- 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
Highway Code.PNGA lot of motorists really aren’t happy about impending changes to The Highway Code
Well, the road.cc postbag … okay, inbox … has been busier than usual these past few days after we published an article on Thursday saying that the Department for Transport (DfT) had laid forthcoming changes to the Highway Code before Parliament, and that they are due to come into effect by the end of next month. But the disconnect between the contents of some of those replies, and what the Highway Code currently says even before the amended rules come in hardly fills us with confidence about the extent to which they will be observed.
> Highway Code changes aimed at protecting cyclists to become law next month
Most of those emails were written from people who clearly aren’t cyclists, but seem to have very strong views about where people riding bikes should– or rather, shouldn’t – be, and what they should – or shouldn’t be doing.
If they’re not having a pop about cyclists being on the road and holding up traffic, they’re having a pop at those riding on the pavement and apparently putting pedestrians in danger, and as for dedicated space for cyclists, well, they can forget about segregated bike lanes until they start paying (non-existent) road tax.
Many ask questions of what cyclists can and can’t do that wouldn’t have to be asked if the person asking were familiar with the Highway Code as it currently stands.
The most common of those include “Are cyclists supposed to go in single file?” or “Is it law that cyclists should not ride two abreast?”
Those points, as well as issues such as people riding their bikes in primary position – often, the safest place to be due to road conditions at the place in question – are often raised as criticisms of cyclists on social media, where Twitter accounts such as that of the Surrey Police Roads Policing Unit do try correct misconceptions and educate people about what the law actually is.
Other whatabouttery-tinged gripes in response to our article last week about the changes, as highlighted in the updated version of our Monday moaning: ‘Cyclists are always breaking the law and are a menace on the roads’ article published this morning, included “Cyclist’s are all now taking to using the pavements to cycle,” “cyclists don't give a crap,” and “Cyclist must be insured to use the roads!”
Most of the comments to the Express’s coverage of the Highway Code changes – headlined Drivers set to face 'significant changes' to the Highway Code in weeks – were equally predictable and slanted against those who cycle.
“Wrong, wrong, wrong – the minority trying to manipulate the majority,” wrote one, adding, “Accidents will happen.”
Another said: “What looney came up with this as more cyclists will be killed by [their] own arrogance.”
“Cyclists ride with a sense of entitlement that will now get a lot worse,” opined another.
Of course, there was the inevitable, “As soon as cyclists start paying road tax and actually ride in single file instead of all across the road then I will take notice.”
Not all were anti-cyclist. One commenter said that “Most [cyclists – like myself – probably have petrol vehicles as well.
“Selfish motorists tend to forget that they only get to drive at the sufferance of those who don’t.
“If everyone who rides a bicycle, motor-scooter, motorcycle, uses public transport or walks were to get their cars out instead, the roads would simply clog.”
That last commenter, of course, alluded to a point that is regularly overlooked in the mainstream media, as well as by those who want cyclists off the road – research shows that adults who ride bikes are more likely than non-cyclists to hold a driving licence, and are more likely to be from a household with access to multiple motor vehicles.
Far from it being a case of “Work harder – buy a car,” as Jeremy Clarkson has regularly said, more often than not the cyclist sharing the road with motorists could have chosen to drive that journey instead – and in doing so, add to congestion.
Meanwhile, motoring lawyer Nick ‘Mr Loophole’ Freeman, who has helped a string of celebrities get acquitted of driving offences, often on technicalities, continues to use the media to plug his petition calling on cyclists to be forced to ride in cycle lanes where available and be subject to penalty points – a petition that only today passed the 10,000-signature threshold that requires the government to reply, and we’ve known what its answer will be for the best part of six months now.
It does sometimes feel like a losing battle, and it’s clear that many drivers’ familiarity with the Highway Code begins to diminish the moment they pass their driving test and they may never pick it up again.
But without a major campaign from the government outlining what changes are due to come into force next month, and why they are being made, there are going to be a lot of motorists out there who are simply unaware of them – or will be getting their information from outlets that have a history of being anti-cycling, or even worse, from uninformed members of their peer groups on social media.
And heaven help us with hoping that your average car driver will be able to get their head around the forthcoming Hierarchy of Road Users, which has been welcomed by road safety groups as a positive step towards protecting the most vulnerable.
“Looking at the new rules the biggest proportion is put onto the motorists for safety,” one correspondent wrote to us. “Are not all road users supposed to use common sense?”
Well, yes they are. But the potential consequences of someone driving a large vehicle such as a lorry or bus, or someone behind the wheel of a car or van failing to do so are of course far worse than when a person on a bike does not demonstrate it – and that is precisely why the government is making the changes to the Highway Code.
If only the government had held a consultation into the changes prior to making its recommendations and making a final decision on the changes that will come into effect next month.
Oh wait. It did. A consultation ran from 30 July 2020 to 11:45pm on 30 October 2020 on proposed amendments to “The Highway Code to introduce a hierarchy of road users, clarify pedestrian and cyclist priority, and establish safer overtaking.”
The outcome was published on 30 June this year, and the proposal documents were laid before Parliament last Wednesday 1 December.
Well, no-one can say they weren’t warned …
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
- Kapelmuur 11 min 26 sec ago
About 12 years ago I was unable to continue running because of persistent injuries so I was wondering what endurance activity could be a viable...
- mattw 31 min 49 sec ago
Not worth the energy to hate....
- Johnny Rags 1 hour 2 min ago
Wouldn't generalisations about generations be, I don't know, "generationalisations"?
- ErnieC 2 hours 5 min ago
No chance of that ever being a human being.
- Rome73 2 hours 49 min ago
I'm sorry I don't accept that the majority of cyclists are 'psychopaths'. There are some 'nutters' out there - but I would hazard a guess that most...
- Rik Mayals underpants 18 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 22 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...
- SecretSam 1 day 1 hour ago
Usual ugly Pinarello, bumps and curves where they aren't needed. And, according to Mapdec, not well built.
- Spangly Shiny 1 day 23 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
42 comments
Whatever smart comment comes from whomever, everyone is the same on the road. It's pretty much drivers who always play the smart card and are quite 'excitable'. I've had matters happen to me on the cycle over 30yrs, have drove cars and at the end of the day, to exclamate over others and to berate them when in charge of an item that moves and is incredibly powerful and you're responsible for that is criminally insane. It's drivers who need to get real on the road, literally and to forsake' another human being is very very wrong!
"a petition that only today passed the 10,000-signature threshold that requires the government to reply, and we’ve known what its answer will be for the best part of six months now."
I've been eagerly anticipating how they'll say "No" to his petition.
Spoiler - the same way that they initially said "no" to the one asking them to consider failure to stop at the scene of an accident being taken more seriously. "After careful consideration we have concluded that while there is clearly some public concern we had looked at this one before and don't have any inclination to revisit it, using up our time and possibly irritating more significant chunks of the population. We're very grateful for you raising this point however and we felt your proposal merited further use as loo roll".
Although I expect that first petition didn't take 6 months to get 10k signed up. Or do stupid stunts like making videos claiming a perfectly good and legal cycling was illegal or claiming cyclists get away with acts that are physically impossible to do on a bike but very easily to do in a motor car, and where drivers who are already "registered" get away with it.
"“If everyone who rides a bicycle, motor-scooter, motorcycle, uses public transport or walks were to get their cars out instead, the roads would simply clog.”" .... now there's an idea , what about a national " all regular cyclists/pedestrians drive their cars to work/school day "
A lot of motorists really aren’t happy about a lot of things. It seems like driving is an inherently miserable form of transport.
My village is in a Deliveroo dead spot, and the family voted me to go pick up a Domino's. Really not a pleasant experience - I haven't driven in the dark since before Covid, I think, and I haven't driven at all since March this year.
And then you get home and they expect you to eat the horrible thing.
I would rather french kiss a skunk than eat a Domino's pizza. I use the term 'pizza' very loosely.
I've got teenagers. They like them.
Never mind, they will hopefully grow out of it.
It bloody well is. I had to drive to and from a works lunch in Wales last weekend - a horrible combination of boredom and stress. Christ knows how I put up with an hour each way commute by car for years.
I live at the foot of the peaks so quite often take the car to the start of a hike. I actually enjoy the drive up there on a quiet weekend morning. Feeling like I have the road to myself definitely helps. I'm lucky enough to be able to commute by bike, I would never take a job where I had to drive to work. It looks soul destroying.
I think people are right to worry about these sweeping changes to the HC/local infra and cycling provision without adequate policing and enforcement of motor traffic. I went to a consultation by Coventry CC about their new cycling infra (which is very nice, actually) and was told, in so many words, that liaising with WMP to regulate motor traffic around this was low-priority. To an extent, I feel like local councils and the DfT are back-loading these plans because it's somehow more important to appear to be providing for active travel and 'cleaner' travel to address climate regs - is this accurate, dunno? Even the scheme in Coventry stems from an Air Quality Index report and requirements to reduce emissions closer to the city centre.
" that liaising with WMP to regulate motor traffic around this was low-priority."
Yep, definitely missing the influence of Mark and Steve and the silently disbanded WMP Road Harm Reduction Team. When the new Infra was put into the A34 and A38 in Brum, Mark regulalry cycled it and posted about and took actions about the infractions he came across. Then WMP Chiefs decided fuck it, we can still milk the good publicity but not actually keep it up anymore.
Hm. S'funny that. I've heard so much about WMP and their stellar record on active travel and yet Brum and Coventry are singularly unpleasant places to ride a bike in. Maybe this disbanding was before my time.
Mark and Steve did a lot of work to move Police Close passing initiaitives from just a truck and a mat at the cycle show at the NEC to actually allowing Cyclists to submit close passing and prosecuting drivers. I did have a link to a video Mark did on Youtube where he discussed the history of the change (Was under the Ideas For Beers and he has been on a couple of times).
They also started the Road Harm Reduction Team that used to run specific close passing capture zones, mobile phone campaigns where they filmed from buses and lorries to catch mobile phone usage, anti social parking ticketing and removals and regular speed trap monitoring. They also used to cycle up and down the new Cycle Superhighways against drivers and caught RLJ and left hookers along there.
However, it was only a drop in the ocean so I can see why it might not look like they did alot. And now it has all but been removed as a Policing team (writing was on the wall when they rebranded the Twitter Account to something else) all the good work is definitely being thrown out the window.
I'm not happy that a lot of motorists don't follow the highway code/law whilst driving. Maybe they should focus on themselves instead of worrying about cyclists.
Unfortunately the whole revision to the HC is a waste of time without adequate enforcement.
Since there is no requirement for anyone to update their HC knowledge, the vast majority of road users will be unaware of the changes anyway.
I predict nothing will change and I'll still be close-passed, cut-up, beeped at, shouted at and bullied by motorists nearly every time I go out for a ride.
I predict nothing will change and I'll still be close-passed, cut-up, beeped at, shouted at and bullied by motorists nearly every time I go out for a ride
Unfortunately, this is both correct and long predictable. I declined to take part in the joke consultation because of the long apparent refusal of the local police to pay any attention to the extant HC, never mind any 'new' one
Reply
That's your sense of entitlement showing again. Why should you be entitled not to be close-passed, cut-up, beeped at, shouted at and bullied by motorists!
The irony of the negative comments is that they are all coming from people who have an overwhelming sense of eentitlement.
We've learnt nothing new here, apart from Road.cc getting emailed by random muppets.
Let them waste their time, it's time they'll never get back.
just like when children are told they can't have exclusive use of their favourite swing and have to share the playground.
I find it rather illuminating that such tiny, baby steps to reversing the "car is king" mindset can arouse such passion. We've had a hundred years of the car culture, and this minor adjustment to make the vulnerable safer can rouse people to fury, demonstrating just how car-addicted this country is.
Somewhat like the pretty modest in the scheme of things active travel adaptions in the big towns near me.
This article begs the question just how many drivists have enough time to burn to email Road.cc. Seems a bizarre use of time.
Submit your views at the consultation stage. No. Write to your MP. No. Send an email to people that couldn't give a shit about your stupid opinions. Yeah, that'll get results.
Yep, it's too late now!
I've just had a quick look back at one of the draft rules that caused concern at the time, Rule 66. The shift from cyclists moving over when a driver wishes, to when they feel it's safe is huge. Clearly the DfT have listened to feedback at the consultation stage, so the opportunity to be heard was there...
Well we know Boo has at least two emails accounts, the original banned one and whichever one he used to sign back up as "someone else". Then we also know he must have created a few to get his mate Nick "Speed All You Want but Bloody Cyclists" Freeman's petition over 10k. So I wonder how many of these emails are from him.
All of the ones about the inherent danger of going anywhere near a TT bike will be his.
Pages