*to Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Κυνόσαργες

Saturday, 1 December 2012

Ontario cycling strategy? Who knew?

Ontario has a cycling strategy?  Who knew for how piecemeal infrastructure is (municipal level), and for shite it is to ride in Ontario, mainly because the drivers are zombies: ’slow zombies’ and ’fast zombies’, but zombies.  How many bureaucrats have funded their lives and retirements making documents like at the first link, and effected exactly nothing.  Say what you want about we teachers, but we have some outcomes, good or bad.

What Ontario needs most is a different attitude in the police and from the courts to all traffic, aimed at minimizing harm; and the same from traffic planning departments.  You minimize harm by reducing speeds everywhere, but especially where there are people out of cars, by enforcing these limits well for a change, and by making criminal and civil consequences to collisions, as in Japan.  Japan has a fraction of N.America's traffic fatalities for just these reasons.  Cycling infrastructure is poor to non-existent in Japan, apart from levée paths, so although infrastructure is nice icing, the cake it ain't.

If process were the point it'd be safe to ride in Ontario: it isn't.  I'll address the pointlessness of the 'strategy' by a KISS objection to each point.
  • Enhance cycling infrastructure in the province [Money: 'put up or shut up'.]
  • Enhance cycling safety through education and legislation [What? One more page in the drivers' guide?]
  • Ensure relevancy through monitoring, researching and coordination [But not use the data for policy, for heaven's sake.]
  • Providing the purchasers of bicycles with cycling safety information, [Not drivers, because our society only respects 'conspicuous consumption'.]
  • Initiating consultations on legislative and/or regulatory changes regarding cycling on paved shoulders, [So we can delay paving shoulders for another generation, though the need is inarguable.]
  • Public education for drivers and cyclists, in collaboration with road safety organizations, [Id est the CAA, which is anti-cycling, no surprise.  However, they spend campaign dollars...]
  • Updating the Driver Handbooks to enhance the safety of all road users, including cyclists, [See my second objection.]
  • Reviewing and updating the Highway Traffic Act to improve cycling safety, and [Tell me another one.]
  • Leading the identification of a province-wide cycling network. [Bullshit.  Anyway, 'identification' doesn't mean building anything: it means throwing up a few signs on some roads so designated by politicians and bureaucrats who do not themselves ride.]
Is this the way Rome fell?  I think we need a Golgafrincham solution.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Post a Comment