Kingston Council in southwest London has been criticised for an equalities assessment on e-bikes that originally claimed the bikes help women 'stay looking nice' and fulfil 'traditional domestic responsibilities.' After a formal complaint from resident Caroline Shah, 64, the council apologised but replaced the offensive language with a new assertion that e-bikes help women carry shopping, drawing further accusations of patronising women. the incident highlights how public bodies can fail to engage meaningfully with gender equality and safety concerns,according to the source report.

The 'Stay Looking Nice' Line and Its Academic Origin

Kingston Council's original equalities impact assessment, published as part of a review of e-bike benefits for the borough, stated that e-bikes 'may increase women's access to cycling and physical activity by making it easier for women to meet their traditional domestic responsibilities, as well as stay looking 'nice' on a bike.' The report also claimed e-bikes are 'challenging sexism in cycling.' According to the source, the council later explained that the problematic phrase was a direct quote from a peer-reviewed academic paper used in the research — a defence that did little to mollify critics, who argued that uncritical use of such language reveals institutional bias.

Why Residents, Led by Caroline Shah, Called the Fix 'Patronising'

After Caroline Shah filed a formal complaint, Kingston Council issued an apology,acknowledging the language was 'outdated and inappropriate.' But instead of a meaningful rewrite, it removed the 'stay looking nice' line and inserted a new paragraph noting that e-bikes could help women carry goods or shopping and manage trip-chaining — tasks framed as 'carrying responsibilities.' Shah told the source she initially laughed at the absurdity but then felt appalled, likening the revised version to a 'Harry Enfield sketch.' She stressed that women simply want to be treated equally and have their safety concerns addressed, not reduced to shopping chores.. The source reports that nine in 10 women feel unsafe on streets after dark, yet the original report concluded e-bikes had no negative impact on women.

A Deeper Failure: No Women Consulted and Safety Ignored

Perhaps the most damning detail in the source is that no women were consulted for the assessment. Shah emphasised that genuine consultation would have yielded very different feedback, especially around safety and infrastructure. The council's report concluded there was no negative impact from e-bikes on women — a claim that residents argue is out of touch with the reality of street harassment and safety concerns. The episode underscores a failure to engage meaningfully with women's experiences and raises questions about the council's commitment to substantive equality rather than tokenistic gestures, according to the source .

What the Revised Report Still Gets Wrong

The replacement language — focusing on shopping and trip-chaining — drew fresh accusations of patronising women, reducing their identities to domestic errands. Residents have called for a proper rewrite of the assessment with genuine consultation and a focus on issues like safety, infrastructure, and inclusive design. As the source notes, the controversy continues, with residents demanding that the council treat gender equality as more than a box-ticking exercise.