- 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
news
Daily Mail story Richard Littlejohn Highway Code changes: Daily Mail publishes "error-strewn" Richard Littlejohn column attacking cyclists
The Daily Mail and The Telegraph have today published opinion pieces slamming the incoming Highway Code changes, and launching outspoken attacks on cycling in Britain.
Florida resident and Mail columnist Richard Littlejohn's work is headlined: 'Bike lane Britain...the Great Leap Backwards. Under cover of Covid, officials have turned our city centres into crazy golf courses giving priority to Lycra-clad lunatics on racing bikes'.
In which he blasts the "mutton-headed communists" and "Genghis [Sadiq] Khan" for supporting cycle infrastructure, while also ripping into cycle lanes built during the pandemic, "Lycra-clad lunatics", "suicide jockeys", two abreast riding, the new 'Hierarchy of Road Users' and the regularly mythbusted road tax.
The Guardian's political correspondent Peter Walker called the column "unhinged, error-strewn and downright weird [...] which adds in elements of racist banter for good measure. All involved should feel deeply ashamed," and awarded Littlejohn the "cycling myth media bingo contest for all-time".
The writer drew analogy between Britain's cycling infrastructure and Chairman Mao's 'kingdom of bicycles', and accused UK transport policy of ruining 21st-century Britain.
Littlejohn claimed city centres are now "crazy golf courses, intended to frustrate freedom of movement by giving priority to Lycra-clad lunatics on racing bikes and suicide jockeys on e-scooters."
Commenting on the Highway Code changes coming into effect this week, he wrote: "Bikers are encouraged to ride two or three abreast in the middle of the road, deliberately to slow traffic to a crawl. Motorists will be expected to cede to both bikes and pedestrians when turning left."
The Code actually states riding two abreast "can be safer to do so", but that cyclists should "allow them [drivers] to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so".
Walker also disputed the claim, amongst many, that "pro-bike extremists were given a blank sheet of paper to write their own rules."
Also: LittleJohn’s claim cyclists were “given a blank sheet of paper” to rewrite Highway Code notably echo comments of @IAMRoadSmart on radio yesterday. It’s not true, and such sentiments have probably helped make life on the road for me & loved ones a bit less safe this morning.
— Peter Walker (@peterwalker99) January 25, 2022
It is not the first time the Mail has been accused of misrepresenting Highway Code changes.
Last week, a MailOnline story told readers that one new rule "tells cyclists to pedal in the middle of the road" when in fact it provides advice about road positioning in certain situations such as on quiet roads or in slow-moving traffic, and riding in primary position has been encouraged by cycling instructors for decades.
> Press misrepresents Highway Code changes – just days before they come into force
The Telegraph too published a provocative opinion piece this morning, titled 'Pedal-pushers have taken over British roads – even as a cyclist, I think it’s time to rein them in'.
The introduction read, "The Highway Code’s new hierarchy of road use (sic) is taking things a bit too far in favour of the smug 'bikeltons' who manage to annoy everyone."
Last week, the Evening Standard was accused of running a misleading headline on a story titled, 'New Highway Code rule will fine drivers £1,000 for opening door with wrong hand'.
The Express went for 'POLL: Do you support new fine for opening car with wrong hand as cyclists given priority?'
Duncan Dollimore, head of campaigns at the national cycling charity, told road.cc: "A government led public awareness campaign should have started by now, with simple, accurate and memorable messages.
"Instead, less than a week before major Highway Code changes are being introduced, too many people are hearing about them through inaccurate news reports like this from the Evening Standard."
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
- HoarseMann 2 sec ago
wot no radar? good job they're on a black friday special at the mo...
- newbankgyratory 9 min 59 sec ago
I reckon the residents should be given some more options:...
- Bungle_52 11 min 21 sec ago
Tweak no 1 then. The tag would need to beep at around 15mph getting more frequent as it approaches 20. It would come with an advisory note to...
- AidanR 32 min 16 sec ago
Sorry, but I have little sympathy for Wiggins. Per the latest set of accounts (2018), by far the biggest asset was a director's loan to Wiggins. In...
- mark1a 1 hour 1 min ago
That will be along in a week or so in the annual reboot of the "All I want for Christmas is... not this" article along with the Park Tool pizza...
- quiff 1 hour 13 min ago
For that money, I'd go to Matthew Sowter - https://www.saffronframeworks.com/
- hawkinspeter 1 hour 20 min ago
The problem with most jeans (i.e. not cycling designed ones) is that they've got the seam where it can intefere/chafe with the saddle. Also, cotton...
- hawkinspeter 1 hour 24 min ago
Why do the police have to wait for the council to install CCTV cameras? Can't they go and put one there themselves - it doesn't even have to be a...
- mdavidford 1 hour 52 min ago
I'm not sure commercial success is even particularly high on his list of priorities for it - it's much more about the leverage it gives him for...
- the little onion 5 hours 9 min ago
Rather artistic photo of this (driverless) car that has ended up on its roof on a dead straight road in Bradford....
Add new comment
123 comments
Ridiculous allegation! Governments don't take these decisions nor should they of course! These changes were all driven by the market. So that's what the people want - it's monetary democracy! Or are you a (Chinese?) Communist or something?
(Leaving another obligatory link to https://roadswerenotbuiltforcars.com/ and other points of over a century's worth of motor vehicle / transport planning history e.g. Traffic in towns, Roads for Prosperity. Not getting into the turnpikes and the railways!)
Yes, exactly, an ideological decision.
At which, he disappeared in a puff of self-denial.
I actually don't think we will see an increase of KSI's of any significance. The vulnerable road users will continue to use the roads with caution and will not use the new rules as a caveat to be irresponsible. The media keeps forgetting the clause in the introduction of The Hierarchy that we all have a responsibility to use the roads safely.
Every single article that has come up on my newsfeeds regarding these changes has been misleading and presenting wrong information. One example is the £1k fine for using the wrong hand opening a door when dooring has been an offence under the RTA1988. The comments from many make you wonder how they managed to pass their practical and theory driving tests as their knowledge of road craft is seriously lacking.
The ire seems to be coming mainly from motorists who claim to not understand the new guidelines which mainly are better wording and they've been too lazy to look up the proof copy and relied heavily on badly written columns.
I have just come out of an industry meeting at which the representative from the Road Haulage Association quoted the door opening thing.
I hope you pointed him to the RTA 1988 and said that surely he doesn't need the highway code to tell him how to open a door safely?
What industry and how was it quoted? Satirically or sensibly?
I feel your pain. Did you correct them?
I've said it before, and I'll say it again:
Most of these changes to the HC are simply adding to the HC things which any reasonable or conscientious road user ought to have been doing anyway (don't run someone over, watch out for someone about to cross that zebra crossing, don't just pull away if your stationary traffic queue starts moving but check if someone's crossing or about to cross, someone's life is not worth you getting there ten seconds earlier, that sort of thing).
Many of them are already in the HC and the intention has been to make it a bit more explicit because apparently "good old British common sense" is a myth and people can't be trusted to be sensible or to be nice to each other.
Someone on twitter argued that not overtaking cyclists within 1.5m would lead to perishable goods rotting in the vans.
Sorry, that'll be my fault. Due to advancing years and expanding girth I can only average 16mph on a good day, and most of your fresh produce comes from 'round 'ere!
That's impressive with the Fen Blow.
Priceless, bless their cotton socks....
'Error-strewn'? Is that the euphemism we're going with these days?
As in
"The Prime Minister was error-strewn when he said he was not aware of any parties in Downing Street"?
"Lance Armstrong was error-strewn when he said he never took performance-enhancing drugs"?
So the DM have managed to turn something as pure and simple as basic road safety into an attempt at culture war in the name of clicks. I'm shocked I tell you, shocked.
"You couldn't make it up". Apparently you can.
See their side?
I guess you mean (paraphrasing TriTaxMan above)
"A motorist's time is more valuable than the life of a vulnerable road user"
We are looking at 'their side' Nigel - and it's mostly lies and misinformation.
Oh, and by the way - The Guardian is subsidised by a growing number of 'supporters' via Direct Debit, so that there is at least some balance against the predominantly right-wing press bias in this country.
Also, the Guardian is owned by a not for profit foundation that has no input into editorial direction. I would contend it isn't quite the same at the Telegraph.
Very good article here from the leftie wokie Spectator for you to read Nige
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/entitled-motorists-have-ruled-the-ro...
Only a "hive mind" mentality would write this nonsense Nige mate
"As I've pointed out time and time again, left-wing types like the Guardian are using cyclists as expendable pawns - cannon fodder - in a culture war against common sense and democracy."
Feel free to delete your road.cc account any time. Thank you.
Well he's changed names at least five times and flounced at least once (for about three hours)...
WT actual F? did it really write that? Fack me it must have been practising
You do understand that it isn't really a "debate" when one side is wilfully misrepresenting the facts in order to create clicks/outrage/arguments, right?
Tell me you at least understand that much?
Of course, you do, but you are only here to create those reactions yourself anyway, aren't you?
This isn't the argument you think it is. The Daily Mail is also free. However, unlike the DM, the Guardian is mostly funded by donations where the DM is mostly funded by adverts...
... MailOnline adverts next to titillating pictures that the print version (catering to a different demographic) argues against. Cake, eat.
Richard "ALL LAZY, WOKE SNOWFLAKES NEED TO GET BACK TO THE OFFICE!!!! Oh btw I've worked from home for 30 years" Littlejohn has an opinion about cyclists, does he?
I'm delighted that he took time to share it with us from his gated mansion in Florida, it gives me an opportunity to actively ignore him rather than the more passive approach I usually take!
Nothing to see, just Mr Littlejohn playing to the gallery of bigoted little Englanders.
That said, I quite like the picture, of the cyclist astride his red steed, leaving the motorists stewing in their grey traffic jam.
The bicycle looks like one of those drawn by someone from memory by someone who doesn't own one, instead of looking at a photo. Vertical seat stays are a somewhat rare design detail. It's a good one for this gallery--in fact, it's a lot like the first one.
https://www.dezeen.com/2016/06/19/velocipedia-project-hopeless-bicycle-d...
Pages