Every now and then a letter to this page gives you a jolt. This particular one was written by Councillor Nick Dines (‘What about the impact on motorists’, Opinion, January 14), where he expressed concern about the impact of the Cycle Enfield plans on road space for cars.

What a cheek. With the exception of the war years, my life has been witness to car preference in terms of road and street design, road rules, fear of being hit by a vehicle, all of which have driven cyclists off the roads. And now, to add insult to injury, a councillor objects to a small change to reverse the trend.

Clearly it hasn’t occurred to him that cyclists, every bit as much as drivers, are people with a right to travel a route convenient for them. Does democracy mean nothing to him? Are cyclists second-class citizens with no entitlement?

He might be forgiven if cycling created noxious gases/particles, wore away the road surface substantially, contributed to global warming, or deterred parents from encouraging their offspring to walk to school. But that applies to cars. Perhaps though, Cllr Dines believes exertion is bad for people’s health, and that lack of exercise and curtailing kids’ independence is a good thing, but in that he wouldn’t be joined by the medical profession.

David Hughes

Palmers Green