Why does no one take cycling seriously in London ? Climbers and hikers being active people are far more likely to cycle than others which is demonstrated by the number of bikes you see chained up at climbing walls. This is not solely down to two great advantages of cycling being that it is cheaper than public transport and keeps you fit, the real benefit of cycling London is that it is simply more practical than anything else. Ok it the traffic takes a bit of getting used to but after a while the benefits just make any other form of transport seem ridiculous. One could go on for hours about the convenience, practicality and speed of cycling in relation to other means of transport, never mind that you don't have huddle into the armpits of other people on overcrowded trains and buses but I don't have space here. You could also argue quite reasonably that it is the only form of transport in London that is not running at close to full capacity.

What is really amazing given all that is how few people actually cycle around London as a preferred means of transport. I know that there has been a sharp rise in the number of people cycling in London (especially in the wake of the 7/7 bombings which really demonstrates that people have a completely unrealistic perception of risk) but using my workplace as an example it is still probably less than 1%. If, for example, you try and get the Northern Line tube into the City from Clapham Common on a busy morning you will see the carriages jammed full. You may well have to wait for 2 or 3 trains to go past before you get on one or else take the train down to Balham in order to pick up an up train in an emptier condition. What is really amazing is that most of the people at the station look like fit types in their 20's and 30's who probably spend every lunchtime in the gym and then run down to Brighton and back in the evening for fun. Why on earth do they put up with the purgatory of the Northern Line when they are only a 20 minute bike ride from the City? Especially as I would bet most of them have got a bike somewhere though I did read that most mountain bikes only do about 10 miles a year.

There are ongoing campaigns to encourage more cycling and not just from special interest groups either. Transport for London has a cycling section and there have been TV Ads showing the benefits. There is advice on safety, cycling routes, theft prevention and Ken Livingstone has planted a lot of greatly appreciated shiny stainless steel cycle racks around the city (though his pro cycling credentials got a knock when he foolishly suggested that a cyclists registration scheme). There have also been some tax changes to encourage cycling though for most people they are probably to Byzantine to understand.

Yet still very few people cycle. The real reason for this I believe is simply that cycling is still regarded as a marginal and eccentric activity and somehow not really practical. We all remember the image of David Cameron cycling into the Houses of Parliament (closely followed by a car with all his kit). This was just a stunt to show off his supposed green credentials (like his ridiculous windmill that will never replace the energy used to produce itself) but the point is that he achieved the stunt because no one in power really considers a bike as a proper method of transport. If it was considered a mainstream activity then no one would have noticed.

If you really want to find out how cyclists are regarded you should sour some of the letters pages of the Daily Mail and Telegraph. What comes out most of all is a seething fury about "Lycra Louts" (unlike the Saga Louts at the Telegraph) and red light jumpers. I'm not going to argue the rights and wrongs of jumping red lights but the real point here is that the cyclists are regarded as some sort of alien species, distinct from pedestrians and motorists. Since everyone walks at times and most people at least have use of a car sometimes identifying car drivers and walkers as a special group is a bit like identifying breathers as a special interest group. Most cyclists are motorists to an extent, it's just a shame that most motorists are not cyclists. Why they rant about cyclists is not because they really care about safety (the cyclist will always come off worst) but because they are jealous. They see the biker flitting through the traffic like some blithe spirit while they lurch stiltedly from one hold up to the next and feel trapped. So in order to achieve a moral superiority they mock the cyclist and complain about petty traffic infringements (probably on their mobile while driving, listening to Terry Wogan, having a fag and drinking a coffee).

There is a complementary cause that allows eco warriors to vilify 4x4 owners. Ok you don't need one in London and they do use more fuel but do you not think some of the bile might not be tinged by a hint of envy?

But back to the main point, cycling is still considered a an activity for cranks (NPI), weirdos and nutters so what can be done to move it properly into the mainstream? Well here are a few suggestions:

1. Do away with cycle lanes. Unless they have a physical barrier between them and the rest of the traffic they are just so much green paint on the road. They give the cyclist a false illusion of safety and are a cheap way for politicians to demonstrate they are following an eco cause.

2. Allow cyclists to jump red lights. Pedestrians don't have to observe traffic signals and it would stop the Daily Telegraph readers (no doubt nicely kitted out in string-backed leather driving gloves) writing all those daft letters. It would also take the pressure off the police in trying to uphold and unenforceable law.

3. Force offices to provide bike racks. My building has a large underground car park but no bike provision! How many bikes could you park in one bike space? You should also ensure that it is permissible to lock bikes to any railing. I once locked my bike to a railing outside a restaurant and they responded by wrecking my front wheel, an incident I have neither forgotten nor forgiven.

4. Change the law so that in an accident the driver is presumed to be culpable. That should make them more careful and it works in Holland .

5. Ban the school run mums. How many times have you heard parents say that they don't want their kids cycling to school because there is too much traffic? Go out at half term and you will see who creates all the traffic. 6. Give everyone a bike. Say you gave away 5 million bikes (approximately the potential cycling population of London ) at £300 each. This would cost £1.5 billion. This is essentially peanuts compared to the Olympics, the Dome, Foot and Mouth, war in Iraq , the NHS computer fiasco and you would still have the bikes to show for it. Ok a lot of these would be instantly sold but this would cause the bottom bracket to fall out of the second hand market thus hugely reducing the attractions of bicycle theft.

If all this was done and you only increased the cycling commuters to a totally feasible 10% of the total there would a huge benefit to transport in general. The extra slack in the tube and rail systems would lead to an overall increase in reliability and the extra cyclists would have a civilising effect on other road users.

Poor transport is consistently being cited as one of London 's great failings as a city. As cycling is really the only mode of transport that can increase significantly without the need for hugely expensive infrastructure changes it is really amazing politicians are still not taking it seriously.