Quite recently, I heard a commentator speak of the big cycling lobby as an organized plot to harm people’s quality of life and even compromise their safety. To hear these words, one would have thought that a group of fanatics was plotting an overthrow of the established order in the name of fads having no justification other than that of disgusting cars. As if taking advantage of one’s daily commute to exercise was a violent attack on the status quo. Although…
On May 5, the French government announced a new bicycle plan. Nearly two billion euros will be invested by 2027 to increase the cycling network throughout France. In all, the government wants to add more than 43,000 km of secure bicycle lanes to the current network by 2030. You read that right. This would bring the number of protected cycle lanes to 100,000 km.
That’s not all, we are also talking about modifying the Highway Code to adapt it to the realities of cyclists as well as training and subsidies for the purchase of bicycles. In short, the whole of France is seized with a fever pushing it, pedaling faster and faster, towards the great precipice of active mobility. The evil cycling lobby has taken power at Matignon, at the Élysée and in all major French cities.
Here, we see the same movement emerging in Quebec cities. Moreover, the City of Quebec has just announced a major development plan for a major cycling network with the help of the Government of Quebec. We are not at all in the same levels of investments, but it is the same intentions that are in action.
However, to be able to really generate a shift towards the integration of active mobility as an alternative to the automobile, we will have to make much more substantial gestures. It’s not enough to paint the asphalt hoping that people will have a sudden urge to leave their car at home to borrow these new territories.
Unfortunately, the tendency to caricatures and verbal puffiness when it’s time to talk about cycling is harming the serene debate that must be held collectively in Quebec. You will tell me that the general tension is less than on certain waves. However, when you cycle to work or play, it still exists on the road. This toxic anti-bike populism has something to do with it.
To be able to convince a person who does not already use a bicycle for his daily trips, there are two essential factors that must be taken into account in the development of a cycle path. The first is obviously travel safety. The second is the user-friendliness of these same journeys. Building unprotected trails that lead nowhere is wasted money.
For those fearful of cycling in urban settings, it has been shown that modal shift to cycling only occurs when these two factors are achieved. To achieve this, imagine letting a child go to the park alone. How would you design the bike lane? Among other things, by ensuring that the track is safe, that vehicles cannot encroach on it, that intersections are safe, that there is a destination linked to the track and that there are interconnections. Like streets for cars, after all.
However, it is not magic. To make these cycling facilities, you have to take up space, a lot of space. In most towns, nearly 80% of public roads have already been allocated to motor vehicles for nearly a century. Which means that as soon as a bike lane is built, it must be taken away from another user. Either way, it’s up to the vehicles. Because of space, we cannot invent otherwise.
It is a complete paradigm shift that must take place in our vision of mobility. The more alternatives there are to cars, the more likely we are to achieve our ambitious carbon reduction goals. Alone, the electrification of transport will not be enough. The bicycle is one of these solutions.
It is not being anti-car to hold such a speech, it is to want to allow humans to take back their place in the city and to have the choice of their mobility. No one likes being stuck in congestion. However, the more choices there are, the smoother mobility will be. This necessarily means reducing the space dedicated to cars. There is no cycling lobby facing an automotive and oil industry. Who has the most to lose financially from a reduction in space for the car in favor of the bicycle?
So, yes, it’s a fight against inertia so that the human regains its letters of nobility in the planning of mobility. Because the climatic precipice that stands before us imposes a real rational and pragmatic discussion. This means challenging the monopoly of the car on the roads for the benefit of people in cities.
CEO of the Institute for Urban Resilience and Innovation, professor and associate researcher, François William Croteau was mayor of Rosemont–La Petite-Patrie.