- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Broken bike (CC licensed image by garryknight, www.flickr.com)DfT admits "ever increasing problem with pedal cyclist casualties" as serious injuries rise 8 per cent
Statistics released by the Department for Transport (DfT) on Thursday show an 8.2% rise in serious cyclist injuries from 2013 to 2014, continuing a worrying trend of injury risk to cyclists that has increased every year since 2004.
The data, compiled from police reports, shows a 4 per cent increase in road deaths among all users from 2013 to 2014, with 5.3 per cent more serious injuries.
Vulnerable road users – pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists – bore the brunt of the increase, and "all account for disproportionately more casualties than would be expected, given the distance travelled," according to the DfT report.
British Cycling, meanwhile, says cycling remains a comparatively safe form of transport, and that today's Cycling and Walking Investment announcement will improve safety for those on two wheels.
The number of cyclist killed rose from 109 to 113, and the DfT report says: "There was an 8.2 per cent rise in the number of seriously injured pedal cyclists to 3,401 in 2014.
“With the exception of 2012 to 2013, the number of seriously injured pedal cyclists has increased every year since the low of 2,174 in 2004.
“This long term rise indicates that there is an ever increasing problem with pedal cyclist casualties."
It attributes part of the increase to growth in cycling of 3.8 per cent to 3.25 billion vehicle miles in 2014.
This rise of 27 per cent in cycling since 2007, it says, is "not far short" of the 31% rise in cycle casualties in that time.
It says greater exposure to traffic has resulted in more road traffic incidents involving bike riders.
There were 1,775 reported road deaths in 2014, an increase of 4% on 2013 figures, with 5.3 per cent more serious injuries than 2013.
Last year's overall casualty figures reverses a long term downward trend, and the DfT points out there were 45 per cent fewer fatalities than in 2005 and 37 per cent fewer than the 2005-09 average, and the 194,477 casualties of all severities in 2014 is the second lowest since records began.
But the report says: "One of the more noticeable discrepancies is for pedal cycles. Although pedal cycles have a similar fatality rate as pedestrians, at around 35 to 38 deaths per billion miles travelled, there is a marked difference between the two groups for overall reported casualties."
Per billion passenger miles there were 38 pedestrian deaths and 35 cyclist deaths, but while there were 2,110 pedestrian casualties there were 6,588 cyclist casualties.
British Cycling's Campaigns Manager, Martin Key, said: "Cyclists being injured on UK roads is an ongoing concern, and any fatality in these circumstances is deeply tragic. However, cycling remains a comparatively safe form of transport.
"I believe we are making progress, and it was encouraging to hear cycling minister Robert Goodwill announce today that the Department for Transport has started work on its long-awaited Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy.
“This is a welcome step forward, but today's figures show that the sooner this plan is put in place, and significant investment is made in cycle-proofing our roads and junctions, the better.
“Our vision is to bring cycling provision in Britain closer to the standards set up some of our European neighbours – when that happens, injuries and fatalities will become much rarer."
Pedestrians made up three quarters of the increase in deaths last year, the highest number since 2011.
Car occupant casualties also increased by 5.2 per cent to 115,530 while deaths remained the same. Car and taxi traffic increased 1.9 per cent from 2013 to 2014, which partly explains the increase.
Laura Laker is a freelance journalist with more than a decade’s experience covering cycling, walking and wheeling (and other means of transport). Beginning her career with road.cc, Laura has also written for national and specialist titles of all stripes. One part of the popular Streets Ahead podcast, she sometimes appears as a talking head on TV and radio, and in real life at conferences and festivals. She is also the author of Potholes and Pavements: a Bumpy Ride on Britain’s National Cycle Network.
Latest Comments
- David9694 1 hour 2 min ago
I hope you're all checking your insurance policies, helmets, test certificates and road tax, it's the 2024 round-up...
- check12 2 hours 42 min ago
200 people out of a close by population of how many? Just build it and stop being a wuss
- Spangly Shiny 4 hours 15 min ago
To paraphrase Field of Dreams, "Build it right and they will come: and use it!"
- Rendel Harris 6 hours 36 min ago
And a Happy Christmas to you, road.cc staff!
- Rendel Harris 7 hours 24 min ago
The odds of not being able to find a single pedestrian - just one, note, "any pedestrian" - in an area containing more than about ten of them who...
- bikeman01 9 hours 3 min ago
I love how wannabe racer reviewers talk about fork flex under braking like their tyres are made of glue. I find traction gives long before fork flex.
- hawkinspeter 10 hours 10 min ago
They don't make them like they used to
- LongitudeLatitude 11 hours 1 min ago
Thanks for using my picture of chocolate in your opening picture. The original can be found here, chocolate! | LongitudeLatitude | Flickr.
- lesterama 11 hours 28 min ago
Fair comments. I'll put my hands up and say I got the wrong end of the stick with this one. ¡Feliz navidad! Here's a pic for the season of goodwill.
- Mike Holmes 11 hours 32 min ago
A trip down memory lane (or street) for me - Harry Quinn's bike shop was at the top of our Street and I used to spend time staring at the bikes and...
Add new comment
28 comments
I am so very, very pleased that someone published a strategy. That is definitely going to change the nation for the better, isn't it?
Maybe I can cover my body with printouts of the strategy, and the cars will bounce off it as they try to drive through me?
Maybe I can show the strategy to my local council highways department, so they can ignore it ("no money for that, sorry").
If we are very lucky and behave ourselves until tea-time, the benevolent masters will publish a policy, or maybe an aspiration or a target. Then we might get some plans and consultations, a logo, a committee, a website, further all-party discussions, tea, biscuits, jelly and ice cream. Then a unicorn, a squadron of flying pigs in full RAF colours, a messiah, a time machine, and a leaflet to every household featuring a summary of the answer to life, the universe and everything?
It needs a bit of statistical interpretation. The 8% increase in injuries is significant (anything above about 1.5% would be) but with the number killed being around 110, any change between 100 and 120 is not significant and well within the bound of statistical variability given the small numbers. Still far too many and what is statistically very significant is the large numbers that are killed by HGVs.
I would ignore the numbers killed, the numbers are too small, the real issue is the number of serious injuries. The fact the numbers are rising far faster than the increase in cycling is not a good sign! 8.2% in injuries v 3.8% rise in miles ridden.
I meant on tv and continually not just for a week or two.
Information, instruction & training. Plus continual reinforcement and hopefully some corresponding enforcement.
Maybe easily accept helmet cam evidence more often. People slow down for speed cameras, perhaps they'll drive better around cyclist if they a) know what they're meant to do and b) think they might get caught.
I'm a fair weather commuter, three days this week I've taken myself on the 20 odd mile round trip to and from work.. (from Leamington to Coventry in the midlands).
The latter part of the week however I've spent plotting ways to take revenge on the selfish drivers who try and get as close to me as possible, get impatient and aggressive when they can't pass, those who have ZERO spacial awareness apart from the car in front of them and the people I spot on their mobiles...
It's very scary.
It may be very un-politically correct but, I can't help but stereotype here... in my opinion the most consistent offenders are:
VAN DRIVERS, TAXI DRIVERS, 4X4 DRIVERS, the people who scare me the most are the ones who don't see you, and aren't looking for you.. on roundabouts, at junctions or riding through slow traffic...
..makes me shudder just thinking about it!
This is true. There do seem to be a lot of motorists out there who have no idea of how wide or how long their vehicle is: the ones that will force their way alongside you if you are waiting in a queue or to come out of a junction in primary; the ones who will go try to go through between you and a pedestrian refuge, then suddenly brake hard as they realise that they won't fit.
And the ones who don't seem to understand that if there is a traffic queue in a hundred metres distance with me approaching it, with a red traffic light showing a hundred metres beyond that, then revving past to sit in front of me (as I smoothly move out and round them) just makes them look really stupid...
"Highway code Rule 140
Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its times of operation. Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable. You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions "
Or as actually applied in the real world.....
Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line when there's a copper behind you. Or unless you need to nip into the shop for a packet of fags, in that case as long as you stick your hazards on, it will be fine.
Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable (i.e. parking somewhere else would mean you may have to walk somewhere/or the lane is outside your house). You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions (see above hazard light exceptions).
"Highway code Rule 140
Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its times of operation. Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable. You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions "
Or as actually applied in the real world.....
Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line when there's a copper behind you. Or unless you need to nip into the shop for a packet of fags, in that case as long as you stick your hazards on, it will be fine.
Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable (i.e. parking somewhere else would mean you may have to walk somewhere/or the lane is outside your house). You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions (see above hazard light exceptions).
Cycling as a commuter (not in London) on a daily basis, I think a lot of motorists really genuinely think that their hazard warning lights are some sort of 'get out of jail free' card - "If I put my hazards on I'm warning people that I'm being a hazard, so it's OK".
This, this, very much this. There do seem to be a lot of motorists who think that a painted cycle lane is just some sort of advisory guidance to keep those pesky cyclists at the side of the road. And reading sites like this, it seems that even painting the whole cycle lane blue doesn't help (can you imagine?).
Fundamentally, it's just not bloody good enough.
This is a free country and cycling is a legal activity. I should not have to consider whether doing something legal is worth the risk of personal injury, abuse, and cultural disapproval from people who choose other activities.
Imagine if "riding a horse" got as much abuse as cycling. "Get in the horse lane! Stop crapping on the road! Ugh, you're wearing jodhpurs!" It'd be utterly ridiculous.
3 Simple steps are needed to fix this:
1: Strict Liability
2: Default priority for vulnerable users
3: Legislate for camera and sensor deployment
DfT need to commission some public information adverts to attempt to explain / reinforce the rules such as; taking the lane, riding primary; riding two abreast; safe overtaking and leaving a gap; and, ASL's.
Education might begin to stem some of the incorrect beliefs out there.
Like those adverts that appeared on bus stops last year, you mean? 'Cos they made a great difference...
"DfT need to commission some public information adverts to attempt to explain / reinforce the rules such as; taking the lane, riding primary; riding two abreast; safe overtaking and leaving a gap; and, ASL's."
Surely any public information campaign would fall foul of the Advertising Standards Authority? The same ones who demanded that adverts showing cyclists riding in the primary position and without helmets be removed?
Clearly the ASA need educating too.
The ASA backed down on that in the end, didn't they?
But then they allowed the advert which suggested that < 2 foot passing distance was fine, their response was ignorant and idiotic.
It's the lack of roads Policing which must take some responsibility for those figures.
Cyclists are, like pedestrians, vulnerable road users. The only difference bring cyclists have to ride on the road. The vast majority of car, van and lorry drivers do not look upon us as vulnerable when they come across us. They see us as a nuisance. That is where it's gone wrong.
The complacency of drivers today and the lawless way in which they drive is shocking and is down to practically no law enforcement. We've all heard and read that driving is a privilege not a right and although it's almost become a cliché, it does need reinforcing in the form of law enforcement, stiff penalties and re-education.
In my town I haven't seen a single speed trap where the police park up and get their radar guns out in red circle speed limits in what must be at least 5 years.
That is why we are in such a sad state of affairs. Cycling may have increased but then so has car use. I don't see the cause of these extra casualties asa result of more cyclists, it's just more bad drivers.
Purely anecdotal, and possibly just my paranoia from reading about too many 'hate crimes' against cyclists on these pages, but I'm feeling that recently there is a lot more aggression towards me as a cyclist, especially when I'm dressed up as a lycra lout. Maybe this is the fault of the Daily Mail or maybe even a certain militant cycle stazi who appear to revel in conflict with motorists, sometimes justified, sometimes maybe not so much.
However the van driver yesterday who, so apoplectic with rage, felt the need to hang out of his window and launch a tirade of purple faced expletive laden abuse as he failed to force his way past at a narrow pinch point (due my riding in primary, easily keeping with the flow of traffic and having only a gap of 2 car lengths in front) seems to be symptomatic of a hardening belief amongst some road users that bicycles have no right to use the road, and if they do, then they should be in the gutter to make overtaking them easier.
Come off it British Cycing! Grow some balls and demand things improve rather than making apologies for the figures because you are worried you'll loose members if cycling looks dangerous.
AFAIA, BC appear to have had little interest in commuters or anything outside their racing interests or its club membership until the last few years. They appointed their first infrastruture advisor in 2013, and Boardman as policy advisor possibly some time around then too.
Essentially the CTC and local campaign groups have been making all the noise until recently, BC are the johnny-come-latelys.
It'd be interesting to know where the recent interest has come from - I cant help thinking it has more to do with Chris Boardman than anything else.
But to be cynical it could be viewed as much to boost membership, possibly to the CTC's loss. As it is we have various BC cheerleaders in the small club (of mostly new roadies) that I'm a member of..someone even came out with the line 'you should join BC cos they support all cyclists' . Which is clearly bollocks if your interest is timetrialling (CTT/RTTC), recumbents/hpvs/"wrong-shaped bikes" (BHPC) or mtbing (IMBA UK). To read through some of the BC blurb in the last 3 years or so you'd get the impression they're the only cycling organisation in the UK.
If you read the BC chap's whole comment, then it's basically "cycling is safe - but should be safer so they still have work to do" which is correct. I think he does get the spin wrong and opens with too much about it being safe, but it's not like he's a campaigns manager... oh, wait a minute! Anyone would think that British Cycling were a load of uncoordinated muppets who only started campaigning recently and still aren't collaborating with CTC and local campaign groups, wouldn't they?
Also, if British Cycling would worried about making cycling look dangerous, they'd stop telling charity fun rides to disqualify riders on recumbents, without helmets and so on. Their Sportive department should not be handling charity fundraisers.
@FATBEGGARONABIKE
you have much more chance of receiving a parking ticket from a traffic warden, or a fine from a camera system for entering a hatched junction, than being stopped by the Police?
The only time I see Police now in London is when they are driving fast on blue lights to an incident, or during the occasional PR exercise that is "operation safeway" which involves them standing around at traffic junctions talking to each other whilst traffic offences are committed nearby.
Further Police cuts, and the reduction of specialist Traffic police, cannot do anything but inform drivers that the chances of getting caught are becoming ever more remote, so drivers continue to speed, jump red lights, traffic light gamble, park illegally on cycle lanes, freely use their hand held cell phones whilst driving
Doesn't need painted parking restriction - they aren't allowed there. Public education would help (a bit).
Highway code Rule 140
Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its times of operation. Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable. You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions apply.
Law RTRA sects 5 & 8
I wonder if the amount of bad driving on our roads has anything to do with annual police budget cuts.
Or the scrapping of national road safety targets, reducing the incentive for local authorities to focus on this, at the same time as they've needed to find savings due to major funding cuts.
The relationship between number of cyclists and number of cycling casualties can be broken, as proven by cycling nations which implemented good legislative frameworks and invested in cycling infrastructure, The obvious complacency with the presented numbers is nothing short of scandalous.
Well there's human progress for you.