I sense this debate is becoming far too polarised. The roads we have are for all to use and where all users respect and have equal consideration for all others. Sadly there will always be a minority who spoil it for the considerate majority, that applies to motorists as much as cyclist, horseriders etc. I'm predominently a motorist, I bought an electric car to help the environment a little, but I have been a keen runner and always slow or stop my car to give way to a runner at junctions if I'm turning and can slow a little to allow them to continue easily and safely. Similarly, when younger I was a cyclist and always give cyclists space, provided ofcourse that they do the same for me and don't think they have a higher priority than me or a right to use the entire road riding two or there abreast or to use the road when money has been spent on a cycle lane for them but they "choose" not to use it.
Improved behaviours are always going to be the solution and this is why places like the Netherlands and Norway have been successful in the adoption of mixed transportation, I've worked and travelled in both locations and they are simply more considerate! The other ingredient in these cases however has been money, and lots of it, often on roads too; sadly that's the part we're missing, we think we can do it on the cheap or can raise the money to do it by taxing the motorist. This approach however, will only serve to alienate the motorist, who, whether we like it or not currently constitutes by far and away the highest financial contributor to our infrastructure and also represents the majority of users. Within that use, most motorists are simply trying to get from A to B for a valid reason, a reason no greater or less valid than someone on a bicycle or walking. Add to that, that in a large number of cases, there simply is no viable alternative to their chosen mode of transport.
I've said this already in this thread, we need to spend money to create those viable alternatives. The answer is to improve and make the alternatives more appealing than the car, rather than make the car even less appealing than the limited and often impractical alternatives.
This thread seems to have gone a little of track. The Windlehurst Speed humps were installed as "mitigation measures" as a result of the new bypass, but what were we mitigating against, increased traffic, speed or both or just a perception of speed experienced by a handful of local residents and casued by an even smaller minority of inconsiderate motorists and a pot of money from the SEMMS project that needed to be spent that would appease those residents and also give the Highways Team a pet project, which as we know only too well, they love! Whatever the case, they don't work for the majority. The overriding conclusion from these seems to show that people now prefer to use a different route, Hoorah! they have worked; but only for that small handful of residents! But to what detriment to every one else? On one hand we build a £290m bypass to make car journeys easier and actually a little greener and then make it a road to nowhere by building a rollercoaster at one end of it that motorists will hate... madness! The answer was of course to build the whole bypass and connect it to the M60 but our green campaigners wouldn't like that because cars are the enemy and must be destroyed.
Then consider little old Marple and how it loves its heritage, its shops and cafes and how it wants visitors. You only get that if people can get in and out, we can't have it both ways.
There is no easy answer but I for one don't see bashing the motorist as the answer, speed humps damage cars, there's no denying that, they do increase polution, yes they do reduce speed, but not safely and certainly not fairly because as was pointed out by someone earlier in the thread, we don't all have to use wooden knives and forks because one person might use a knife to hurt someone somewhere, (although God forbid, I can see wooden spoons being made law one day). If that's our mindset, every 30mph road in the country should have speed humps.
