FROM THE EDITOR: Why adding fuel to the fire of city's anger was foolish and wrong

We all acknowledge that there are lots of times when using a car is the only convenient way to get places, and that is fine.

We all know that cycling is good for people and place.

There, it seems, basic manners and common sense end.

Logic says that the more people cycle regularly, the better for all us.

Reality makes most of us scared to take a bike on Sheffield’s major routes because it is terrifying.

It shouldn’t be but it is. Would you let your teenage child cycle at rush hour across the city to school?

I wouldn’t because my heart leaps into my mouth at the mere thought.

So why can we never agree on how to make it safer for bike rides?

The enormous row that has blown up over the extra protection for an existing cycle lane in Shalesmoor just confirms what we all knew.

Cyclists love to hate motorists, motorists love to hate cyclists and our council seemed to lack the intelligence to navigate that difficult path without adding fuel to that fire.

Nobody would wish to make it impossible for ambulances to pass when busy.

That is ridiculous, but there are other elements where compromise is possible.

Even if we had the best planned routes with no impact on cars and a consultation to really address people’s concerns, the love-hate relationship wouldn’t disappear.

But we haven’t got either of those. It was badly thought through, badly implemented and badly communicated. To add insult to injury, it isn’t even permanent and ‘changes’ are already being looked at by council bosses.

What hope do we have for solving the roads crisis in this city if we can’t even sort one tiny stretch?

There was an added irony when our business editor David Walsh was working on his feature.

He had categorically been told by the council press office that nobody was available for interview that day.

Who should he see while cycling but cabinet member for transport Bob Johnson who was, of course, happy to talk.

Imagine if less of your money was wasted on spin, while officers were available and accountable alongside elected members allowed to directly answer questions from us and you. Maybe negotiations on such thorny issues wouldn’t be so difficult after all.