- 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
National Express close pass (still from YouTube user Bicycos)National Express boss who sits on TfL board accused of blaming cyclists for own deaths
The chairman of transport provider National Express, who also sits on the board of Transport for London (TfL), says the biggest danger to cyclists on the capital’s streets are bike riders themselves, leading to an accusation from London Cycling Campaign's Charlie Lloyd that he "blames cyclists for their own deaths."
Sir John Armitt’s remarks were made at a meeting of TfL’s board that this morning approved the two new Cycle Superhighways that will cross the centre of the capital, and came shortly after a National Express vehicle was involved in a collision at Marble Arch in which a cyclist was injured.
"I would say the biggest danger to London cyclists on the roads in London are actually themselves," he told the meeting.
"The way in which many, many, many of them ride one is surprised that in fact the number of accidents is not far larger because it is an entirely different way of cycling to which you see in many other cities," he added.
The TfL board was told of the collision between the National Express coach and the cyclist just minutes after Armitt made those comments.
He was joined in his unsuccessful attempt to block the scheme by fellow TfL board members who also sit on the boards of Canary Wharf Group and the Licensed Taxi Drivers Association (LTDA).
The LTDA has indicated it may seek a judicial review of the Cycle Superhighways, as well one on a proposed as a daytime ban on most traffic on Tottenham Court Road.
Armitt also rejected surveys which found overwhelming public support for segregated cycle infrastructure in London, saying: "The opinion polls are pretty valueless quite frankly because there is no explanation of who is actually responding.
"Without knowing where somebody is coming from when they respond to an opinion poll then it is pretty difficult to take on board the support or non-support for a scheme."
Times journalist Kaya Burgess, who runs the newspaper’s Cities Fit For Cyclists campaign which was launched in February 2012, said on Twitter that according to the Metropolitan Police, the collision took place at Marble Arch at 9.48 am today.
A police spokesman told him that the injuries sustained by the cyclist involved in the collision with the National Express coach were "not thought to be life-threatening."
National Express is a member of the Confederation for Passenger Transport, whose chief executive said last November that the organisation was “extremely concerned” about the impact of the Ccle Superhighways on operators, and in particular the loss of coach parking spaces on the Embankment.
In the wake of Armitt's comments this morning, there have been calls on Twitter for a boycott of National Express Services.
Plymouth-based CTC cycling development officer Brett Nicolle, wrote: “I will not use @nationalexpress ever, ever again after chairman Sir John Armitt blames cyclists for their own deaths.”
Will Nickell, ethics and environment officer at the University of East London Students’ Union said: “I consider it apt to boycott @nationalexpress until Sir John Armitt is no longer chair. His views of cycling are the most ignorant I've seen.”
Parimal Kumar tweeted, “Yes @tfl board member/National Express chairman John Armitt, it's cyclists who are greatest danger to themselves,” with a link to a YouTube video filmed by a cyclist who said in the description, “Although this is not the closest pass that I have had, I would say that it was potentially the most dangerous.”
A video posted to YouTube in 2013 shows a National Express coach passing extremely close to the cyclist recording the footage.
In the description to the video, user Bicycos quoted a reply he had received from the firm, which said: "The safety and well being of our customers and other road users is our highest priority and I assure you that, under no circumstances, will we tolerate the standard of driving that you have experienced.
While a National Express employee said the firm could not divulge the outcome of its investigation, they added, "I would like to reassure you that the appropriate action has been taken in line with our disciplinary policy."
During the same year, the company teamed up with Sustrans to help devise a sticker for its coaches to warn cyclists of blind spots. The design eventually chosen was described by one road.cc reader who spotted it as “near enough useless.”
Armitt, who also chairs National Express’s safety and environment committee, was chairman of the Olympic Delivery Authority which oversaw the delivery of venues, infrastructure and legacy for the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. The non-departmental government body ceased operation at the end of last year.
Charlie Lloyd, campaigns officer at the London Cycling Campaign and a former lorry driver, noted on Twitter: “John Armitt blames cyclists for their own deaths. Four cyclists died on edge of Olympic Park when he was in charge, no safe routes.”
Meanwhile, London cyclist Richard Leeming tweeted: “Cycle facilities at the Olympic park are a joke.”
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 39 min ago
Take it to an understanding LBS like mine who will return to Shimano whatever state the cranks are in and you get a brand new Ultegra chainset for...
- Rik Mayals underpants 9 hours 19 min ago
Here's my cycling related Christmas gift. Beautiful enamel garage sign to go above my Campagnolo Super Record RS equipped Colnago.
- Rendel Harris 13 hours 27 min ago
No idea if Cancellara was using a motor or not, I hope not as I greatly enjoyed him as a rider, but the tech was certainly available, I can...
- wtjs 15 hours 5 min ago
Fair enough:...
- SecretSam 16 hours 16 min ago
Usual ugly Pinarello, bumps and curves where they aren't needed. And, according to Mapdec, not well built.
- Rome73 18 hours 23 min ago
That's not strictly true - Reform will legalise immigrant baiting, trans bashing and tar and feathering of anyone woke. Loads of fun for all the...
- Rendel Harris 18 hours 10 min ago
What's a "legitimate cyclist" please? Someone who doesn't conform to your arbitrary norms? At the age of 56 I admit that you have 13 years more...
- mattw 1 day 8 hours ago
This risks turning me into a hanger and flogger....
- Spangly Shiny 1 day 14 hours ago
I had the pleasure of owning two of the featured builders here, in my history. When I joined the Army in 1971, I took with me my curly Hetchins:...
Add new comment
41 comments
Maybe National Express should use this video as a training aid.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEvmXRWKvio
One of these almost took me out on the Old Kent road at a pinch point. Instead of easing off the gas he decided to go at full pelt almost straight into the back of me, pressurising me to stop & get out the way.
I caught up with him at the lights (surprise surprise) & I asked if he knew what he did (I know, I know). His response was "What did you want me to do? Hit another car?" I simply replied, "Maybe slow down & use your brakes"
The attitude that it’s ok, or better, to hit a person on a bike, rather than a car is astonishing!!
Anyway, having seen this, the attitude of the driver I spoke to doesn't surprise me anymore.
=
National Express: the Addison Lee of coach companies? Don't use if you value human life and have ANY alternative.
Yup, easy enough to boycott.
There's no place in public eye for this person, he's making decisions that affect all road users. Get rid!
Everyday commuting through London I see unnecessary risk taking by other cyclists so I can see where he gets his ideas from.
Whatever happened to being patient and waiting behind traffic at lights. I don't get this presumed right to move to the front of the intersection? That combined with bad infrastructure I am surprised too their are not more incidents. I won't however go as far as saying we cause our own problems, that would be too simplistic.
It all comes down to incentives: If there was a quicker and safer option people will take it.... At the moment the incentive to bend or break the road rules gives a greater perceived return (safety and journey time etc) then following the road rules and the current inadequate cycling infrastructure.
That's the same letter I got from them. It is clear that their drivers are not taking any notice and are not being disciplined and from the chairs comments you have to wonder. There is no room for that sort of driving.
Never encountered a National Express Coach on a bike but have numerous times in the car on the commute to work & that is scary enough. It amazes me that as a Health & Safety obsessed culture, it goes out of the window when Company vehicles are being driven on the public roads. This is where the Police should start clamping down, this would send a clear message to all road users.
They've been approved!
http://www.mayorwatch.co.uk/tfl-board-approves-boriss-flagship-cycle-sup...
Obviously people are still free to navigate the gyratories and multi-lane junctions amongst the HGV's and Tipper lorries.
Personally, i'll be sticking to the new cycle lanes!
got no choice int he West Mids if you wish to take a bus with their virtual monopoly.
Well, I know which coach company I will now be boycotting.
When I rode around London I was appalled at the way the majority of cyclists acted. It's like driving a car, if you assume everybody else is a pillock you stand less chance of being an crash statistic.
In a perfect road network cyclists would be the biggest danger to themselves (apart from maybe pedestrians, dogs and motorbikes). The network and the fleet are not yet up to that standard.
Perhaps the government could make it so by enforcing the use of driver assistance and collision avoidance systems on the National Express fleet as a trial for rolling it out to all other vehicles.
@Jamminatrix If The Netherlands and Denmark can then i can't see why Britain can't at least attempt it. If they fail then at least they attmepted it. At the moment they just fail fullstop without even looking into it.
Another reason is that The Dutch are forward thinkers in that they foresaw the motorised vehicle would be the dominant mode of transport and decided early on that they would not allow cyclists be run off the road.
Cycling infrastructure in these countries is more to improve traffic flow from high volumes of cyclists than outright protect cyclists. They are successful not just from infrastructure, but automobile driver education, as well as law-abiding cyclists. They've worked out the whole system where everyone has their part to play.
It's clear reading these comments there are UK residents ready to give up their right to use the roadway and just demand segregation for cyclists because they're scared of the road...which is the most expensive and unpractical approach.
Absolute complete bobbins. Go read the policies of the LCC and CTC and educate yourself on where they stand on segregated infrastructure, including where they believe it is appropriate.
Sometimes this forum is a practical demonstration that if a lie is repeated often enough, it really does get believed.
Nobody has suggested ANYONE is to lose their right to use the road, protected cycleways or not. Currently there is a choice - ride with heavy, fast-moving traffic, or don't cycle at all. That's a shit choice. Why do you not want other people to be able to choose to cycle in comfort and safety? What's wrong with you?
You suggest infrastructure is "unpractical"[sic]. It's entirely practical, and has been shown to be in many countries. When you build proper cycle infrastructure you allow everyone to use it, in safety, forever. This creates a country of cyclists, which builds a future driving population of people who are also cyclists.
Asking people to 'drive nicely' has never worked anywhere. It doesn't make being in close proximity to vehicles feel safer and never will, no matter how often you say it. It won't prevent collisions, or dangerous driving. It won't prevent genuine mistakes, or a loss of concentration from killing someone on a bike. It certainly doesn't encourage more people to ride.
KAPOW!
What's his point? Better infrastructure makes things safer.
There's plenty of expensive infrastructure in place to prevent his coach drivers hurting themselves by their own actions. Maybe he would vote against the gentle curves on motorways, or those crash railings along the edges. Nobody to blame but themselves if they fall asleep on a 10 mile straight and there's no crash barrier!
But what's the point in having crash barriers along just the motorways? We can't put crash barriers along every single stretch of road, and unless we put them everywhere there's no point in doing it is there?
We Cyclists are humans too! we have fight or flight responses, quote
“ The way in which many, many, many of them ride one is surprised that in fact the number of accidents is not far larger because it is an entirely different way of cycling to which you see in many other cities,"
If cycling and cyclist were treated with respect by other road users then you would find that cyclists would ride in a far different manner. If he and the powerful could see the bigger picture, give us space, time and respect and you find ridding behaviours will change. Put anyone in harms way including cyclists, then there behaviour will reflect the stress and threat that they are under! That is the key that will unlock the door.
Agree for 'cyclists' but there are a huge number of people who are just people who happen to be on a bike. More often than not it's these who ignore the traffic lights etc.
Yes but those just on a bike out to buy some milk from the shops May well a start playing by the rules (also there may be a lot more of them, on a sunny warm day) . If they weren't treated as something that is not worth the time or respect!!!
Eurgh, this elitism is what I hate about cyclists. No, there is no difference. Not morally, anyway.
Prancing around in lycra on expensive carbon fibre doesn't make you a bad person or a good one. If you're going to claim it makes you statistically more law abiding, the onus is on you to demonstrate that; PROPERLY, not with "helmet cracked therefore it saved my life"-level idiocy.
But more to the point, to address the implication you've left: no, you are NOT any more or less deserving of safe conduct from others than anyone else on the road. If I hit someone whilst driving, the only question I need ask is "was MY driving responsible". If it was, I don't give a fuck if I hit a Real Cyclist or not. If it wasn't, I still don't give a fuck if I hit a Real Cyclist or not. Same way I wouldn't care if I was accused of raping the priest's daughter or the town bike.
If you're not making that implication - then I hope you don't ever accuse motorists of making unsubstianted allegations about large numbers of people, because that is precisely what you've just done.
Do you know that for a fact?
Those people who just 'happen to be on a bike' are the future of mass cycling in the UK. It won't be vehicular cyclists.
The solution, as it was in the Netherlands, is not just to remove the opportunities for conflict between the different modes of transport, but to make cycling the most convenient way to travel short distances from A to B. That means removing points of conflict and untangling infrastructure so that the most desired cycle route is as free as possible from red lights and other obstacles.
Let's try and nail this for once and for all. To any other road user, whether a pedestrian, car, bus, lorry driver, or someone on a horse, anyone on a bike is a cyclist.
When I'm in London, I certainly see a lot of people in decent kit and on a decent bike going through red lights.
Chris Boardman says that cycling needs to be "normalised" and a huge part of that is providing less confident cyclists with somewhere they feel they can ride safely.
In my opinion (not road.cc's necessarily) anyone who makes a distinction between 'cyclists' and 'people on bikes' - at a guess because of the bike they are riding, or the clothes they are wearing, or a couple of other things that spring to mind that I won't go into - really isn't helping the cause,
I would perhaps question the very blinkered view taken by members of the TfL board in respect of cyclists and their use of transport around London. Or anywhere for that matter! My money doesn't get spent on National Express as I don't have the requirement to use them so I can't even begin a boycott.
Go and tell that to the families of all the dead Londoers who would be alive if there had been separation for cycling on main roads and major junctions
Jesus... What about the rest of the country who has a fraction of the investment London receives? Its tragic and accidents happen and always will, its the risk we and other road users take when we use them, you cannot segregate the whole of the UK or is this just about protecting "londoers"?
What we need is driver awareness, new laws with presumed liability included, better justice and take responsibility for ourselves on the roads.
Pages