Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Gardai put helmets and hi-vis on fixed penalty poster - but they aren't a legal requirement

Irish police accused of sending "mixed messages" as poster on new fixed penalty fines shows helmets and hi-vis - which aren't a legal requirement...

The Gardai have been accused of giving misleading advice after helmets and hi-vis clothing have appeared on a poster describing new fineable offences for cyclists.

The posters, listing seven new Fixed Charged Notices which come into force 31 July, picture a cartoon cyclist with pointers to helmets, fluorescent clothing and reflectors, whose absence aren't a legal requirement or fineable, as well as front and rear lights, which are.

The Irish Cycling Advocacy Network, Cyclist.ie, has accused the Gardai of sending mixed messages with its poster, and of a "car-centric view of traffic management" and of "ignoring" driving offences like speeding.

Dublin Cycling Campaign's Colm Ryder, in a letter to the Garda, points out the poster is not technically correct, not least because points four and seven, regarding cyclists running red lights, are duplicates.

He said: "We are also disappointed that the issues of helmet wearing, hi-viz, and front reflectors, all of which are not mandatory, and do not incur a fine or are not illegal, are bound up with the agreed issues which are illegal - although not having a rear reflector, does not incur an FCN. We suggest that these need to clearly distinguished as not incurring any fine, or not being an offence.

"In summary we are disappointed with the inaccuracy of the post and we suggest it be corrected as soon as possible, and that the non-mandatory items be removed from the post."

In a statement on its website, Cyclist.ie voices frustration at the apparent lack of evidence used in coming up with the new charges.

It said: "We are not convinced that the ‘risk’ element associated with these proposed FCN offences has been properly assessed​ in the context of overall national road safety policy.  Do cyclists kill other road users?  What level of injury/offence is caused by cyclists in comparison with motor vehicles?  What quantum improvement in road safety will be achieved through the introduction of these FCNs?  We have yet to see real analyses / figures, or be convinced by anything other than anecdotal comments.

Following a meeting with the Gardai, Cyclist.ie said: "We certainly acknowledge the logic in tackling careless cycling. However, we are still very concerned that the more serious issues of motor vehicles exceeding speed limits, overtaking closely/dangerously and fly-parking in cycle tracks are not being addressed in a way that will make Irish roads safe and attractive environments in which to walk or cycle for people of all ages and abilities.

"We did get a clear sense that they are much more favourable to ignoring certain motor vehicle infractions (discretionary policing), in order to ‘keep business moving’, rather than considering the issue of a safer environments for all road users. They appear to have a very car-centric view of traffic management."

The Gardai used its Twitter account to reinforce the fact hi-vis and helmets are not compulsory but "highly recommended"

The seven fineable Fixed Charged Notices for cycling, which come into effect on 31 July, are below.

1. No front lamp or rear lamp during lighting up hours on a bike
2. Cyclist driving a pedal cycle without reasonable consideration
3. Cyclist failing to stop for a school warden sign
4. Cyclist going through a red light
5. Cyclist proceeding past a stop line, barrier at a railway level crossing, swing bridge, when the red lamps are flashing
6. Cyclist proceeding into a pedestrianised street or area
7. Cyclist proceeding past cycle traffic lights when red lamp is lit

Sergeant Tony Connaughton explained to road.cc the first part of the poster is about safety, the second about the fines. 

He said: "We continue to promote safety on the roads. We also continue to promote the use of helmets, hi-vis clothing and lights. An Garda Siochana, the RSA and other agencies, regularly distribute hi vis garments and lights.

"The poster starts with cycle safely, we then clearly list all existing offences which now attract fix charge penalty notices."

"Gardai urge cyclists to comply with the legislation, be safe, be seen and stop at red light etc. Cyclists need to be aware of the 7 offences as listed on the leaflet and avoid the 40 euro fine. Cyclists can play a part in making the roads safer. Motorists' must also respect cyclists and exercise care share the road safely (sic)."

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.

Add new comment

12 comments

Avatar
Paul_C | 9 years ago
0 likes

pretty obvious they want to be seen to be doing something, and they've worked out the the quickest way to reduce casualties is to reduce the number of cyclists....

Avatar
ChairRDRF | 9 years ago
0 likes

Usual "road safety" drivel.

Don't know where to start - probably no point.

Oh alright, just two points:

Point 2: I have never been able to drive my pedal cycles. Somebody must have left the steering wheel off them.

Spoke reflectors. Nobody has ever produced any evidence for efficacy. When you see them it's generally too late, and if you're watching out you'd see the cyclist anyway. But there are millions and millions produced every year for bicycles.

Avatar
Beatnik69 replied to ChairRDRF | 9 years ago
0 likes
ChairRDRF wrote:

Point 2: I have never been able to drive my pedal cycles. Somebody must have left the steering wheel off them.

Your pedals don't have a steering wheel because you don't need to steer them. You do, however, by pedalling your bicycle, drive it forward.

Avatar
BigglesMeister replied to ChairRDRF | 9 years ago
0 likes
ChairRDRF wrote:

Usual "road safety" drivel.

Don't know where to start - probably no point.

Oh alright, just two points:

Point 2: I have never been able to drive my pedal cycles. Somebody must have left the steering wheel off them.

Spoke reflectors. Nobody has ever produced any evidence for efficacy. When you see them it's generally too late, and if you're watching out you'd see the cyclist anyway. But there are millions and millions produced every year for bicycles.

Agreed, spoke reflectors are bollox.

Avatar
wycombewheeler replied to BigglesMeister | 9 years ago
0 likes
BigglesMeister wrote:
ChairRDRF wrote:

Usual "road safety" drivel.

Don't know where to start - probably no point.

Oh alright, just two points:

Point 2: I have never been able to drive my pedal cycles. Somebody must have left the steering wheel off them.

Spoke reflectors. Nobody has ever produced any evidence for efficacy. When you see them it's generally too late, and if you're watching out you'd see the cyclist anyway. But there are millions and millions produced every year for bicycles.

Agreed, spoke reflectors are bollox.

Only effective when you are crossing the path of a car. Generally at these times cars would have priority so I would put more faith in myself checking a car is not coming.

Avatar
anarchy | 9 years ago
0 likes

Oink oink

Avatar
wwfcb replied to anarchy | 9 years ago
0 likes
anarchy wrote:

Oink oink

 37

Avatar
Angelfishsolo | 9 years ago
0 likes

I think 4 is a red traffic light whereas 7 is a red pedestrian / cycling crossing light.

Avatar
pmanc replied to Angelfishsolo | 9 years ago
0 likes
Angelfishsolo wrote:

I think 4 is a red traffic light whereas 7 is a red pedestrian / cycling crossing light.

I've discussed this in emails with a representative of TfGM who are responsible for much of Manchester's road infrastructure.

Essentially the indication was that toucan crossings - pedestrian/cyclist crossings - should only be used where a section of pavement either side is designated as shared use. In that situation if a cyclist chooses to cross at the toucan, they are behaving like a pedestrian rather than a vehicle, and are under no obligation to wait for a green bike any more than a pedestrian has to wait for a green man; no UK jaywalking law.

Of course caution should be exercised, and the whole thing is a farce anyway. People on bikes should have one clear safe dedicated option rather than a bodged choice of how to negotiate the junction and who to share with.

Avatar
Laura Laker | 9 years ago
0 likes

Colm Ryder, quoted par 4, points out that four and seven are the same, too.

Avatar
Al__S | 9 years ago
0 likes

Aren't 4 & 7 the same thing? And 5 is pretty much the same thing

Avatar
mattsccm | 9 years ago
0 likes

Shame really as by doing this they have created a huge anti feeling when the seven points above are fine.

Latest Comments