Putting power into pedal power

London Cycling Campaign (LCC), with support from Transport for London and the Big Lottery Fund, have just produced an All Ability Cycling Guide for Greater London, with an accompanying DVD, Go Cycling. Alan Sutherland explains why they’re somewhat off track

The LCC, which represents the interests of cyclists in London, is a major campaigning organisation, of which I am proud to be a member. But when it comes to disability, they don’t quite get it.

There are a large number of charitable projects, in London and nationally, that provide cycle riding as a leisure activity for ‘special needs’ groups. Typically based in a local park, they provide specialist equipment for fun rides. Being run by cycling activists, they have a strong voice in cycling organisations, and are clearly the dominant voice in the All Ability Guide. I do not know a single one that is run by disabled people.

What is lacking in all this is any concept of independent living, any sense that some of us ride cycles for transport rather than once-a-week leisure – and that a lot more disabled people would do so if they had the right sort of advice.

I would like to see, not an All Ability Cycling Guide, but a Disability Cycling Guide that treated disabled people as existing in the real world and riding on roads rather than in parks.

I would like some discussion of the practicalities of commuting. (The Guide does not actually recognise the possibility that disabled people might have jobs.) What facilities do disabled cyclists need employers to provide? Are they covered by the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA)?

I’d like to see information about adapting regular bikes with kit such as the dual brake lever, made for use with tandems, which allows a one-handed rider full braking. If disabled people know what to ask for, a good cycle shop should be able to assemble it, but they are not necessarily used to solving those problems.

I’d like discussion of whether current traffic planning for cycles is accessible for users of non-standard bikes such as tricycles and tandems, and whether the DDA could be used to fight for such provision. And can disabled people who want to start using a bicycle to increase their independence use Direct Payments or Access to Work to help them do so?

And I would also like to see some discussion of the needs of elderly and frail riders. Quiet and traffic-free routes are becoming increasingly common; trikes and cycles with a low step-through or electric assist can provide an invigorating alternative to mobility scooters.

As with so much else in disability, the primary discussion should not be about special provision, but about the removal of barriers. Our leading cycling organisations should be playing a major part in that fight. And if that means the Cyclists Touring Club campaigning for changes in Access to Work legislation, I’m not complaining.