Ann Coffey


A number of constituents have contacted me regarding the Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy (CWIS) and the funding of Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LCWIPs).

As you know, the CWIS was published in April 2017 (available here), which set out the Chris Grayling’s ambition to increase journeys by bike and foot by 2040 and included a specific objective to double the number of people cycling by 2025.

At the heart of the Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy are Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans, which in 2017 all English councils outside London were invited – but not required – to produce; identifying cycling and walking improvements required at the local level. Greater Manchester’s cycling and walking infrastructure proposal is available to view online.

Constituents who contacted me expressed concern that there has been no central funding to implement the LCWIPs planning process. I agree that investment in cycling and walking is insufficient and I share the concern that a large proportion of the promised funding for the CWIS has not been ringfenced.

The Transport Minister’s consultation on the Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy (CWIS) safety review received more than 14,000 responses. Chris Grayling recently published his response, available here. Paul Tuohy, chief executive of the charity Cycling UK, has expressed disappointment at the lack of funding announced in the consultation response.

I am concerned that the CWIS targets are unlikely to be achieved unless there is a substantial increase in dedicated spending on walking and cycling.

Constituents have also contacted me about the Government’s cycle safety review: In August 2018 the Department for Transport (DfT) launched a consultation which examined the possibility of creating a new offence for cyclists, equivalent to causing death by careless or dangerous driving. This followed the high profile case of a cyclist killing a pedestrian while riding an illegal bike, which highlighted a gap in the law to effectively deal with death by dangerous cycling.

Although I welcome a review of dangerous cycling, I agree that the remit of the consultation should have been broadened to include all road traffic offences and penalties for all road users.