- 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
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Cycling Scotland Leave Space for a Life campaign (Cycling Scotland)Over a quarter of motorists in Scotland don’t know driving dangerously around cyclists could lead to driving ban or prison sentence – and over 50% say more cameras would “change their behaviour”, new survey finds
Education, enforcement, and networks of dedicated cycle lanes are key to reducing the number of cyclists killed and injured due to careless or dangerous driving, Cycling Scotland has said – after new research commissioned by the charity found that more than one in four people in Scotland are unaware that driving carelessly or dangerously around cyclists could result in a driving ban or prison sentence.
Meanwhile, as part of another Cycling Scotland survey, 58 per cent of motorists admitted that knowing their driving was being captured on camera would make them change their behaviour around people on bikes.
The findings of the two surveys have been revealed this week as Cycling Scotland, supported by Police Scotland, launches its annual Give Cycle Space nationwide road safety campaign, which aims to remind motorists of the risks of close passing and driving dangerously around cyclists.
Today we launch our road safety campaign, supported by @PoliceScotland, to remind people driving they always need to drive safely around someone on a bike. Give at least 1.5 metres of space when passing someone on a bike.#GiveCycleSpace pic.twitter.com/ngGDFgW6C7
— Cycling Scotland (@CyclingScotland) April 29, 2024
According to new Police Scotland data, on average four people a week in Scotland suffer serious, potentially life-changing injuries in collisions involving motorists while cycling.
And a new survey of 1,009 Scottish drivers has found that 27 per cent are currently unaware that driving carelessly or dangerously around people cycling can lead to a driving ban or prison sentence.
Meanwhile, a separate survey of over 500 motorists, also commissioned by Cycling Scotland, revealed that 58 per cent of drivers said that knowing a camera could capture their driving behaviour would lead them to change how they behave around cyclists.
However, despite that particular finding, Police Scotland continues to be criticised by cyclists for the ongoing delays surrounding the proposed introduction of an online road safety reporting portal (allegedly due to budget constraints) – delays which Cycling UK said last year were putting cyclists in Scotland “at risk”.
62 per cent also said that the risk of killing or seriously injuring someone would be the most likely factor to ensure they drive safely around someone on a bike.
The same percentage of drivers claimed to always double check their mirrors and blind spot for cyclists before making a turn and other manoeuvres, with the remaining 38 percent admitting they either often, sometimes, or rarely do so.
Last year, Police Scotland’s road safety figures for the period between 2015 and 2021 revealed that motorists were at fault in almost three-quarters of all collisions between cyclists and drivers, with the data also suggesting that common tropes about ‘dangerous’ cyclists, such as riders “wearing dark clothing”, are responsible for comparatively few crashes.
New analysis of police data also, Cycling Scotland says, revealed that a “significant” number of those motorists who were at fault in fatal collisions between 2015 and 2020 (almost one in ten of the total number, and roughly half of those whose criminal history records were available) had previous convictions for driving-related offences.
These latest findings come a few weeks after Cycling Scotland published its recent research into attitudes towards cycling, which found that more than two thirds of Scots consider not feeling safe on the roads the biggest barrier to making more cycle journeys, while 37 per cent said they would cycle more often if they were more confident.
62 per cent also said that they support re-allocating road space for cycling in their area, while 88 per cent believe cycling could improve health and wellbeing, a figure that has risen in comparison with 2022.
Launched this week, Cycling Scotland’s campaign – which will run online, on television and radio, and on buses – seeks to raise awareness of the legal passing distance of 1.5m and the responsibility of drivers to safely overtake cyclists (and the possibility of a £100 fine and penalty points for failing to do so), with the charity’s hard hitting ‘Leave Space for a Life’ advert underlining the risks of dangerous driving.
When you're driving, it might be easy to think "I can just squeeze past that bike" - but don't risk it. Close passes are dangerous, scary and have consequences. It's not just a bike, it's a person.#GiveCycleSpace pic.twitter.com/hifMFsajsm
— Cycling Scotland (@CyclingScotland) May 1, 2024
“More people are travelling by bike in Scotland which is really positive,” Simon Bradshaw, Cycling Scotland’s Road Safety Manager, said following the campaign’s launch.
“To improve our health and environment, we need to enable even more people to choose cycling. What we can’t do is accept a corresponding rise in serious injuries and deaths.
“The road safety TV ad shows someone cycling on the road from a driver’s viewpoint, together with images of their life and loved ones in the space next to them – we’re reminding drivers to Leave Space for a Life.
“Our message is that we’re all people, travelling on the road and wanting to get home safely. Dangerous and careless driving around people on bikes is risking someone’s life and risking serious legal consequences.”
He continued: “It's clear that a campaign on its own isn’t enough. We need urgent change including networks of dedicated cycle lanes and enforcement to reduce dangerous driving, especially given the number of repeat offenders involved in fatal crashes.
“Education can also play a key role in changing public opinion and behaviour and we will work with other organisations to ensure that such road safety awareness campaigns can continue.”
“Every driver has a responsibility to safely overtake cyclists,” Chief Superintendent Hilary Sloan, Police Scotland’s Head of Road Policing, added.
“Cyclists are vulnerable on the road and drivers should be aware of how they can help reduce serious and fatal collisions. Police officers are out every day educating road users and carrying out enforcement, and we are part of a crucial partnership response to road safety.”
After obtaining a PhD, lecturing, and hosting a history podcast at Queen’s University Belfast, Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.
Latest Comments
- Clem Fandango 8 min 59 sec ago
So they're bitter about not being able to park wherever they want, is that about the strength of it from The Motornormative Poet?
- Steve K 40 min 11 sec ago
Which section of the A34 (there are two, unconnected bits)? Back in 2016-17 when I was riding from London to the North West a lot (for reasons I've...
- FatAndFurious 8 hours 12 min ago
I'm not known for my imagination. What are folk hoping to see? We have events, races, leagues, workouts, clubs, free rides, group rides, portals to...
- mark1a 9 hours 31 min ago
No problem at all old chap, its successor the CAAD13 is available in mechanical 105 11sp guise (not too shabby a groupset IMO with Shimano trickle...
- David9694 10 hours 25 min ago
Car crashing into Colchester Co-op sees two hospitalised https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/24719022.car-crashing-colchester-co-...
- Prosper0 11 hours 26 min ago
No offence to Endura, but same advice as to Rapha, I actually have all the kit I need, for probably several years. You need to go and win the next...
- chrisonabike 15 hours 21 min ago
Ah - yes, they've got an American Star the wrong way round (means the child carrier needs rearranged though). Or it could be a Facile but inverted?
- lesterama 17 hours 14 min ago
What a bunch of ases
- quiff 18 hours 7 min ago
It was only your comment in the carousel that first brought me here, and yet I still managed to read most of the page before remembering this isn't...
Add new comment
36 comments
" over 50% say more cameras would “change their behaviour” " It's a well known fact the carrot doesn't work for most motorist, but the big stick does.
Intersting article in The Spectator advocating drivers who have a dashcam to "snitch" on littering/flytipping by other drivers.
I assume the same writer (and the paper) is happy for drivers (and cyclists) to use video evidence against dangerous driving too...
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/long-live-the-litter-lout-snitches/
Clown passes me within a few inches, apparently he gave me plenty of room.
Drivers simply care and as for Polis Scotland a chocolate teapot would be of more use.
So can anyone cite an example where driving dangerously around cyclists led to a driving ban or prison sentence ?
And then ponder the results of the survey.
Not Scotland and a pedestrian killed, not a cylist but a driver was jailed for dangerous driving today.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c136rvdln3do
more details of what happened here
https://www.phtm.co.uk/news/6604/phtm-news/speeding-gloucester-cabbie-ki...
and here
https://www.punchline-gloucester.com/articles/aanews/speeding-taxi-drive...
Forget the 27 percent. What about the 38 percent unswayed by the idea of driving safely to prevent a serious injury to or death of a vulnerable road user?
and de facto they'd be right; or has that sanction ever in fact been applied?
I thought the rule was that it wasn't dangerous driving unless the cyclist was killed or maimed, in which case it was the sun's fault, or providence.
Exactly that, I'd have answered their survey I was unaware anyone had been sent to prison or banned from driving for driving dangerously, like they ever use that charge, around cyclists
Not Scotland but this was dangerous driving. It's the only one I'm aware of where a cyclist wasn't killed. Even when cyclists are killed it's usually careless.
https://road.cc/content/news/near-miss-day-872-van-driver-banned-12-mont...
I was so surprised when I read it that I bookmarked it.
"Over a quarter of motorists in Scotland don’t know driving dangerously around cyclists could lead to driving ban " - 1 in 4 cars close passing me on the way to work seems on the low end.
100% of scotplod aren't interested in the effects of that statistic.
Hardly a surprise - most drivers won't fix their driving unless they think there's a chance that they'll get caught for it. This is why police should prioritise dealing with public video evidence rather than ignoring it as it'll probably have much greater influence than the police doing a traffic stop once in a blue moon.
It will also stick it to the idiots who think that members of the public reporting crimes is snitching and that instead we should rely on the police to be everywhere on our roads to catch them in the act.
The very fact that the only thing that stops people behaving like animals is the fear of getting caught and a flourescent police sticks out like a sore thumb might suggest that police cars are not the best way to catch bad drivers who will adapt their driving around them.
When drivers are petrified that every other car and cyclist is probably filming their danagerous driving the roads might be a little safer.
These studies can always be summarised by "I don't really care about the safety of cyclists and other people but if I think I will actually be punished for my shit driving I will change...because that might affect me...the person who matters"
So the solution to all these things is to make the punishments serious and the likelihood of getting caught high. ie. make it easy for people to submit footage and make the fines high and the points high. Get caught twice, licence gone.
TBH I think the second part of what you desribe is more important, the chances of being caught and convicted needs to be very high, it is the only way to improve driving standards. I am fairly confident that this has already been proven with speeding, at least in the areas with camera enforcement.
For all I want the punishment to be more sever, I don't think that is in most peoples heads as they don't believe they will ever be caught.
"27 per cent are currently unaware that driving carelessly or dangerously around people cycling can lead to a driving ban or prison sentence." Really? A quarter of all drivers ? What are driving schools teaching learner drivers then? Is it any wonder 85 people a day are killed or seriously injured on our roads?
"What are driving schools teaching learner drivers then?" - to pass the driving test. As someone here pointed out to me things have changed, you don't go off and digest the Highway Code - you get a "pass your theory test"
bookapp and just do practice theory tests.And of course once you've passed ... that's it! Instructors, the DVSA, the Highway Code ... all irrelevant. Police? Enforcement is extremely sparse and punishments light. You're even "on your honour" to let the DVLA know if you physically lose the ability to drive. (Also mentally but of course you might not think to do so at that point...)
Meanwhile - "practice makes ... habit". That is informed by societal "common knowledge", the opinions and practices of your passengers / other drivers when you're a passenger and those you interact with every day on the roads.
My teenage daughter is learning to drive. She has an app to practice for her theory test (she's failed it once). I asked her if she wanted a copy of the HC and she said, "Why?". I said, so you can read the guidance and rules and road signs - stuff you need to know. She replied, "I don't need to do that, I've got the app". I just rolled my eyes at her and went away, muttering under my breath.
This almost ties in with my mini-rant about modern teaching methods on that other thread - the theory test is more about memorisation than actual understanding.
To be fair that wouldn't necessarily be different with the app presentation of this vs. the actual doc. And IIRC when I did mine they had tried to include some tests of "what is dangerous in this situation" / "what would you do here" rather than just "what does this sign mean". Albeit it was all multiple-guess and some of the possible (incorrect) answers were pretty wild.
The key thing for getting understanding seems to be motivation. Clearly lots of people are quite motivated to drive (independence! Income! Intercourse!) but perhaps insufficiently motivated to drive well / safely? Thus it's understandable if they didn't feel the need to understand, and didn't (any more than was needed).
In my case I'd also remained (somewhat) a bike rider, as I was through my teens - maybe another reason for a different approach?
I think there are also hazard perception videos now. One of them was linked on here a while back, and lots of us scored badly because our cycling spidey-senses were going wild spotting unofficial hazards like potholes, wet white lines, manhole covers...
Anything's a hazard if you're cautious enough
OT & Just for you
https://www.popsci.com/animals/squirrel-leap-skills/
Hmmm - robotic squirrels. I can't see any problem with them inevitably turning against their creators.
Meanwhile, squirrels have been teaching robots how to mislead and trick others
https://spectrum.ieee.org/robots-learn-deceptive-behaviors-from-squirrels
Thank your chosen deity (except Sciurid-related ones) we invented spanners - we should be able disable them by undoing their nuts!
They do that to stop people just clicking on everything randomly. Which is again kind of outcome driven testing or knowledge to pass association rather than actual learning.
The official advice is bollocks! They tell you to click when you see a potential hazzard, but anything could be a potential hazzard.
The best thing to do is ignore the official advice, and only click at the exact point that you see a potential hazzard start to develop into an actual hazzard. For instance, when you see a football roll into the road, you click, because you know that the kids are going to come running after it. You click when you see the other driver emerging from a side road and you can see the back of their head, because they're going to turn right and not see you. And so on...
You also get stung for spotting too early.
I did try one and mud on the road was not considered a hazard.
A friend of mine who immigrated here from a commonwealth country also happened to drive for the military. When sitting his hazard test he was failed as he was reading too much into his surroundings. This happened to be force of habit for him as the nation was dealing with huge insurrection at the time.
To take a charitable view of that stat, a good and careful driver could still reasonably answer that they are unaware of the precise legal consequences of poor driving - i't not great suvey design. Just like I don't know how many years I could get for armed robbery, but it seems an irrelevance because I don't do armed robbery.
Pages