Conservative councillor wades into cyclist hi-vis clothing discussion with "reprehensible" rant... says "Lycra louts" who ride in roads instead of cycle lanes "suffer the consequences"

It doesn't have much impact on drivers around me except when I point out, literally, poor passes, then the next driver always takes a wide berth.

But 2 or 3 passes later and we're back in the loop again.

Worst recently has been the number of learner drivers close passing, clearly missing the passpixi sign, and seemingly without correction from their instructor, which makes me think the next generation of drivers even with the recent HC changes are just as clueless and driving as MGIFs

alexuk wrote:

Wearing all black gear, on an all black bike, without lights, does make you hard to see in some situations.

But he didn't say that, AFAICS - he said wearing dark colours was a bad idea full stop.

It shouldn't matter what colour clothing you are wearing or what colour your bike is, if you have lights on.

And, TBH, going on the number of times you hear "I saw this cyclist, all in black, with no lights on" I'm not convinced anything matters as much as the motorist having their vehicle's headlights switched on and properly paying attention to the road environment around them.

brooksby wrote:

And, TBH, going on the number of times you hear "I saw this cyclist, all in black, with no lights on" I'm not convinced anything matters as much as the motorist having their vehicle's headlights switched on and properly paying attention to the road environment around them.

Well, it's this, isn't it.

People too often drive on auto-brain. They've always gone this way; they always speed up at that bit; there's never anybody along this section...

Until people accept that you may only proceed as far as you can see your path to be clear, we will not have safe roads. Even on a dark, poorly lit road in the wet, this holds true. If you cannot see tell that the tarmac is clear of any obstructions - not just that you can't see any obstructions - you should be slowing down.

Yet anything approaching that standard of driving is treated as a war on motorists.

The problem is we implicitly accept that "only proceed as far as you can see your path to be clear" or the like is not always true, given speed limits and the layout of many roads.  Indeed, some folks are happy to say this explicitly e.g. "driving simply doesn't work well if that were always true".

The problem with flexibility on the latter point is the presence of vulnerable road users also.  Drivers going too fast to stop will (literally) impact vulnerable road users the hardest.  Motor vehicles crashing into other motor vehicles should not be something we "design for", but I could see that this might be more acceptable in some circumstances *.  With pedestrians and cyclists (and animals, wild and domestic) on the roads ccepting "sometimes drivers just can't stop" is accepting a higher level of KSIs: that's the choice.

Something something different philosophy something something "Sustainable Safety"...

* Both because of the protection of the motor vehicle and in many cases velocities will be similar.  (Of course the potential for high opposite velocities make things much worse.  That is the the reason why some places prohibit ANY overtaking by motor vehicles on some classes of road e.g. NL).

I nearly got hit twice last year, it was only my reactions and hard braking that saved me, whilst wearing a bright luminous yellow jersey, reflectives, with two front lights, one flashing,one steady, in full street lit conditions, riding prime position.

One of the drivers was driving a police car.

One of the drivers was driving a police car

Despite my loathing of the despicable Lancashire Constabulary and its almost universally anti-cyclist officers, I have only once caught one of them driving badly, and I didn't have the camera running. It was illegal crossing of a single unbroken white line.

Here's my experience while wearing a bright yellow jacket. Also had two static lights on pannier rack. A flashing red on seat post and my panniers had bright yellow reflectives on them. He was still determined to squeeze through. Far too many motorists drive on auto pilot and consistently do not read the road. It makes little odds how many steps you take to increase visibility. Drivers simply don't pay attention. 

Edit: Not sure why the paste didn't work
https://youtu.be/UtM71BQDyng

I'll start wearing brighter colors when cars do. At the moment, 90% of the cars on my street are black or dark blue. I guess lights and reflectors will have to do for both of us, for now.

I think you stand out because of the fur and ears ... but yes to lights and more so to reflectives, especially those on moving parts.

I'm all for helping those poor folks who are driving a bit when it's mostly in my interests.  However seems that's not easy *.  Particularly because driving tends to train us to only look for the cars.

* Apart from helping their arguments as to why they didn't to their job properly / adhere to the conditions of their driving licence e.g. "but they weren't wearing hivis / helmet / were at the edge / middle of the road / were on a bike / I was astonished that it got dark at night and that made it harder to see".

chrisonabike wrote:

I think you stand out because of the fur and ears

Well also those cateyes help.

james-o wrote:

The term 'Conservative councillor' on here is fast attaining 'Florida Man' status.

Except that 'Florida Man' is very often quite amusing.

Conservative councillors are quite often laughable too?

The mix after May 2025 will be interesting.

All County and Unitary seats in England are up for reelection.

Personally, I see significant Lib Dem and Green gains.

Reform UK are still driving a clown car.

eburtthebike wrote:

Councillor Ian Hutchinson appears to be yet another petrolhead (or whatever derogatory term suits you) who doesn't understand anything about cycling, but then, he's a tory so spouting loudly and long on subjects you know nothing about is second nature.

"In Northumberland we are spending millions on cycle tracks, yet "lycia louts" (sic) don't use them! Come on cyclists, play the game and appreciate what we are doing to try and keep you safe! If you ride on the road and there is a cycle track available, YOU suffer the consequences!!!!!!"

And that sounds just like the right wing bully boys of little brain and less English ability who intimidate council officers explaining why Active Travel facilities are so necessary.  As for appreciating what they are doing to try to keep us safe, I very much doubt it.  I don't know the facilities he's talking about, but if local cyclists don't use them, I'm pretty sure they're rubbish.

Never mind that they're rubbish, if you don't use them and a driver hits you, it's your fault.  I know the tories are only a shadow of their former glory, but it would appear their barrel has been scraped clean.

Now this is a real bully boy - Labour MP Mike Amesbury.

biking59boomer wrote:

TBH I have some sympathy wtih those who say we should use cycle lanes. We fought long and hard for them and large amounts of public money have been spent on them. Lack of use is one of the arguments used to remove them as well as against future provison. We lierally need to use them or lose them.

No, we fought long and hard for proper cycle lanes, but 90%+ in this country aren't fit for purpose and we definitely didn't fight for them.  Give us decent cycle facilities and we'll use them, but give us dangerous, inconvenient shared use paths and we'll stay on the road.  Losing them would be a benefit.

Exactly - use this cycle lane that stops before the busy part where it's really needed or use this cycle path, which is really a pavement going past numerous concealed entrances to homes and ends abruptly and inexpicably nowhere near a town or a group of offices.

Surreyrider wrote:

Exactly - use this cycle lane that stops before the busy part where it's really needed or use this cycle path, which is really a pavement going past numerous concealed entrances to homes and ends abruptly and inexpicably nowhere near a town or a group of offices.

Wow! Worse than I thought.  I wonder if Councillor Ian Hutchinson has ridden it and would like to tell us what effing use it is.

You have aroused a couple of hopelessly ineffectual obvious trolls, the most recent being obviously Tory - the relevance of a non-cycling story concerning a Labour MP being obvious only to the dimwit himself

wtjs wrote:

You have aroused a couple of hopelessly ineffectual obvious trolls, the most recent being obviously Tory - the relevance of a non-cycling story concerning a Labour MP being obvious only to the dimwit himself

You made a funny.. I saw the term Bully Boy and that made me think about the article I recently read concerning an MP beating the crap out of a constituent. Nothing more than that and neither a Tory or Labour supporter as I do not reside in the UK dimwit.

biking59boomer wrote:

TBH I have some sympathy wtih those who say we should use cycle lanes driver should use motorways rather than A-roads and b-roads, even if it is inconvenient. We fought long and hard for them and large amounts of public money have been spent on them. Lack of use is one of the arguments used to remove them as well as against future provison. We lierally need to use them or lose them. As for high viz kit and lights they doesn't protect you but they do give you a better chance of being seen before it's too late.

Paint on a road is not infrastructure

As demonstrated at the top of this article.

The government and councils have yet to deliver safe, robust, joined up and consistent cycling infrastructure. I used to live in a university town where you would hope that would have existed and all that was there was a handful of ASLs and a few strips of paint. The same town also claimed to be a link for two NSL routes yet had nothing linking them. Pretty much every suggested infra put up for consultation has seen huge kickback and has never come to fruition. 

Until I start to see proper maintained infra in place and laws ensuring my safety I will continue to keep to the roads.