- 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
Highway Code (Department for Transport)Highway Code 'fury': Calls for cyclists' driving test as Mike Graham and Daily Express continue attacking changes
The Highway Code changes were back in the spotlight again today after an article on the Daily Express' website, in which Paul Biggs from the Alliance of British Drivers demanded cyclists take a test to use the roads.
Despite the story claiming Biggs is a "keen leisure cyclist", the representitive for the voluntary organisation that promotes the interests and concerns of Britain's drivers, said it was "bizarre untrained cyclists are still allowed on the roads."
"It seems crazy to allow cyclists on the roads with no requirement to have at least passed a cycling proficiency test or to have even read the Highway Code," Biggs said.
"If the government are genuinely interested in cycling safety, then it's bizarre that untrained cyclists are still allowed on the roads."
The news site then shared messages from readers on social media supporting the calls for an official test for cyclists to be allowed on the road, although some did suggest motorists be required to complete cycling experience as part of the driving test.
Biggs commented that 15 to 20 per cent of cyclists had never passed a driving test or Highway Code theory test, words which were published alongside figures from Avaris Bikes explaining there were 12,252 crashes 'involving a car and cycle' in London since 2019.
The Express story set the scene for the calls, saying: "Cyclists are currently not required to take a test or learn the Highway Code to be on the roads. This is despite cyclists being placed with pedestrians at the top of the new ‘hierarchy of road users’ which has led to some cyclists riding three abreast down the middle of the road."
Within the article a clip from Good Morning Britain featuring TalkRadio presenter Mike Graham slamming the Highway Code changes was included.
During Graham's rant he says giving priority to cyclists at roundabouts is "a recipe for disaster", and claims that cyclists are being encouraged to ride "three abreast slowly in front of cars".
Before finally adding: "Let's not forget we've spent tens of millions of pounds, hundreds of millions, probably, creating cycle lanes for cyclists to be able to ride safely in lockdown [...]
"They're now saying they want room back on the rest of the road that we are all squeezed onto, and that's why people are rushing around so much because congestion has actually increased as a result of this mad dash to turn everybody into a cyclist."
At the heart of the revised Highway Code is the 'Hierachy of Road Users':
A concept that places those road users most at risk in the event of a collision at the top of the hierarchy. The hierarchy does not remove the need for everyone to behave responsibly. The road users most likely to be injured in the event of a collision are pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders and motorcyclists, with children, older adults and disabled people being more at risk
Regarding Graham's comments about cyclists being told to ride "three abreast slowly in front of cars", the Highway Code actually states:
Be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in groups. You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so
It is not the first time the changes have been misrepresented or criticised by the national press.
> Press misrepresents Highway Code changes – just days before they come into force
Days before the changes came into force the Express ran with, "POLL: Do you support new fine for opening car with wrong hand as cyclists given priority?" in reference to the advised Dutch Reach method of opening your vehicle's door.
The truth is it was already an offence to open a car door, or cause or permit it to be opened, so as to cause injury, punishable by a maximum fine of £1,000.
It is not a new law and drivers who do not use the Dutch Reach technique will not be fined, unless they commit the aforementioned existing offence.
Dan is the road.cc news editor and joined in 2020 having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for The Non-League Paper. Dan has been at road.cc for four years and mainly writes news and tech articles as well as the occasional feature. He has hopefully kept you entertained on the live blog too.
Never fast enough to take things on the bike too seriously, when he's not working you'll find him exploring the south of England by two wheels at a leisurely weekend pace, or enjoying his favourite Scottish roads when visiting family. Sometimes he'll even load up the bags and ride up the whole way, he's a bit strange like that.
Latest Comments
- slc 2 hours 9 min ago
TBH the west (Barton Hill) part of the scheme looks like a much larger change than the east (Beaufort Rd) part. Some drivers living in the west...
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 45 min ago
If you bothered looking at the link you would see that it is not one of their reflective jackets, it is fluorescent with only a small number of...
- Owd Big 'Ead 8 hours 53 min ago
You need to get out of Derby then. Go somewhere else, because while not perfect, Derby is streets ahead of the vast majority of places I've lived...
- HoarseMann 11 hours 9 min ago
Driver injured after car flips onto its roof https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy0g9rpp8x9o
- mark1a 11 hours 26 min ago
I don't think he wants to talk about it...
- Rendel Harris 11 hours 56 min ago
Ach, dinnae fret...
- Matt Page 12 hours 4 min ago
The Prevelo Alpha Three on the main feature image is 20".
- eburtthebike 12 hours 15 min ago
£100 bonus.
- chrisonabike 12 hours 24 min ago
To be fair if this is our usual revenant they've got form in rewriting history...
- chrisonabike 12 hours 25 min ago
"At the going down of the sun, and in the morning, we will remember them ... we have to because some numpty destroyed the roll of names"....
Add new comment
60 comments
I was astounded how much had changed with highway code etc when I took my full motorcycle test 24 years after my car test, and found the experience of having to relearn the highway code very useful.
So I like the idea of cyclists being offered free training, which can be updated every 5-10 years.
However I would also like it if people driving vehicles, cars, motorcycles etc had to do a mandatory theory and pratical test every 5 years. It would be like a motorcycle CBT, you can't fail but would be asked to do more training if dound to be lacking.
A majority of car journeys are under 5 miles. A quarter are under 1 mile. Even discounting for the disabled and those carrying heavy loads, there a significant number of journeys that are made by car because it's the easiest option, and the motorists concerned give zero shits about kids dying from pollution, their burden on the tax payer from road damage, which their VED does not cover and the burden on the NHS from lifestyle driven disease as they refuse to get any exercise even when they could have a purpose for that exercise.
Yet there are still bellends that think someone on a leisure ride is the problem? Thick as pig shit and half as useful.
I can't imagine who you could be thinking of...
Stumped. STUMPED I tell thee....
It's in the Express so it's just fodder for boomer gammons and Karens.
It's like the Daily Hate from 1984. Express readers need their daily dose.
Cycling Proficiancy - The thing is , we cyclists really wouldn't especially mind, it's basic and a dawdle. Should be re-instated at schools , you'd not hear any outcry from parents.
Nearly sure that Cycling Scotland operate the Bikeability 1&2 in Scottish Primary Schools. How comprehensive that is remains to be seen. Hopefully the Greens will be able to secure money to allow this scheme to be more consistent and widespread. There's a few primaries on several of my loops from work and it's a real joy to see all the bikes parked up in the playground and the kids being taken through Bikeability during the summer months.
The solution isn't testing cyclists, but regular testing for drivers, whether that is a re-test, or regular Highway Code knowledge. How many have actually read it since learning? I'd guess less than 10%
Exactly . Plumbers for exampe get a basic re-test every year if theyre GasSafe registered. It's amazing drivers do'nt get a basic refresher test , if not annually at east every three years . Not a full yest , just a "likely to kill or not " test
I think most drivers would be in favour of extra tests just so long as failing one didn't mean you had to stop driving. That would be a "life changing event" to many people. (Although when this happens people find they can actually adapt in my experience.)
Continuing to drive when you're not fit can also be a life changing event, and not just for you!
Having friends who work in A&E they describe over the course of their working life there has been a dramatic shift in the type of injuries sustained by motorists away from serious injuries or deaths.... to Minor Injuries or death.
In the past drivers would have taken less risks in a lot of situations because they knew that if they got it wrong there was a pretty good chance they would have ended up seriously injured in any moderately severe accident.
Compare that with driving in a modern car, in the same accident the driver and passenger will likely walk away with relatively minor injuries. Just look at this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePYO0-Ig0VU showing 20 year old cars crashing into their modern equivalents at 40mph.
In my opinion a big part of the change in drivers attitudes to road safety is down to the fact that they feel safer in their metal cocoons which then encourages them to take more risks.
And the other factor is the way that modern cars are better insulated from the outside world which means it is much easier for a driver to fail to realise just how fast they were going, and the rate at which modern cars gather speed is another factor. Going back to the late 90's you could buy a VW Golf GTi 2.0 petrol.... which would get up to 60 in 10.2 seconds..... whereas a new 2.0TDi will get to 60 nearly 2 seconds faster.
Driving on the motorway in my first car was a terrifying experience ..... the car would do 70 on a good day and felt like it could shake itself to bits at any moment at 70..... my current car feels relaxed and comforatble and safe at the same speeds.
My first car was a 10yo mk2 escort. It was literally a tin box. It took forever to get any speed up on the motorway and it shook and rattled like it was possessed. My current car sits comfortably at 70 and you wouldn't even know it.
That YouTube clip was truly terrifying. This kind of stuff needs to be shown during lessons to illustrate that even with a modern car you can still sustain some serious injuries. I was challenged a friend to drive a classic mini the same way he drove his BMW version. He looked at me in horror. He admitted he had become too used to the tech in modern cars and relied to heavily on it to protect him.
In the same way. Many modern instructors seem to teach you to brake late. Not use gears to slow down. To close the gap at junctions. All stuff that is in complete contrast to what I was taught.
Risk compensation is a proven fact when it comes to driving cars, and one effect of all the safety gear for drivers is to transfer the risk to vulnerable road users, cyclists and pedestrians, hence the new HC rules, which are likely to have little effect.
Pretty much every day now for the past 3 weeks my news feed has had some inflammatory headline or other from the Express or the Mail or one of the provincial Reach Group tabloids with "Drivers' FURY", "Drivers REFUSE to follow new rules", "Cyclists now think the rule the road", etc.
It is getting tedious - and the comments sections of those articles are an absolute cess pit of bigotry and ignorance. You can see that the articles are having the exact intention of riling up bad drivers and directing that hatred against cyclsts.
Jesus, it was bad enough cycling on the road before - these continued misinformation articles just make it worse.
It's all a distration ruse. Lobbyists paid by automobile companies to distract and kick the can down the road even further. Car companies know that if/when the conversation about our conjested road system happens they won't like the conclusions.. we are years away from having that or any meaningful conversation and it won't be a quick one, so we just need to jump on any goodwill brought in from lockdown and keep supporting our champions like Saint Boardman with health and safety facts. Someone give me a political party which cites positives not negatives that isn't pointing too far loony or preaching the status quo and they'l get my vote (a pipe dream).
Car manufacturers are in a bit of a pickle - they have such small margins that they have to sell a lot of vehicles to turn a profit. Also, their manufacturing plants cost a lot of money to run so without a constant turnover of people buying new cars, they stand to lose money.
It's why they put so much money into advertising and lobbying.
I thought you might highlight the Express had started quoting Road.cc, a bike enthusiasts forum apparently, and some of its comment contributors in its many many recent articles on the highway code lately.
The people whining about the changes to the HC might like to reflect on the DfT data showing over 80% of crashes involving a bicycle and motor vehicle are not the fault of the cyclist.
In case anyone hasn't seen it, there's a petition to require drivers to take a Bikeability test before the driving test -
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/603615
I said on the Twitter feed it would make everyone a better driver (if only in the short term) and might reduce the 60 KSIs a day...
getting a bit fed up with the press pushing my buttons...the biggest bullies in the playground are getting all the announcements at assembly...they are complaining its "not fair" other people want to play in "our" playground....
Express article....."It comes after research from Avaris Bikes found there was a total of 12,252 crashes 'involving a car and cycle' in London since 2019 - with 4,169 in 2021, 4,143 in 2020 and 3,940 in 2019."
zero context and simply pursues the theme that cyclists are not responsible ...last time I checked The City of Westminster was in London...
not the most authoritive source [:-)] and from 2013 but the numbers have cropped up in other research...
"The City of Westminster has revealed that more than two thirds of collisions between motor vehicles and cyclists within its boundaries in the past year that resulted in injury to the rider were due to some factor associated with the driver, compared to one in five cases where the cause was attributed to the rider. It has also disclosed that in three in five incidents involving a cyclist and a pedestrian, it’s the latter to whom responsibility is apportioned."
https://road.cc/content/news/83104-two-thirds-cyclist-injuries-following...
not that up to date on UK research as live in Aus' at the moment and I really like to quote this bit of research involving the analyse of film of experienced cycle commuters in Canberra (study was replicated in Melbourne sadly with collisions)...from the summary:
No collision events were recorded. A total of 91 potentially unsafe cyclist-interactions were identified. In the majority of events (93.4%), the behaviour of the driver led to the event. The most common event type was left turn (37.3%) which involved a driver turning left across the path of the cyclist, drivers turning across cyclists’ path from the adjacent direction (32.9%). Unexpectedly opened vehicle doors accounted for 17.6% of cyclist-driver interactions. In the majority of all events, a crash was avoided due to the evasive actions taken by cyclists (Bold added)
https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/217306/Naturalistic-C...
as to pavement and shared path conflict with pedestrians a large part of the problem is the marginalisation of walking and cycling...how many cyclists willing choose to cycle on the pavement? How wide are shared paths? How wide are pavements? Drivers can only be too happy that Cyclist and Ped's are left to fight out the margins
I was saddened at my eldest daughters school prizegiving to be reminded that one of her class mates couldn't be there....she was killed by a car shunted onto the pavement by a truck changing lanes to run an amber light...
so what about the UK?..maybe not the most impartial source but the numbers tell the tale...cyclists on pavements are a problem to the elderly (full stop) and fear of collision is probably a bigger factor than actual injury but that is very real and needs addressing...the answer is make it safe for cyclists to be on the road (which the highway code revisions attemp to do) and not argue about registration and testing....don't get me started on unlicensed and unregistered/uninsured vechicles
Between 2005 and 2018, 8.6% of the 5,835 pedestrian deaths in England, Scotland and Wales occurred on pavements, the University of Westminster’s Active Travel Academy, a new academic think tank, has found. The majority (542) involved motor vehicles, with six pedestrian-cycle footway collisions.
https://www.roadpeace.org/2020/02/17/pedestrian-pavement-deaths/
I lived in Melbourne for several years and was fortunate enough to live in the outer suburbs ( Eltham North ) so I was able to get out into the rural areas with relative ease. I felt sorry for those cycling from the inner suburbs though especially having to deal with B- Doubles that seem to travel at breakneck speeds !
For those of us not in Australia, google says
been in Melbourne 8years (came for 2) living in the (leafy) inner southeast and seen a lot of new shared use trails built and gaps filled...getting somewhere specific is still tricky but for leisure riding after less than a km can pick up shared trails that can take me out to the areas north of Eltham and across to the Dandenongs with (boring)signalised crossings of main highways being the only issue..for example the Diamond Creek trail now reaches Hurstbridge and I can get to Lilydale on shared trails and soon to Yarra Glen...not because of any general enthusiasm for additional infra' for cyclists most stuff built alongside rail/road upgrades and just happens as a tiny part of the budget...despite...hot political potatoes like Sydney Rd and St Kilda rd remain untouched....as to B doubles we now get Triples on more highways and with both road and housing booming "Dog and Lead" construction trucks are everywhere and got a "job to do"....in some ways not a lot different than the north side of Sheffield where I used to live...have to pick and choose roads and work out quiet alternatives...1m/1.5m rule last year means (when don't have to slow from a few km/hr above limit) wider passes ...close pass still norm if oncoming traffic...oh and I forgot its great that can just take bike on metro trains...great way to get to other places to ride without driving and great way to get home...for nostalgia here's the metro train trestle bridge in Eltham ...amazing that full commuter trains run over this! 1902 historical pic...recent pic suffered rotation problems
Always worth remembering that the "Alliance of British Drivers" has such a shamefully tiny membership it won't even disclose how many members it has; best estimates are around 3000. Guess "The Alliance of 0.008% of British Drivers" doesn't sound quite so powerful.
I thought it was the Alliance of Bad Drivers
I took a look at the ABD website and fair fuel uk plus voters for motors and to be honest there is not a lot of activity on these sites which in general tells me that whilst some people like to comment through the various Daily Whatever in reality they have no interest in taking it further. Even the Daily Express Article when I last looked had about 100 comments so almost a lot of shouting of hot air into an empty room.
Whereas the AA and RAC have many, many thousands of members and both organisations have backed the changes to the HC, the AA particularly so in fact.
My bikes (all of them) are well maintained, I know this cos I do em. Have excellent lights both main and secondary front & rear. I always, but always stop at red lights, have third party insurance through British Cycling. Am both a motorist and a cyclist, so have passed a road test. Wear appropriate clothing for my commutes and training rides, always wear a helmet which lets face it are designed to protect you from a fall not the impact of a car. And still I get close passed, honked at for no reason, told to get off the roads, pay non existant road tax etc...
I feel my kind of cyclist are hated more by the motoring fraternity than any other, I wonder why...
Pages