Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Fears that new Halfords survey will prompt negative headlines for cyclists

Retailer "pleasantly surprised" at findings of its Sharing The Road survey - but mainstream media may take selective focus...

There are fears that a survey published today by Halfords, the car parts, cycling and outdoor retailer, that purports to focus on sharing the road, may instead be seized upon by the mainstream media to cast cyclists once more in a negative light.

While the survey,  based on a sample of 2,042 adults and conducted by YouGov, canvasses the views of both cyclists and drivers (many people, of course, are one and the same), road.cc understands that at least one media outlet seems likely to focus just on the elements regarding those who ride bikes, and not in a positive way.

In the preface to the report, Halfords chief customer officer, Karen Bellairs, says: “Other than wanting to inform, we wanted to use this report as a means to celebrate the fun, freedom and togetherness that journeys bring to us all.

“But perhaps most importantly, we wanted to examine whether there was a genuine willingness among cyclists and motorists to share the road, and we were pleasantly surprised with what we discovered.”

But there are concerns among cycling campaigners that following on from recent media coverage, a number of outlets will focus on specific findings related just to cyclists.

Those include that half of respondents believe that cyclists should have to take a proficiency test before being allowed to ride on the road, and 26 per cent say bike riders should be checked on their knowledge of the Highway Code.

Harsher penalties for cyclists who do not follow the Highway Code was backed by 86 per cent of respondents, while 59 per cent agreed that bicycles should carry licence plates.

There are positives from a cycling point of view in the survey – four in five people, for example, agreed there should be tougher penalties on motorists who drive aggressively near cyclists, and 45 per cent that all roads should have dedicated cycle lanes.

Duncan Dollimore, Cycling UK’s head of campaigns and advocacy, said: “While Cycling UK was not consulted about this survey, we know following discussion yesterday with Halfords that their intention was to highlight common concerns of all road users.

“However, given the uneven tone of the current debate on cycling, it was perhaps optimistic to expect this survey would be a constructive addition to the discussion.

 "’Sharing the Road’ is a snapshot of public opinion, not a report based on any analysis of the costs and benefits of the measures which people said they supported.

“We already knew some people instinctively think regulation and testing of cyclists is the answer.

“Those people frequently fail to appreciate the practicalities of imposing and enforcing regulations on children, the costs involved, or the public health and other implications of putting up further barriers to cycling.

“Fortunately, government has consistently reached the conclusion that such proposals are disproportionate and unnecessary.

“Ultimately, there are opinions expressed in this survey which we agree with, and others we don't, but the truth is this is merely a summary of what people said in response to a series of questions.

“It's far better, when suggesting a need for change, to assess the arguments for and against, and this is precisely the point we will make to government as it considers its forthcoming cycle safety review.”

The conviction in August of Charlie Alliston for wanton and furious driving in connection with the death in February 2016 of pedestrian Kim Briggs was followed by a slew of headlines and columns highlighting the danger people on bikes were perceived to pose to those on foot.

Just one example came last Friday, when the Daily Mail published an article under the heading, Victims of killers on two wheels: These six people all died after being hit by cyclists and 100 more are badly hurt every year - so when WILL the law crack down?

The six cases highlighted by the newspaper span a decade, with the Daily Mail highlighting that over the past seven years, 25 pedestrians have been killed in collisions involving cyclists.

However, since the focus on such collisions intensified following the Alliston case, cycling campaigners have pointed out that they form a tiny percentage of road traffic fatalities; in 2016 alone, 448 pedestrians, and 102 cyclists, lost their lives on Great Britain’s roads.

A campaign launched by Mrs Brigg’s husband Matt, supported by the family’s Lewisham East MP Heidi Alexander, has gained huge media exposure and resulted in transport minister Jesse Norman ordering an “urgent review” of cycle safety that may result in an offence of careless or dangerous cycling being introduced – something many campaigners would agree is overdue.

However, they also argue that such response should be proportionate, and that the government should place more attention on drivers of motor vehicles, who are involved in the vast majority of fatal incidents on Britain’s roads.

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.

Add new comment

42 comments

Avatar
Canyon48 | 7 years ago
5 likes

Oh dear.

Halfords running a survey about how cyclists should be treated (legally or otherwise) has about as much legitimacy as The Sun or Daily Mail running a survey asking if we should bring back the death penalty and deport all immigrants.

Avatar
brooksby | 7 years ago
9 likes

I like the bit where half of respondents want cyclists to have to take a proficiency test before riding on the road, but only one fifth thought it was a good idea for motorists to have to learn to ride before they can learn to drive <rolls eyes>.

I'm also convinced that the apparent enthusiasm for cycle lanes is only from people who think that then cyclists can be forced to use them, thus getting them out of the way of "real traffic " so that  "road tax payers " can drive like they're in a car advert.

 

Avatar
morgoth985 replied to brooksby | 7 years ago
2 likes

brooksby wrote:

I'm also convinced that the apparent enthusiasm for cycle lanes is only from people who think that then cyclists can be forced to use them, thus getting them out of the way of "real traffic " so that  "road tax payers " can drive like they're in a car advert.

 

This.  I thought of this also and forgot to mention it.  That said, in some ways I don't care what they think, so long as we actually got top quality provision, but it's not going to happen.  More likely it will be nothing, or it will be green paint which cyclists are forced to use, but which motorists can drive / park in when they feel the need.

Avatar
oldstrath replied to morgoth985 | 7 years ago
2 likes

Morgoth985 wrote:

brooksby wrote:

I'm also convinced that the apparent enthusiasm for cycle lanes is only from people who think that then cyclists can be forced to use them, thus getting them out of the way of "real traffic " so that  "road tax payers " can drive like they're in a car advert.

 

This.  I thought of this also and forgot to mention it.  That said, in some ways I don't care what they think, so long as we actually got top quality provision, but it's not going to happen.  More likely it will be nothing, or it will be green paint which cyclists are forced to use, but which motorists can drive / park in when they feel the need.

You really should care, because even if truly wondrous infrastructure were provided, we would still have to interact with them from time to time.

Avatar
morgoth985 replied to oldstrath | 7 years ago
0 likes

oldstrath wrote:

 

You really should care, because even if truly wondrous infrastructure were provided, we would still have to interact with them from time to time.

Yes, I know, you're right, and in a better mood I would do.  I was more thinking along the lines of "screw what they think" rather than "it doesn't at all matter what they think".   Just finding it difficult to dredge up even the tiniest amount of enthusiasm for this.

Avatar
EddyBerckx replied to morgoth985 | 7 years ago
3 likes

Morgoth985 wrote:

brooksby wrote:

I'm also convinced that the apparent enthusiasm for cycle lanes is only from people who think that then cyclists can be forced to use them, thus getting them out of the way of "real traffic " so that  "road tax payers " can drive like they're in a car advert.

 

This.  I thought of this also and forgot to mention it.  That said, in some ways I don't care what they think, so long as we actually got top quality provision, but it's not going to happen.  More likely it will be nothing, or it will be green paint which cyclists are forced to use, but which motorists can drive / park in when they feel the need.

 

Bit of green paint (if you're lucky). On a shared use bit of pavement (woohoo!!) that starts and stops every 10 foot. Has signposts/bins/letterboxes in the middle. Is full of crap. Gives way to all side roads and driveways. Is utterly useless.  Is out of the way of cars (the important bit). They want cycle paths, they dont want good ones that take up road space - they just want us out the way.

Avatar
RobD replied to brooksby | 7 years ago
3 likes

brooksby wrote:

I'm also convinced that the apparent enthusiasm for cycle lanes is only from people who think that then cyclists can be forced to use them, thus getting them out of the way of "real traffic " so that  "road tax payers " can drive like they're in a car advert.

I wish drivers would drive like they're in a car advert, if you actually watch them, very rarely are the cars driving quickly, engines don't rev very high, drivers wait before pulling out, use indicators etc.

As for the survey, I'd like to know the demographic splits of the people questioned, it seems like a pretty poorly organised 'study'

Avatar
morgoth985 | 7 years ago
8 likes

Does this survey actually do anything at all other than confirm the prejudices of the ignorant majority?  Positives?  Really?  Harsher penalties for aggressive driving won't be much use if they're never enforced.

 The only thing that could remotely be construed as positive is the dedicated cycle lanes (which means what exactly- some green paint?) but nothing really useful will be built because people won't countenance spending on cyclists who "don't pay road tax" and won't give up any road space because that would "cause congestion".

Avatar
davel | 7 years ago
9 likes

"most importantly, we wanted to examine whether there was a genuine willingness among cyclists and motorists to share the road"

Karen Bellairs, off you fuck.

You wanted to spin a tiny bit of YouGov data into several pages of infographic PR, and bugger the consequences. If you wanted to even do the things you say, you would have put a bit more effort into gathering data and not relied on such a piss-poor sample size.

But every now and then, an organisation betrays what it really thinks of its customers, so this survey has its uses. Its 'chief customer officer' thinks she's in an episode of W1A, and I've happily added Halfords to my 'boycott' list.

Avatar
robjordan | 7 years ago
2 likes

A little copy-editing needed here:
"tougher penalties on cyclists who drive aggressively near cyclists" should be drivers I think.
"Mrs Brigg’s husband" = Mrs Briggs's husband.

Avatar
ChairRDRF | 7 years ago
14 likes

Complete rubbish.

Do read Carlton Reid's demolition in BikeBiz.

Has been slated by AA as well as CyclingUK (who have to be nice to them cos of sponsorship deals) who have moderated their language no doubt.

 

Halfords have form here . (See  https://t.co/mJoOYmEFTv ) They are basically here for drivers.

Avatar
Simon E replied to ChairRDRF | 7 years ago
4 likes

ChairRDRF wrote:

Complete rubbish.

Do read Carlton Reid's demolition in BikeBiz.

This one?

http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/halfords-floats-idea-of-number-plates-f...

Number plates for cyclists etc? Oh dear, major PR f..k-up by Halfrauds. Carlton's article quotes their chief customer officer:

"we wanted to examine whether there was a genuine willingness among cyclists and motorists to share the road."

Is there really anyone who thinks they have a choice about whether to share it?

"there is massive support among motorists for better training, more cycle lanes and improved facilities for cyclists."

Yep. It's always someone else that is the problem. Meanwhile drivers can carry on killing and injuring thousands of people every year and nothing needs to be done about it.

Pages

Latest Comments