"You're nicked!" Lord Sugar sparks debate on whether cyclists should carry compulsory ID

Sugar - you're fired!

C'mon, someone had to say it...

Maybe we should be electronic tagged so that we can be tracked when we commit crimes off the bike too. Seems a logical conclusion really.

Oh dear.

I never realised pavement cycling was such a threat to democracy and our security. Is there a country we can invade and subjugate in order to sort this out?

When out on long solo rides I carry a business card with my home number on but I see no reason to carry ID if I'm nipping into town. I don't care what they do in America, they are happy to implement all sorts of reprehensible things, so in my view that country is NOT an example to follow.

While it might seem a bit lame to say that the police should be dealing with 'real' crime. I don't like RLJing and riding without lights. I understand some people have an issue with pavement cyclists, though how this blights their lives to the extent we are expected to believe I'm not sure. However, if the police were equally keen to stop parking on pavements, double yellow lines and zebra crossing zig-zags, clamp down on the 1.7 million uninsured drivers on the roads, on aggressive and dangerous driving, speeding in urban areas etc etc I might consider the henious crimes of jumping red lights to be worthy of a 'crackdown'.

I sometimes cycle on pavements. The alternative is to ride at 5-10 mph along a busy 40mph A-road while my children cycle along the pavement. IMO this does not aid me in my goal of living to a ripe old age (BTW consideration for peds has been drilled into the kids at from the start). If drivers were more considerate and drove more slowly around cyclists all 3 of us could ride on the road.

So as far as I'm concerned uber-MAMIL Alan Sugar can stick his poncey rider ID up his arse. That is, unless he insists that youths in hoodies, middle-aged BMW drivers, motorcyclists, white van drivers and everyone else who steps out of their front door gets one too.

Silly suggestion and an appropriate response.

Should cyclists be obliged to carry I.D?

No, we have no plans for that.

Lord Young seems like a reasonable chap.

Although he says he is a keen cyclist, Lord Sugar sounds like a typical angry motorist. 'Grrr, those pesky cyclists jumping red lights and getting away with it. Fume, fume'.

Compulsory I.D and registration for pedestrians are inappropriate. The same goes for cyclists.

was surprised to hear Sugar being described as a "keen cyclist". Do you reckon he goes out with a bunch of mates every weekend? Can't imagine I'd want to ride with him....

As regards what he says, I can't see how any registration scheme could be made to work, and I am against ID cards. But I can see the day when we'll all (and I mean motorists, cyclists and pedestrians) need liability insurance.

I mean, what do you do if a pedestrian steps out, causes an accident and ruins your bike in the process? Write it off as bad luck?

If you are bothered about being injured and emergency services knowing blood group ICE number and name then by all means carry something - even if in your mobile.

However, going from a voluntary situation to being compelled is streets apart: I can see the 'mission' creep on this to powers the state would love to have over everyone -> from cyclist to pedestrian.

Driving a motor vehicle is one of the few situations the Police can demand to know your name and address on stopping without there being much to go on.

For example: I very nearly got arrested this year for standing my ground when a WPC and her commanding officer - both traffic cops - overstepped the mark in demanding I delete a pic I had taken (I hadn't actually got any shots off) of an accident scene (a wide general view) and later my ID after I stopped my bike at the roadside. Having demanded I delete the pic - I couldn't, obviously but the officer confiscated my mobile (I only had that on me) after I told him as a journalist anything I had is subject to PACE - meaning he needed a court order as it's deemed special material. I only got it back on negotiation but later as I refused to give my ID he wanted to do me for obstruction. Crazy.

Makes good sense to me. It's the most sensible suggestion with regards making cyclists responsible for their actions and much better than other suggestions such as the "cycling test/licence".

I've just bought Dog Tags with basic ID on them and usually carry my wallet with me. I would be happy to be stopped by the Police and have my ID checked. I have nothing to hide.

Cyclists should be held responsible for the offenses they make. In my opinion there's not much difference between car or cycle or pedestrian jumping red light. Perhaps it would be more effective to register bikes ( I don't know if there is such a database in the UK or somewhere else). With that the police officer can write down serial number of the bike and send the fine afterwards.

In my country(Bosnia&Herzegovina)we are obliged to carry an ID at all times, including a drivers licence while driving any vehicle..but in the other hand there are no separate tracks for bicycles, riding is done pretty much anywhere you can, and the system is heavily corrupted. So in what ever way you take it, consider yourself lucky to be living in a law-structured country.

cheers ^^

Commuting as I do every day into Birmingham I see things you just wouldn't want to believe.

Whilst a cyclist jumping a red light (I don't condone this as it upsets other road users and gives "good" cyclists a bad name) probably won't kill anyone, a driver of a car/truck/bus most likely will.

The other day I started to navigate a roundabout with lights, having just got green and checking to my right was okay (it was), I double checked as always only to see a woman driver totally ignore her red light and the fact that other vehicles had stopped. She was talking into her mobile, held in front of her face as they do nowadays, looking down into it. How she didn't crash is beyond me, but more importantly if I hadn't double checked she would hae hit me.

Cars jumping red lights seems to be becoming a common sight these days. It is this that needs to be stopped, not worrying about cyclist not having an id card

I'd be quite happy to see more police on busy road junctions. I'm pretty sure it would benefit cyclists because drivers would be less inclined to sit in the bie box, and they might not barge their way across cyclists when turning left.
And likewise, the stupid irritating cyclists who jump red lights and give the rest of us a bad name would behave too.
Unfortunately to police every junction would be such a ridiculous waste of limited police resources that it will neer happen.

Well, I'm sure some people would prepare themselves with a fake ID in case they got caught cycling illegally, but most wouldn't bother. I know that I (and probably a majority of drivers) sometimes break the speed limit in my car, but I don't feel the need to carry a fake driving licence and register my car to a false name and address - I just accept that, if I do something wrong, I'm likely to pay a fine or some other penalty. I don't buy the idea that very minor criminality is always backed up with more major criminality - it just isn't true.

The main problem seems to be the logistical one - there is no compulsory form of ID in this country. Passports and driving licences aren't mandatory, and none of the other government issued documentation has a photo (e.g. birth certificate). So, whilst I'd be perfectly happy to carry ID with me on my bike (and generally do anyway, as my driving licence is in my wallet), it's not feasible to require people to have a passport or driving licence for cycling, and then we move in to having to hold something akin to a bike licence, which opens up a whole new can of worms.

In conclusion - Lord Sugar in ill thought out statement shocker.

"Cyclists should carry some form of ID, so they can get nicked by police for jumping pavement or lights. Otherwise they just lie who they are"

Is it me or is that one of the most ridiculous things you've ever heard? Not everyone, unlike Lord Alan suggests, is so riddled with criminality that they feel they need to verify who they are should they be arrested or cautioned...

Surely, if you're expecting to get 'nicked by the police' you'd be prepared with some fake or stolen ID (presumably the bike you'd be riding would be stolen also) ?

In a way I can see where he is coming from.

I always wear a roadid because if something were to happen to me I want my family to be with me or notified as soon as possible.

It is a matter of choice though, of course.

Would I be as happy if I had to carry ID in case I was stupid enough to run a red light or cause an accident on a pavement by riding on it?

Personally, yes. but I am not sure everyone wants accountability and responsibility.