Since it’s a brand-new year on the live blog (Rick Astley didn’t sing ‘Never Gonna Give You Up’ just after midnight on the BBC for nothing), I thought I’d wipe the slate clean and make a fresh start by focusing on some different kinds of cycling-related stories – a post-Christmas clean-up, if you will, of all the doom and gloom and social media outrage that populated the 2023 blog.
Ah, I see…
Well, scratch that idea – because, I regret to inform you, the government and police are at it again when it comes to shifting the onus for road safety onto vulnerable road users. And cyclists on social media aren’t one bit happy about it.
Plus ça change, and all that.
Yesterday, just nine hours into the New Year, Northern Ireland’s Department for Infrastructure – making a rapid live blog debut this year after a spectacularly farcical 2023 – issued a reminder to “everyone of our shared responsibility in 2024 to safeguard our own safety and that of others, however we choose to travel on the roads”.
The latest call for shared responsibility on the roads comes after the PSNI released its provisional, and sobering, road safety figures for 2023, which revealed that 69 people died on Northern Ireland’s roads last year, up from 55 and 50 in 2022 and 2021 respectively.
Perhaps most shockingly, of those 69 killed in road traffic collisions, more than half were vulnerable road users – two cyclists, 19 pedestrians, and 13 motorcyclists.
> No change in cycling casualties over 10 years in Northern Ireland called “shameful” by Cycling UK and should be “wake-up call” for decision makers
And what did the Department for Infrastructure’s permanent secretary Dr Denis McMahon have to say about this alarmingly high death toll for vulnerable road users?
“If you are a driver help protect more vulnerable road users by slowing down and paying attention. If you are walking please always be aware of your surroundings and if walking at night please ensure you can be seen. And if you are a cyclist or motorcyclist, please ensure you put your safety first,” he said in a statement.
“By each and every road user taking personal responsibility, we are likely to see a reduction in the number of people being killed or seriously injured.
“As we start a new year, please resolve to help prevent collisions and save lives by slowing down and paying attention.”
> "What if a cyclist hits this?": Councillor raises alarm over enormous pothole big enough to stand waist-deep in
As anyone familiar with the live blog in 2023 will predict, that particular sentiment – and the accompanying post calling for “shared responsibility” didn’t go down too well with cyclists on social media.
“Shared responsibility is a cop out,” Holywood Cyclist said in response to the DfI’s post. “How many people do pedestrians or cyclists kill or seriously injure in a year? There is only one danger on the roads and it is time the powers that be here did something about it rather than just asking nicely. Two lives ruined per day isn’t enough to drive change?”
> New barriers on infamous ‘car park’ cycle lane vandalised, as councillor calls for “robust” protection “before someone gets seriously hurt”
“Shared responsibility means putting equal onus/blame on vulnerable road users who get killed, rather than putting the onus on those doing the killing. When are you going to adopt the hierarchy of road users?” asked Stormont Cyclist, noting Northern Ireland’s (predictably) lackadaisical approach to adopting measures now commonplace in other parts of the UK.
“STOP VICTIM BLAMING” was OB Cycler’s all-caps response, while others pointed out ways the Department for Infrastructure could take their share of the responsibility for road safety.
> “If they can’t build cycle lanes, devolve bloody powers to us and we’ll do it”: Belfast Council slams Northern Ireland government’s “joke” delivery of cycling infrastructure – as just 2.8km of bike lanes installed in two years
“How about you build the infrastructure to keep cyclists and pedestrians safe? The domination of the car has to end,” Dom Bryan wrote.
“Oh yes, reminding people. A sure-fire way to improve road safety. 71 dead last year even with your reminders. Maybe it’s time to try something different, you know, like infrastructure. Who is best placed to fix that, I wonder,” pondered Peter.
Meanwhile, Aaron added: “Give us an online portal to upload footage of dangerous and illegal driving already... falling years behind other police forces!”
Now that would be a fresh start we could all get behind…
Add new comment
29 comments
Meanwhile the PSNI has cut 21 positions from the road safety team totally disregarding that the roads have been carnage and the death toll for 2023 sitting at 71.
What change in my cycling behaviour or attire would prevent me from being smashed into by a distracted/ignorant/aggressive driver whilst they are forcing their way past me from behind? I have hi-viz, garmin radar, helmet (because the fear of hitting my helmet is bound to scare the driver into giving more clearance isn't it?). Obviously the answer is to leave my bike in the shed and take the fking car, joining all the other selfish morons clogging the roads in a vehicle that is 10 times larger and a 100 times heavier than is needed to transport one person.
Replace your cycling garb with a tonne of steel like a mech suit. Might be a bit heavy to carry so support it with a wheel in each corner and it might need an ICE to aid with mobility, or an equally incendiary long range battery pack.
There's a certain amount of logic in expecting road users to look out for themselves - others don't seem to be interested in doing it.
I had to run an errand, on the way home from work tonight, and this meant that I couldn't use the usual segregated cycle paths and had to use mostly ordinary roads.
Apart from the poor facilities for crossing busy roads (3 set of toucan lights to get across one road, for example)
In the space of 8.5km, I had 4 very scary moments which, had they been encountered by a less experienced cyclist, would most likely have just been the first one, followed by "splat!"
The level of impatience and poor observation is truly shocking.
Having thought about this a bit more, what the announcement should have said, is "Watch out for others, because they sure as hell aren't watching out for you..."
I suppose cyclists do need to share responsibility for safety on the road. I mean - if a cyclist isn't paying attention then they might run into an SUV and KSI the driver. Erm…
What if we stop killing all those drivers with our wayward cycling, then will the drivers agree to stop killing cyclists?
Sounds fair enought to me.
Well I haven't killed any drivers while cycling yet and vice versa.
So - a truce. How to encourage it though?
Come now, be sensible. I can't be expected to look out for every SUV shaped object on the road - I have to continuously stare at my Wahoo (other GPS units & computational tech are available) to ensure that I stay at the precise speed that means I am exceeding the speed limit and riding recklessly, yet still "holding up" vehicular traffic.
"They" are always painted in non hi-viz colours anyway - how am I supposed to see them when they appear in front of me. And apparently thousands of their drivers have no insurance or pay tax. Not like me - I Had TrAiNInG (did my cycling proficiency back in the '80s you see). And another thing.... they're always in the "middle of the road" doing 2mph for miles on end, dozens of them line astern on their pointless single occupant trips.
Vermin the lot of them. They can just blummin' well stay out of my way or face the consequences (the drivers'll be alright if they wear plastic hats anyway). If I write off a wankpanzer because we collided then it's their fault for putting themselves at risk.
That coffee & cake I'm on my way to won't eat/drink itself either now will it.
Twitter link so not for all
https://twitter.com/SimonTheSprout/status/1742151328950816957
still
Polti colours: the black Aurum is more of a disappointment than the strip. Those white Aurums were the most elegant bikes in the peloton over the past few years.
Happy New Year Ryan and fellow road.cc'ers!
A slightly different take on the NI responsiblity thing. Are they going to explain to motorists what "cyclists taking responsibility for their own safety" looks like. In my mind this is a lot of riding primary, riding 2 abreast in groups and generally deciding when (if) it is safe for cars to pass.
I give it until the first sunny Sunday club run until your mate with all the gear and no idea takes out the bunch whilst trying to put his sunglasses on whilst wearing his new Kask helmet that makes him 0.27W faster (he gets an extra couple of % because of his massive ears and lack of hair).
Have you guys tried not being hit by cars? Honestly, if you take some responsibility and just don't get hit by cars and we will all be much safer.
Might want to add "(sarcasm)" to Your comment as some people might not get it.
Should have hit em with the winky face haha
There are many places on the web where it wouldn't be sarcasm.
Before Martin was given his marching orders this place was one of those places, I well remember his dictum "Any cyclist hit by a car has de facto put themselves in harm's way in the first place."
Excellent summary.
Non-cyclists: "but... you chose to cycle" (everyone knows this is risky).
Many cyclists: "it's never happened to me, so it must be something you did".
Further - addressing issues at the "attitude change" level via information or other campaigns is a default by authorities (and indeed many safety organisations - though mostly this is all they can do). I think this is because:
a) we can. It's the least we could do (apart from literally nothing). Can be done quickly, will only be done for a short time, minimal cost and little political embarrassment if the public ignore it. Such campaigns don't require expensive, long-term or technical stuff like rebuilding our public spaces, introducing new laws or re-directing the police/legal system.
b) it seems logical - the cars and bikes aren't (yet) driving themselves, so the issue is the people. So just persuade them to change behaviour - simple, right? Plus by introspection we know that what we, our family and friends do is reasonable and obviously not part of the problem.
Unfortunately history shows us that in this case it's not going to happen without other push and pull factors. This is a self-reinforcing cycle - inadequate provision for cycling / cyclists being a minority (an "other") means than almost no-one cycles, which means ...
Hope to see a story on this one road.cc
Cyclist threatened with legal action for trademark infringement.
Balck belt barrister does a demolition job in polite terms.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sskav4IEuaQ
The headline for the video got me a little worried at first as I have posted a couple of videos where I have put the logo of the drivers' employer within my uploads. But as I watched Mr BBB do his analysis, I felt quite relieved.
But what is more worrying to me are the comments under his video. I know and appreciate that there's a lot of twisted thinking out there, but I was surprised at how much of that unpleasantness was coming from subscribers of the BBB.
I am not surprised at all. Other replies on a video by BBB try to tell him his advice has no legal basis!
The one thing I will say for BBB is that he is much more straight talking that a lot of the "lawyers" on Social Media (Mr
[Arse]Loophole springs to mind)I watched that and now, I want the cyclist to apply for an injunction if only so that the company gets saddled with thousands of pounds of legal costs.
It's beyond stupid for a company to threaten trademark infringement rather than just apologising for the poor driving skill of their van driver (they could have said some platitudes about retraining etc.).
they could have said some platitudes about retraining etc.
More likely to be worthless platitudes like 'we take this seriously and have taken action, but we're not going to tell what it was'. That means they have done nothing at all.
Me too but I expect the company knows a few tricks about how to quickly liquidate to avoid liability so in practice the cyclist would never get their money back.
IANAL, but usually there's exceptions for court ordered payments, so I'd expect the director could be held personally responsible for the legal bills even after the company is liquidated.
I of course like most cyclists just wantonly cycle exactly how I would were there no cars on the road trying to kill me. I don't ride defensively 100% of the time around cars and avoid countless "accidents" I would be part of if I didn't.
Thank god those sweet innocent motorists that pull across me have judged perfectly that I was going to slam on my brakes whether they were there or not. There but for the grace of god...