THE county council is at risk of losing out on government money for walking and cycling unless it can prove it is taking active travel seriously.

Worcestershire County Council is one of only a handful of authorities across the country to be asked for more proof it is still committed to its active travel plans before government funding can be handed over.

The Department for Transport has now published a list highlighting several local authorities that ministers needed “further assurances” from before money - which could amount to hundreds of thousands of pounds - could be handed over.

The council had already lost out on more than half a million pounds in government funding after its walking and cycling bids failed to meet the criteria for emergency active travel funding last year.

In a warning to council leaders on Friday (July 30), transport minister Chris Heaton-Harris said authorities that had “prematurely removed or weakened” active travel schemes would see the funding reduced or removed.

Councils have also been warned they could lose out on future funding if schemes are not up to scratch.

“We have no interest in requiring councils to keep schemes which are proven not to work, but that proof must be presented,” he said.

“Schemes must not be removed prematurely, or without proper evidence and too soon to collect proper evidence about their effects.”

Asked about the inclusion of the county on the list, Councillor Alan Amos, cabinet member for highways and transport, said: “We have responded to a request from the Department for Transport for additional information to support our bid.

"We expect to receive the outcome of the bid by September.”

A one-year review of the Department for Transport’s Gear Change cycling and walking plan said the government would reduce funding to councils – particularly in urban areas – which did not take active travel seriously.

In separate comments, Prime Minister Boris Johnson also warned that councils opposing active travel schemes needed to offer viable alternatives to combat rising traffic levels.

“I support councils, of all parties, which are trying to promote cycling and bus use,” he said.

“And if you are going to oppose these schemes, you must tell us what your alternative is, because trying to squeeze more cars and delivery vans on the same roads and hoping for the best is not going to work.”

Last year, it was revealed that Worcestershire County Council would only receive £784,000 of its £1.3 million bid for emergency government active travel funding.

At fifty-eight per cent, the gap between the amount of money the county council bid for and how much it is actually set to receive was among the worst in the country.

Cycling campaigners had called the council’s bids “inadequate” saying it did not go far enough to address most of the key aims set out by the government for the funding – including pop-up bike lanes, widened pavements, and cycle and bus-only corridors – to help people social distance in busy areas.

Matters had been made worse when Cllr Amos dismissed calls for further investment calling the growth in popularity of cycling during lockdown “just a phase” and the council needed to focus on all forms of transport.

In August last year, a leaked council presentation stated senior Conservative councillors had made it clear they did not support any schemes that resulted in the loss of car parking spaces or road space for cyclists or pedestrians.

The council later said the slide did not reflect its actual policies.