enough to prosecute all the drivers who break it? Are there campaigns against it?[/p][/quote]If they care enough to rigorously enforce the speeding laws, who knows what could be next on the agenda, bicycles ridden on the road at night without lights, bicycles ridden through red lights............. be careful what you wish for. Torchie1
  • Score: 2

11:02am Fri 2 May 14

RomseyKeith says...

Buzzard2 wrote:
My wife just said to me, "It is all just a lot of very stupid men sobbing because they are not allowed to play with their toys." And you know what? She's absolutely right.
No she isn't. Many women cycle too, and take part in similar events. Many women are also at the top of their field in professional cycling competitions. Your wife's comment is nothing more than a prejudiced sexist attack, which would not be tollerated if it was directed at a different race, sexual orientation, or on the female gender if the same comment came from a man. For some reason, sexism is tollerated if it is directed towards men, but shouldn't be if people were really concerned with equality.
[quote][p][bold]Buzzard2[/bold] wrote: My wife just said to me, "It is all just a lot of very stupid men sobbing because they are not allowed to play with their toys." And you know what? She's absolutely right.[/p][/quote]No she isn't. Many women cycle too, and take part in similar events. Many women are also at the top of their field in professional cycling competitions. Your wife's comment is nothing more than a prejudiced sexist attack, which would not be tollerated if it was directed at a different race, sexual orientation, or on the female gender if the same comment came from a man. For some reason, sexism is tollerated if it is directed towards men, but shouldn't be if people were really concerned with equality. RomseyKeith
  • Score: 1

11:29am Fri 2 May 14

From the sidelines says...

Torchie1 wrote:
saint61 wrote:
Tour De France - Yorkshire 2014
Giro D'Italia - Belfast 2014

These are what you call GRAND TOUR events. The New Forest can't even hold an amateurs' event.

Maybe Wiggle and the NPA need to ask these authorities how they stage such events because they certainly can't do it themselves.
Probably because Wiggle want to make as much money out of the participants as possible with minimal outlay from the organiser. Start applying for road closures, various permissions and a Police presence and it will mean an entrance fee that few will be prepared to pay.
You obviously have no idea about the economics of the Tour de France.

Here's a suggestion: get yourself educated.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]saint61[/bold] wrote: Tour De France - Yorkshire 2014 Giro D'Italia - Belfast 2014 These are what you call GRAND TOUR events. The New Forest can't even hold an amateurs' event. Maybe Wiggle and the NPA need to ask these authorities how they stage such events because they certainly can't do it themselves.[/p][/quote]Probably because Wiggle want to make as much money out of the participants as possible with minimal outlay from the organiser. Start applying for road closures, various permissions and a Police presence and it will mean an entrance fee that few will be prepared to pay.[/p][/quote]You obviously have no idea about the economics of the Tour de France. Here's a suggestion: get yourself educated. From the sidelines
  • Score: -3

11:34am Fri 2 May 14

camerajuan says...

Torchie1 wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Any chance of clamping down on the speed of drivers how cause more damage than any Wiggle/Sportive? I know there's "the law" but do they really care enough to prosecute all the drivers who break it?

Are there campaigns against it?
If they care enough to rigorously enforce the speeding laws, who knows what could be next on the agenda, bicycles ridden on the road at night without lights, bicycles ridden through red lights............. be careful what you wish for.
I wish for less deaths & accidents on the road. Not why I should be careful about that and shame on you if you don't wish for the same.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: Any chance of clamping down on the speed of drivers how cause more damage than any Wiggle/Sportive? I know there's "the law" but do they really care enough to prosecute all the drivers who break it? Are there campaigns against it?[/p][/quote]If they care enough to rigorously enforce the speeding laws, who knows what could be next on the agenda, bicycles ridden on the road at night without lights, bicycles ridden through red lights............. be careful what you wish for.[/p][/quote]I wish for less deaths & accidents on the road. Not why I should be careful about that and shame on you if you don't wish for the same. camerajuan
  • Score: -3

11:50am Fri 2 May 14

RomseyKeith says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
Quizbook wrote:
vpharm wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.
Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?
Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.
Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years. You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads? Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy.
If you tried to pay in cents for using the road (say at the Toll Booth on the Itchen Bridge), I don't think they'd be happy.
Where in America are you from? How long have you been in England?
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quizbook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.[/p][/quote]Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?[/p][/quote]Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.[/p][/quote]Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years. You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads? Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy.[/p][/quote]If you tried to pay in cents for using the road (say at the Toll Booth on the Itchen Bridge), I don't think they'd be happy. Where in America are you from? How long have you been in England? RomseyKeith
  • Score: -2

12:23pm Fri 2 May 14

Drhysted says...

Torchie1 wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Any chance of clamping down on the speed of drivers how cause more damage than any Wiggle/Sportive? I know there's "the law" but do they really care enough to prosecute all the drivers who break it?

Are there campaigns against it?
If they care enough to rigorously enforce the speeding laws, who knows what could be next on the agenda, bicycles ridden on the road at night without lights, bicycles ridden through red lights............. be careful what you wish for.
I have no problem with the police upholding the law fairly.
Cyclists without lights after dark should be fined, car drivers with defective lights should also.
Cyclists running reds should be fined, but get the car drivers as well.
Cyclists who injure or kill a person by breaching the Highway Code should be punished, so should car drivers (oh wait cyclists get imprisioned for this, but car drivers generally don't even get a slap on the wrist).

We have plenty of appropriate laws in the country, most are not adequately Policed, generally because the Police are spread too thin.

With regard to the NPAs new "guidelines". Ask UKCE how many they already comply with, you may be in for a suprise.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: Any chance of clamping down on the speed of drivers how cause more damage than any Wiggle/Sportive? I know there's "the law" but do they really care enough to prosecute all the drivers who break it? Are there campaigns against it?[/p][/quote]If they care enough to rigorously enforce the speeding laws, who knows what could be next on the agenda, bicycles ridden on the road at night without lights, bicycles ridden through red lights............. be careful what you wish for.[/p][/quote]I have no problem with the police upholding the law fairly. Cyclists without lights after dark should be fined, car drivers with defective lights should also. Cyclists running reds should be fined, but get the car drivers as well. Cyclists who injure or kill a person by breaching the Highway Code should be punished, so should car drivers (oh wait cyclists get imprisioned for this, but car drivers generally don't even get a slap on the wrist). We have plenty of appropriate laws in the country, most are not adequately Policed, generally because the Police are spread too thin. With regard to the NPAs new "guidelines". Ask UKCE how many they already comply with, you may be in for a suprise. Drhysted
  • Score: -4

1:05pm Fri 2 May 14

Parrotgone says...

They're not rules. They're a voluntary charter. As anyone who reads it ought to quickly realise

1.5 Event organisers are encouraged to adopt the letter and spirit of the charter wherever possible, consistent with the size and nature of the event. However, the charter does not replace or detract from the Highway Code or Law, nor does it alter statutory regulations affecting cycle races and time trials which are governed by the Cycle Racing on the Highways Regulations 1960.

And despite that assurance, this is clearly, at least in part, arises from an attempt by some parties to do exactly that, and to impose greater restrictions over and above the statutory regulations, regardless of any authority or otherwise to do so.
They're not rules. They're a voluntary charter. As anyone who reads it ought to quickly realise 1.5 Event organisers are encouraged to adopt the letter and spirit of the charter wherever possible, consistent with the size and nature of the event. However, the charter does not replace or detract from the Highway Code or Law, nor does it alter statutory regulations affecting cycle races and time trials which are governed by the Cycle Racing on the Highways Regulations 1960. And despite that assurance, this is clearly, at least in part, arises from an attempt by some parties to do exactly that, and to impose greater restrictions over and above the statutory regulations, regardless of any authority or otherwise to do so. Parrotgone
  • Score: -1

1:17pm Fri 2 May 14

RomseyKeith says...

RomseyKeith wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
Quizbook wrote:
vpharm wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.
Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?
Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.
Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years. You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads? Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy.
If you tried to pay in cents for using the road (say at the Toll Booth on the Itchen Bridge), I don't think they'd be happy. Where in America are you from? How long have you been in England?
I've done similar myself when abroad (tried to pay for something with Pounds instead of Dollars). It's easily done.
Where from America r u from?
[quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quizbook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.[/p][/quote]Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?[/p][/quote]Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.[/p][/quote]Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years. You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads? Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy.[/p][/quote]If you tried to pay in cents for using the road (say at the Toll Booth on the Itchen Bridge), I don't think they'd be happy. Where in America are you from? How long have you been in England?[/p][/quote]I've done similar myself when abroad (tried to pay for something with Pounds instead of Dollars). It's easily done. Where from America r u from? RomseyKeith
  • Score: -2

1:25pm Fri 2 May 14

Parrotgone says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
Quizbook wrote:
vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
How many times do we have to say it ?
Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937.
We all pay for roads through general taxation.
Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"?
Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary.
That's why the little round paper document,representin



g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc"
The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes.
Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate?
And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?
Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.
Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years.
You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie

d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads?
Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy.
Because it's factually incorrect perhaps.

Roads are paid for from general taxation (income tax, VAT etc). Cyclists, like anyone else, pay this. So, they're not getting a free ride. They've contributed to the cost of road building.

As for unregulated - there are regulations relating both to individual cyclists, and specifically to mass cycle events on public roads.

So, what are you suggesting s/he admit?
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quizbook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.[/p][/quote]Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?[/p][/quote]Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.[/p][/quote]Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years. You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads? Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy.[/p][/quote]Because it's factually incorrect perhaps. Roads are paid for from general taxation (income tax, VAT etc). Cyclists, like anyone else, pay this. So, they're not getting a free ride. They've contributed to the cost of road building. As for unregulated - there are regulations relating both to individual cyclists, and specifically to mass cycle events on public roads. So, what are you suggesting s/he admit? Parrotgone
  • Score: -1

1:56pm Fri 2 May 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
Quizbook wrote:
vpharm wrote:
Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads).
Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
How many times do we have to say it ?
Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937.
We all pay for roads through general taxation.
Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"?
Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary.
That's why the little round paper document,representin



g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc"
The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes.
Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate?
And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?
Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.
Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years.
You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie

d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads?
Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy.
Under insured? Most cyclists ARE insured against third party claims, it's either included in their home and contents policy, they've got bespoke insurance or like me, they are members of things like British Cycling which automatically covers you against third party claims, also, that's not being under insured considering that is the lowest form of insurance you can legally have on a car.
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quizbook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.[/p][/quote]Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?[/p][/quote]Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.[/p][/quote]Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years. You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads? Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy.[/p][/quote]Under insured? Most cyclists ARE insured against third party claims, it's either included in their home and contents policy, they've got bespoke insurance or like me, they are members of things like British Cycling which automatically covers you against third party claims, also, that's not being under insured considering that is the lowest form of insurance you can legally have on a car. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -7

2:26pm Fri 2 May 14

RomseyKeith says...

Parrotgone wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
Quizbook wrote:
vpharm wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers!
How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.
Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?
Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.
Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years. You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads? Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy.
Because it's factually incorrect perhaps. Roads are paid for from general taxation (income tax, VAT etc). Cyclists, like anyone else, pay this. So, they're not getting a free ride. They've contributed to the cost of road building. As for unregulated - there are regulations relating both to individual cyclists, and specifically to mass cycle events on public roads. So, what are you suggesting s/he admit?
If you guys think that cyclists are getting an unfairly good deal by not paying VED (or Road Tax) or not having to be insured, etc, then why not leave the car at home and hop on your bike? If it's such a good thing then why not join the ranks of the cyclists? What's stopping you?
It applies to all, not just a cycling elite.
[quote][p][bold]Parrotgone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quizbook[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]vpharm[/bold] wrote: Place NPA marshals along the routes to monitor the free loading cyclists (they don't pay tax to use roads). Make every cyclist wear registration numbers![/p][/quote]How many times do we have to say it ? Nobody pays road tax, it was abolished in 1937. We all pay for roads through general taxation.[/p][/quote]Where in his comment does vpharm mention "road tax"? Vehicle excise duty is a tax.Look up the word "duty" in any dictionary. That's why the little round paper document,representin g VED,displayed in vehicles not exempt from it,is called "a tax disc" The boring old arguments that cyclists trot out,every time someone has the temerity to suggest that they don't pay to use the national road system,doesn't hold water,because as they frequently remind us,we ALL pay that(or more accurately, most of us)through our conventional mandatory taxes. Are they suggesting that those who don't cycle,are therefore entitled to a rebate? And do they ever express any gratitude towards those who don't cycle,but still contribute to the roads through their normal taxes,for therefore subsidising those who do cycle,by default?[/p][/quote]Motorists are the ones being subsidised, NOT cyclists, unlike motor vehicles, cyclists cause very little, if any damage to the roads, we don't pollute anywhere near as much as even a moped, we're faster than motor vehicles in cities, we help keep congestion down, same with pedestrians and those who get public transport, so yeah, I think cyclists and those who don't drive to get to places short distances away in general, should get rebates but we know it won't happen, so no point mentioning it.[/p][/quote]Why can't you ever be magnanimous enough to admit that (legal or not)you've been getting a free,unregulated ride for years. You may not have to pay VED(or ROAD TAX,as it has always been colloquially known as), because cycles have no emissions, but are you saying then that you should therefore pay not one cent,for the right to ride untested,unidentifie d,unregistered, and under insured, on British roads? Legal or not,that seems like an incredibly unlegislated loophole,in a country which prides itself on equality,fairness and democracy.[/p][/quote]Because it's factually incorrect perhaps. Roads are paid for from general taxation (income tax, VAT etc). Cyclists, like anyone else, pay this. So, they're not getting a free ride. They've contributed to the cost of road building. As for unregulated - there are regulations relating both to individual cyclists, and specifically to mass cycle events on public roads. So, what are you suggesting s/he admit?[/p][/quote]If you guys think that cyclists are getting an unfairly good deal by not paying VED (or Road Tax) or not having to be insured, etc, then why not leave the car at home and hop on your bike? If it's such a good thing then why not join the ranks of the cyclists? What's stopping you? It applies to all, not just a cycling elite. RomseyKeith
  • Score: -4

2:38pm Fri 2 May 14

Torchie1 says...

camerajuan wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
Any chance of clamping down on the speed of drivers how cause more damage than any Wiggle/Sportive? I know there's "the law" but do they really care enough to prosecute all the drivers who break it?

Are there campaigns against it?
If they care enough to rigorously enforce the speeding laws, who knows what could be next on the agenda, bicycles ridden on the road at night without lights, bicycles ridden through red lights............. be careful what you wish for.
I wish for less deaths & accidents on the road. Not why I should be careful about that and shame on you if you don't wish for the same.
Thankyou for your support in challenging the behaviour of your colleagues that neither use lights at night or carry on through red lights. You clearly recognise that these practices are foolhardy and dangerous.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: Any chance of clamping down on the speed of drivers how cause more damage than any Wiggle/Sportive? I know there's "the law" but do they really care enough to prosecute all the drivers who break it? Are there campaigns against it?[/p][/quote]If they care enough to rigorously enforce the speeding laws, who knows what could be next on the agenda, bicycles ridden on the road at night without lights, bicycles ridden through red lights............. be careful what you wish for.[/p][/quote]I wish for less deaths & accidents on the road. Not why I should be careful about that and shame on you if you don't wish for the same.[/p][/quote]Thankyou for your support in challenging the behaviour of your colleagues that neither use lights at night or carry on through red lights. You clearly recognise that these practices are foolhardy and dangerous. Torchie1
  • Score: 3

2:47pm Fri 2 May 14

camerajuan says...

I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free.

BIke - £500
Kit & Helmet - £200
Insurance - £50
Lights - £30
Spare Inners - £20
Tools - £30

These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there.

If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike.
I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free. BIke - £500 Kit & Helmet - £200 Insurance - £50 Lights - £30 Spare Inners - £20 Tools - £30 These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there. If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike. camerajuan
  • Score: -3

4:31pm Fri 2 May 14

Positively4thStreet says...

camerajuan wrote:
I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free.

BIke - £500
Kit & Helmet - £200
Insurance - £50
Lights - £30
Spare Inners - £20
Tools - £30

These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there.

If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike.
That's your initial outlay for setting yourself up with a cycle CJ,nothing to do with what you pay to use the road system,which(for the benefit of Romsey Keith),is not one penny.
Don't come up with your usual old chestnut of "we pay for the roads,through our taxes", because as you never cease to remind us,we ALL pay that,and we don't all use the roads.
The other old chestnut is" well I've also got a car, so I've paid all my taxes".Well in that case how come (even leaving aside,the emissions argument),that car owning motorcyclists still have to be independently tested, licenced,registered and insured?
Stop going off on your tangental arguments to wriggle off the hook CJ,and be man enough to admit it..you're getting a free ride.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free. BIke - £500 Kit & Helmet - £200 Insurance - £50 Lights - £30 Spare Inners - £20 Tools - £30 These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there. If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike.[/p][/quote]That's your initial outlay for setting yourself up with a cycle CJ,nothing to do with what you pay to use the road system,which(for the benefit of Romsey Keith),is not one penny. Don't come up with your usual old chestnut of "we pay for the roads,through our taxes", because as you never cease to remind us,we ALL pay that,and we don't all use the roads. The other old chestnut is" well I've also got a car, so I've paid all my taxes".Well in that case how come (even leaving aside,the emissions argument),that car owning motorcyclists still have to be independently tested, licenced,registered and insured? Stop going off on your tangental arguments to wriggle off the hook CJ,and be man enough to admit it..you're getting a free ride. Positively4thStreet
  • Score: -1

4:58pm Fri 2 May 14

RomseyKeith says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free. BIke - £500 Kit & Helmet - £200 Insurance - £50 Lights - £30 Spare Inners - £20 Tools - £30 These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there. If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike.
That's your initial outlay for setting yourself up with a cycle CJ,nothing to do with what you pay to use the road system,which(for the benefit of Romsey Keith),is not one penny. Don't come up with your usual old chestnut of "we pay for the roads,through our taxes", because as you never cease to remind us,we ALL pay that,and we don't all use the roads. The other old chestnut is" well I've also got a car, so I've paid all my taxes".Well in that case how come (even leaving aside,the emissions argument),that car owning motorcyclists still have to be independently tested, licenced,registered and insured? Stop going off on your tangental arguments to wriggle off the hook CJ,and be man enough to admit it..you're getting a free ride.
Cycling is free to all. You can also take advantage of the freedom of cycling. There are expenses involved. Bikes still need maintaining.
I rarely cycle these days, but that is my choice. I drive or walk as it is easier and safer, and only cycle off-road on cycleways, as I feel it safer to do so due to the intollerence, impatience and selfish nature of some drivers. Only some mind. Not everyone's the same. There are considerate drivers out there, just as there are considerate cyclists who stop at red lights, and use lights and high vis at night.
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free. BIke - £500 Kit & Helmet - £200 Insurance - £50 Lights - £30 Spare Inners - £20 Tools - £30 These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there. If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike.[/p][/quote]That's your initial outlay for setting yourself up with a cycle CJ,nothing to do with what you pay to use the road system,which(for the benefit of Romsey Keith),is not one penny. Don't come up with your usual old chestnut of "we pay for the roads,through our taxes", because as you never cease to remind us,we ALL pay that,and we don't all use the roads. The other old chestnut is" well I've also got a car, so I've paid all my taxes".Well in that case how come (even leaving aside,the emissions argument),that car owning motorcyclists still have to be independently tested, licenced,registered and insured? Stop going off on your tangental arguments to wriggle off the hook CJ,and be man enough to admit it..you're getting a free ride.[/p][/quote]Cycling is free to all. You can also take advantage of the freedom of cycling. There are expenses involved. Bikes still need maintaining. I rarely cycle these days, but that is my choice. I drive or walk as it is easier and safer, and only cycle off-road on cycleways, as I feel it safer to do so due to the intollerence, impatience and selfish nature of some drivers. Only some mind. Not everyone's the same. There are considerate drivers out there, just as there are considerate cyclists who stop at red lights, and use lights and high vis at night. RomseyKeith
  • Score: -3

6:40pm Fri 2 May 14

southamptonadi says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free.

BIke - £500
Kit & Helmet - £200
Insurance - £50
Lights - £30
Spare Inners - £20
Tools - £30

These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there.

If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike.
That's your initial outlay for setting yourself up with a cycle CJ,nothing to do with what you pay to use the road system,which(for the benefit of Romsey Keith),is not one penny.
Don't come up with your usual old chestnut of "we pay for the roads,through our taxes", because as you never cease to remind us,we ALL pay that,and we don't all use the roads.
The other old chestnut is" well I've also got a car, so I've paid all my taxes".Well in that case how come (even leaving aside,the emissions argument),that car owning motorcyclists still have to be independently tested, licenced,registered and insured?
Stop going off on your tangental arguments to wriggle off the hook CJ,and be man enough to admit it..you're getting a free ride.
I love my free ride, and driving my oil burner.

But it here doing a legal activity. If you feel so strongly start a campaign and lobby the government to change the laws, but please google it first as the government have very valid reasons for having it the way it is.

Maybe a letter to mr Cameron will get the ball rolling. I hope you win as I can't wait to display my free tax disc on my bike, along with the free insurance I get. Not sure what the mot will cost though but not too worried as I only pay thirty quid for the car so the bike shouldn't be more than a fiver.

I all ready have a driving licence so I'm already tested and licensed to Davila standards. Not sure about registration either not much room for a number plate which will probably get broken by a close passing car anyway
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free. BIke - £500 Kit & Helmet - £200 Insurance - £50 Lights - £30 Spare Inners - £20 Tools - £30 These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there. If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike.[/p][/quote]That's your initial outlay for setting yourself up with a cycle CJ,nothing to do with what you pay to use the road system,which(for the benefit of Romsey Keith),is not one penny. Don't come up with your usual old chestnut of "we pay for the roads,through our taxes", because as you never cease to remind us,we ALL pay that,and we don't all use the roads. The other old chestnut is" well I've also got a car, so I've paid all my taxes".Well in that case how come (even leaving aside,the emissions argument),that car owning motorcyclists still have to be independently tested, licenced,registered and insured? Stop going off on your tangental arguments to wriggle off the hook CJ,and be man enough to admit it..you're getting a free ride.[/p][/quote]I love my free ride, and driving my oil burner. But it here doing a legal activity. If you feel so strongly start a campaign and lobby the government to change the laws, but please google it first as the government have very valid reasons for having it the way it is. Maybe a letter to mr Cameron will get the ball rolling. I hope you win as I can't wait to display my free tax disc on my bike, along with the free insurance I get. Not sure what the mot will cost though but not too worried as I only pay thirty quid for the car so the bike shouldn't be more than a fiver. I all ready have a driving licence so I'm already tested and licensed to Davila standards. Not sure about registration either not much room for a number plate which will probably get broken by a close passing car anyway southamptonadi
  • Score: 2

6:40pm Fri 2 May 14

southamptonadi says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free.

BIke - £500
Kit & Helmet - £200
Insurance - £50
Lights - £30
Spare Inners - £20
Tools - £30

These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there.

If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike.
That's your initial outlay for setting yourself up with a cycle CJ,nothing to do with what you pay to use the road system,which(for the benefit of Romsey Keith),is not one penny.
Don't come up with your usual old chestnut of "we pay for the roads,through our taxes", because as you never cease to remind us,we ALL pay that,and we don't all use the roads.
The other old chestnut is" well I've also got a car, so I've paid all my taxes".Well in that case how come (even leaving aside,the emissions argument),that car owning motorcyclists still have to be independently tested, licenced,registered and insured?
Stop going off on your tangental arguments to wriggle off the hook CJ,and be man enough to admit it..you're getting a free ride.
I love my free ride, and driving my oil burner.

But it here doing a legal activity. If you feel so strongly start a campaign and lobby the government to change the laws, but please google it first as the government have very valid reasons for having it the way it is.

Maybe a letter to mr Cameron will get the ball rolling. I hope you win as I can't wait to display my free tax disc on my bike, along with the free insurance I get. Not sure what the mot will cost though but not too worried as I only pay thirty quid for the car so the bike shouldn't be more than a fiver.

I all ready have a driving licence so I'm already tested and licensed to Davila standards. Not sure about registration either not much room for a number plate which will probably get broken by a close passing car anyway
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free. BIke - £500 Kit & Helmet - £200 Insurance - £50 Lights - £30 Spare Inners - £20 Tools - £30 These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there. If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike.[/p][/quote]That's your initial outlay for setting yourself up with a cycle CJ,nothing to do with what you pay to use the road system,which(for the benefit of Romsey Keith),is not one penny. Don't come up with your usual old chestnut of "we pay for the roads,through our taxes", because as you never cease to remind us,we ALL pay that,and we don't all use the roads. The other old chestnut is" well I've also got a car, so I've paid all my taxes".Well in that case how come (even leaving aside,the emissions argument),that car owning motorcyclists still have to be independently tested, licenced,registered and insured? Stop going off on your tangental arguments to wriggle off the hook CJ,and be man enough to admit it..you're getting a free ride.[/p][/quote]I love my free ride, and driving my oil burner. But it here doing a legal activity. If you feel so strongly start a campaign and lobby the government to change the laws, but please google it first as the government have very valid reasons for having it the way it is. Maybe a letter to mr Cameron will get the ball rolling. I hope you win as I can't wait to display my free tax disc on my bike, along with the free insurance I get. Not sure what the mot will cost though but not too worried as I only pay thirty quid for the car so the bike shouldn't be more than a fiver. I all ready have a driving licence so I'm already tested and licensed to Davila standards. Not sure about registration either not much room for a number plate which will probably get broken by a close passing car anyway southamptonadi
  • Score: 0

6:15pm Sat 3 May 14

camerajuan says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free.

BIke - £500
Kit & Helmet - £200
Insurance - £50
Lights - £30
Spare Inners - £20
Tools - £30

These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there.

If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike.
That's your initial outlay for setting yourself up with a cycle CJ,nothing to do with what you pay to use the road system,which(for the benefit of Romsey Keith),is not one penny.
Don't come up with your usual old chestnut of "we pay for the roads,through our taxes", because as you never cease to remind us,we ALL pay that,and we don't all use the roads.
The other old chestnut is" well I've also got a car, so I've paid all my taxes".Well in that case how come (even leaving aside,the emissions argument),that car owning motorcyclists still have to be independently tested, licenced,registered and insured?
Stop going off on your tangental arguments to wriggle off the hook CJ,and be man enough to admit it..you're getting a free ride.
Oh sod off you broken record! We all have to pay council tax however yes you're correct, we don't all use the roads but that's the individuals choice.

We've been through why cars and motorbikes require stricter testing so many times - its because motor vehicles pose so much more of a risk than bicycles do to others. Proof is in the stats on that one. Give up, you are flogging a dead horse.

Now, if you'd like to give me my grand for my "free ride" you seem to think I'm getting I'll be on my way.
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: I'm still unaware of how being a cyclist is free. BIke - £500 Kit & Helmet - £200 Insurance - £50 Lights - £30 Spare Inners - £20 Tools - £30 These are entry level prices. If we're talking a full carbon road/TT/cyclo-cross bike, which lots of Hampshire residents use, the costs escalate into the thousands. Those who can afford to buy such things obviously have a full time job, so they have a house/flat which they pay council tax to live in - which pays for the upkeep of roads. Not to mention the VAT on the goods which also assists there. If anyone thinks Cycling is free, can they please tell me how they do it for free as I could do with a spare grand as well as a new bike.[/p][/quote]That's your initial outlay for setting yourself up with a cycle CJ,nothing to do with what you pay to use the road system,which(for the benefit of Romsey Keith),is not one penny. Don't come up with your usual old chestnut of "we pay for the roads,through our taxes", because as you never cease to remind us,we ALL pay that,and we don't all use the roads. The other old chestnut is" well I've also got a car, so I've paid all my taxes".Well in that case how come (even leaving aside,the emissions argument),that car owning motorcyclists still have to be independently tested, licenced,registered and insured? Stop going off on your tangental arguments to wriggle off the hook CJ,and be man enough to admit it..you're getting a free ride.[/p][/quote]Oh sod off you broken record! We all have to pay council tax however yes you're correct, we don't all use the roads but that's the individuals choice. We've been through why cars and motorbikes require stricter testing so many times - its because motor vehicles pose so much more of a risk than bicycles do to others. Proof is in the stats on that one. Give up, you are flogging a dead horse. Now, if you'd like to give me my grand for my "free ride" you seem to think I'm getting I'll be on my way. camerajuan
  • Score: 3

11:56pm Sat 3 May 14

TotallyAnonymous says...

It's 'dos and don'ts', not 'do's and don'ts'.
It's 'dos and don'ts', not 'do's and don'ts'. TotallyAnonymous
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree