- 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
Cyclist in traffic (copyright Simon MacMichael)“The day cyclists took over the roads”: The Times, Darren Grimes and TikTok react as new Highway Code revisions come into force this weekend
Revisions to the Highway Code aimed at protecting vulnerable road users came into force this weekend – and some news outlets have marked the occasion by calling for the changes to be scrapped and declaring a ‘battle of the Highway Code’ on Britain’s roads.
The updated Highway Code includes not only the laws that road users are required to follow but also contains advice aimed at improving safety. A new hierarchy of road users has been introduced, where the most dangerous road users carry the greatest responsibility for the safety of the most vulnerable, with pedestrians at the top of this hierarchy followed by cyclists.
Other updates include advice for cyclists in certain situations (such as riding in the middle of their lane to increase visibility on quiet roads, in slower-moving traffic, and when approaching junctions), giving priority to pedestrians at junctions, and encouraging the adoption of the ‘Dutch Reach’ method of opening car doors.
> Highway Code changes: ‘What about cyclists, or do the rules not apply to them?’
Despite the new Highway Code’s focus on the safety of all road users, some media outlets and commentators predicted “carnage” under the new rules.
This stance has not softened since the changes were introduced on Saturday. In two articles titled “The day cyclists took over the roads” and “Battle of the Highway Code”, the Mail Online claimed that since the new rules were brought in, cyclists have been “deliberately hogging the centre of the road, causing pile-ups of traffic behind them”.
The Mail again misleadingly referred to cyclists “taking to the middle of the road and riding two-abreast” with drivers “powerless to stop them under the new Highway Code”. This claim has been rebuffed by groups such as Cycling UK, who emphasise that bike riders are asked to ride in the centre of their lane in certain situations, not the middle of the road.
> Press misrepresents Highway Code changes – just days before they come into force
The site also prominently shared a tweet which claimed that a group of cyclists “refused to let cars past for eight miles looking back and laughing”.
As we reported on Friday, the Times responded to the incoming revisions by calling for cyclists to be licensed and insured, almost 10 years to the day since the newspaper launched an award-winning campaign to make Britain’s roads safer for people on bikes. The paper also appealed for a new offence of death by dangerous cycling to be introduced, under the headline "Killer cyclists may be classed like motorists".
Beyond the written press, the changes were featured on a particularly embarrassing segment on GB News yesterday, hosted by conservative political commentator Darren Grimes.
Grimes said that the new hierarchy featured “pedestrians and cyclists at the very top” before adding “I don’t need to tell you where motorists end up” (the presenter, hosting his first show on the channel, neglected to mention that van and lorry drivers bear more responsibility for car drivers and motorcyclists under the updated guidance).
He also criticised what he said was the overt emphasis on dangerous drivers under the new rules, claiming that in London “you’re lucky if you get away with your life with cyclists storming down the road so fast”, despite cyclists being involved in four of the 346 incidents which resulted in the death of a pedestrian in 2020.
> Grant Shapps calls for new ‘death by dangerous cycling’ law
Grimes was joined on the programme by Fair Fuel UK’s Howard Cox, a prominent opponent of the new Highway Code, who described the changes as “a cyclist’s charter” and said that the updates permitted bike riders “to cycle in any way they wish, no matter how dangerous, without fear of prosecution.”
Cox continued: “They have been given the right to pass all the blame to other road users. They are innocent no matter what they do, and this can’t be right. I believe this Highway Code will actually lead to more injuries and more deaths.”
Despite Cox’s criticism of the changes, he called for the updates to “be sent to every household in this country”.
“This Highway Code assumes all drivers are homicidal maniacs, and that is completely and utterly unjust,” he said.
While Cox adamantly defended the “law-abided majority” of motorists, one TikTok user was criticised over the weekend for claiming that the new rules meant that she was inevitably “going to hurt people”.
Chantelle Bradd, a model from Bristol, posted a video on the social media platform in which she argued that the new Highway Code was part of the government’s attempt “to de-populate us”.
Give up your licence. pic.twitter.com/mBV9pkCWWu
— put it in the bin (@photogog) January 30, 2022
In the video (which contains copious amounts of swearing), she said: “I’m a new driver, so I don’t know how I’m even going to deal with driving through the centre of Bristol, because bikes now can be on either side of you, and you have to give way to them.
“They don’t have to use the cycle lanes, which our councils have spent maybe millions of pounds on. They can opt to be in the centre of the road instead, they can ride two-abreast in the middle of the road, so they’re definitely going to be making you late for work in the morning. Why have you done this?
“People are going to get hurt,” she continued. “I am going to hurt people. I’m going to be responsible for hitting Maisie with her little helmet going to school. I’m going to t**t her off her bike in the morning because of this. Why?”
Yesterday, Cycling UK called for a long-term public awareness campaign from the government to help produce a “mindset shift” on British roads and to counteract misleading reports in the media. The charity says it will take years to fully enforce the revisions and change “entrenched driving behaviour”.
“The latest changes to the Highway Code are a hugely important start towards a mindset shift that will make the roads safer for everyone – not just for people who choose to cycle or walk,” Cycling UK’s head of campaigns Duncan Dollimore said.
“The changes in our driving behaviour, however, will only happen if the government commits to communicating them with simple, accurate, and memorable messaging in the long term.
“We’ve seen the public’s attitude shift on seat belt use and drink driving. This shows entrenched driving behaviour can change. The new Highway Code requires a similar shift, and it can happen again but not overnight.
“To make our roads safer for everyone, the government must be looking in terms of years not months to communicate and eventually enforce these changes.”
After obtaining a PhD, lecturing, and hosting a history podcast at Queen’s University Belfast, Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.
Latest Comments
- Sredlums 2 sec ago
You'd think that, but dirt jump bikes usually only have a rear brake, and they are very much not riding on flat ground, nor are they riding very...
- CitizenSmith 20 min 46 sec ago
There seems to be no support for TOO) now - their email and website are defunct. They are inactive on Facebook. Aftter less than a year the rails...
- Pub bike 26 min 30 sec ago
"Bike theft hotspot"? This is just like having a sign that says "Police don't bother enforcing the law in this area. Thieves you have free reign!"
- Laz 1 hour 18 min ago
I used to daily 1hr sufferfests on indoor rollers, I drank a fair bit of water before during, and after- I noticed my sweat wasnt stinging in my...
- matthewn5 1 hour 50 min ago
I did the four windows on my Victorian flat. I replaced the parting beads (between the panes) and the staff moulds with new timber ones that have a...
- Rendel Harris 4 hours 19 min ago
Well, I don't have any insight into how all consuming being a professional cyclist is and so how much you have to put your faith in your advisors,...
- Hirsute 5 hours 29 sec ago
In the comments "Was it due to icy conditions? "
- Hirsute 5 hours 7 min ago
Finding solutions to US school drop off: Our school has 2 VIP parking spots they auction off at their fundraiser. So, I got one 😁 - and made it...
- slc 7 hours 41 min ago
Marsh lane was unchanged on Friday - I don't think the contractors have been back since the protest.
Add new comment
104 comments
Why would her employer have any view on her social media output? as long as she can perform her job function satisfactorily, that should be all that's required by her employer; employers thinking they can 'cancel' an employee because of sharing an opinion on social media is a cancer on society.
We're advised to be careful on our social media postings especially when we've highlighted who we work for. As the employer does not want the image of hiring individuals of questionable attitudes.
Because the employee can bring the employer into disrepute. This is not a new concept. Just because there are now more ways to bring your employer into disrepute, does not mean some sort of cancer on society. Previously people were limited to writing a letter to a newspaper, now they do this via various online platforms.
We recently sacked someone for their virulent anti-Muslim hate on social media.
There is a basic level of decency that colleagues can expect. There is a basic level of decency the end user can expect (it was a role that was customer facing and the role required the use if judgement on customer circumstances). Also, if you're stupid enough to spout this stuff, you're too stupid to the do the job
He also criticised what he said was the overt emphasis on dangerous drivers under the new rules, claiming that in London “you’re lucky if you get away with your life with cyclists storming down the road so fast”,
Yeah bloody cyclists - always in the way holding oppressed drivists up. Oh wait hang on.....
Hopefully, it'll have calmed down in a week or two media wise but of course, the rules will still be there
Our club ride today ... most overtakes were ok; only one over take incident where an artic passed us wide and long during an empty section of road; unfortunatley, he went too long and an oncoming car appeared around a bend and was made to stop by the truck. The truck driver didn't have to go as long as he did, so I guess he wanted to ensure he was *really* clear before pulling back in.
We had a few people shaking their magic beans coming towards us for being doubled up; a shout from a moped rider coming towards us (and not inconvinenced by us in anyway shape or form) telling us to ride in single file; and an angry shout from a car driver - something along the lines of 'usless fucking cyclists' for being made to slow down to around 18mph in a 20 zone.
So in all, about par for the course for around here.
Glad to hear you are riding again.
Thank you, ktache.
It's been a battle; I'm physically as good as I'm going to get, and hopefully the legal stuff will be over soon. 3 1/2 years on a case of admitted liability, and we're still no where near a settlement.
The day the cyclists took over the roads - no, that's the last Friday or Saturday every month. Just wait until they come across a critical mass event - their worst nightmares will be incarnated. In Edinburgh this plague looked like this:
This is actually genuinely the stuff of rage at "entitled" cyclists: motorist on the left in 1st picture was blocked until all the cyclists had passed (would have been the same if the road was full of cars...). Not proceeding at anything near the Minimum Speed Limits - more 8mph than 12. Definitely getting in the way because filling the entire lane or maybe all ongoing lanes. Cycling through red lights. (Stopping at ones in front of the group but if lights go red while the group's passing they keep going to avoid any cars within the mass). Blocking pedestrian crossings in the same way (yeah... not so sure about this one myself). Not cycling in the cycle lanes (there wouldn't be room... and anyway these nowhere form a connected network). General lack of helmets and hi-vis. Clear presence of youths pulling wheelies. People not being intimidated. (The goal is "friendly interaction" but since there's no leader, no membership ...)
5 cars held up here!
Definitely felt a bit different on our ride today. Frost meant we were a smaller than usual group of 4, but had some motorists hanging well back, more being entirely across the white line.
Still had a major plonker though. A cone had got knocked across into the lane through roadworks causing cars to swerve round it. I slowed, picked the cone up and dropped it to where it came from. This sent a guy behind me insane, shouting, revving and demanding swearily that I stop so he could give me a portion of his wisdom. Fortunately, he turned off about 200 yards up the road. I wouldn't mind, but the cone made no odds to cyclists.
I think you'll find you're wrong.
Did you mean about anything in particular, or was this just a general observation?
Well I was riding solo, in secondary position across Dorney Common
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Dorney+Common,+Windsor/@51.4989678,-0.656289,15z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x48767b5ca89c06d3:0xbdffc4eb4e615773!8m2!3d51.4980935!4d-0.6513322
When a driver came from behind, pulled alongside (no delay as nothing oncoming) called me a c**t and told me to move over. 2010 vintage BMW (no surprise) , Caught him at the traffic lights 1.5 miles down the road, so even if he had been stuck behind me it would have cost him zero actual time.
So, it's not about group size it's just about some drivers having been triggered by tabloid media and being generally unplesant.
Oh yes, young child on passenger seat for this exchange, I was quite tempted to wave my little finger at him in honour of his small dick when I filtered up to the advanced stop line.
I agree, I encounter the same amount of sh!tty attitudes from a small number of drivers whether I ride solo or in a group.
It will undoubtedly be worse for the next 2 or 3 months until the media hysteria dies down and drivers realise that the updates to the Highway Code in the majority of cases were simply clarifying the existing rules.
GAL will continue to bleat on about the new rules going to cause accidents.... when in reality the style of riding for the vast majoirty of cyclists isn't going to change.... I have always ridden in primary position when I have felt the need for my own safety to do so, but the majority of the time would ride in secondary position.
GAL will always interpret any cyclist who does not automatically move from Primary position as soon as a motor vehicle is behind them.... as an antagonistic lycra warrior on a jolly with the sole purpose of holding up a motorist that has to be on a very important journey. Regardless of the fact that the cyclist is maintaining primary position for safety reasons. i.e. on the approach to a blind corner, on the approach to a roundabout or other pinch point.
On the subject of traffic lights...... yesterday I was driving and as I approached a set of traffic lights they changed to amber as I was approaching and despite travelling close to the speed limit (50mph) and only being about 50m away at the time in the 3 seconds from the lights going to amber I managed to safely stop my car and the car directly behind me never ran into the back of me. I never had to use the GAL principle of going through a "recently established red light"
Then at a separate set of traffic lights I can only assume GAL was driving in the opposite direction to me. Turning right from a filter lane behind another car..... filter light comes on and the car in front of me turns right..... as I start to turn I have to do an emergency stop to avoid running into a driver following GAL's "recently established red light" principle who plows through the red light...... surprisingly it was..... wait for it.... yes you guessed it...... an early 2010's BMW 3 series
We certainly has one incident on a steep climb to Astwood Bank where as a group of 4 we singled out and where just too tempting for a BMW to attempt a pass while an oncoming car was visible forcing his way into the group to avoid a head on and nearly rear-ending our lead rider and bringing no. 2 rider to a halt in evasion. Our fault for singling out rather than grinding up in a compact 4 - which would have got abuse from the usual suspects (and it did prove the point that singling out does not help motorists get past). In our 8 or 10 we would have probably stayed 2 abreast but the group would have broken up into two.
.
We did have an example of a confused driver today, old boy in a jaguar stopped on a roundabout as we were about to join, it all got a bit messy to be honest as everyone tried to give way without unclipping but waves and smiles in the end. Other than that, some close passes but no outright aggression.
Local paper FB page is just horrific though.
I'm confused. Does the Times want cyclists punished if they drive dangerously? Or treated like car drivers? Which one...?
I just made use of the new guidance - I'd come from the suspension bridge and was wanting to turn left towards The Downs, but there were some pedestrians trying to cross. I motioned them across, which they didn't react to, so I stopped, repeated the hand motion and said "after you" and then entered the side road behind them as they crossed. Simples.
But what about the carnage behind you of a multiple vehicle pile up ?
And how did he look back laughing at the carnage whilst simultaneously watching and waving the pedestrians across the road?
Handlebar end mirror
It was horrendous, but sounded like not my problem.
I'd been reading about this impending doom scenario yesterday, so naturally I was terrified when I needed to turn right today and there was not a gap in oncoming traffic. Amazingly, even though I had to stop and wait to turn, none of the drivers behind slammed into the back of me.
Perhaps those that are really concerned can just treat a left turn as if it's a right turn, and everything will work out in the end.
That's reassuring. I thought it was specifically left turns were going to end the world, though? Isn't it the rule that under no circumstances should they hold anyone up? (Most of our roads seem designed with that in mind with wide sweeping corners.) Don't advanced drivers sometimes not signal for these?
I thought it was specifically left turns were going to end the world, though?
I'm hoping that someone will obtain video of a driver ignoring the new 'give way' rule in connection with a crossing of a side road, either against a pedestrian or a cyclist walking with a bike, and then reporting the violation to the police. A violation more likely to be captured by a cyclist is a driver crossing right in front of the cyclist going straight ahead on the main road, with the driver turning either right or left from the main road into a side road. Camera vigilantes: look out for it!
'Camera vigilantes'.
Got anyone particular in mind?(!!)
Pages