So letter writer Arif Beyzade (‘Take a deep breath and start again’, Opinion, August 13) thinks that the Labour council is responsible for the Mini-Holland bid. Wrong. The money was provided by a Conservative government, allocated by a Conservative mayor, whilst the bid itself was a bi-partisan Labour/Conservative policy. Government at every level understands that traffic growth on urban streets cannot go on, and that additionally to reduce the cars on the road, cycling has benefits ranging from tackling obesity to curbing dangerous exhaust emissions.

As for Rick Jewell’s letter (‘Motorists win hands down’, Opinion, August 13), I despair. If we follow his line of thought, car growth would continue until congestion brings Enfield to a halt. Has he not woken up to the fact that bikes take up a fraction of the room per person than a driver-only car, or that – picking up his financial points – cars cause several hundred times more wear and tear to road surfaces than bikes.

But it’s his comments about car priority that his views descend to unpleasantness. A person driving a car, a cyclist taking a similar route, a walker crossing a road at a convenient point to complete his/her journey are just three people with an equal entitlement to make their journey conveniently and on time. Drivers are not superior beings ordained to have priority, and if it comes down to choosing a means of transport, cyclists and walkers pose less risk than cars, and don’t emit gases or particles dangerous to health. I was appalled by his cavalier approach to lack of exercise.

Cars have their place, but in cities it would be best if most were small, electrically powered, usually driven at 20mph or below, and never driven above 30mph except on major arterial roads.

David Hughes

Palmers Green