Boris Johnson hails "significant drop" in number of London cyclists seriously injured in 2013

Number of deaths unchanged; campaigners Stop Killing Cyclists urge enforcement against law-breaking drivers

by Simon_MacMichael   May 27, 2014  

London:cyclist in traffic (copyright Simon MacMichael).jpg

Mayor of London Boris Johnson has claimed that there has been a “significant drop” in the number of cyclists killed or seriously injured (KSI) in the capital during 2013. However, the campaign group Stop Killing Cyclists says the mayor needs to do more to ensure traffic laws are enforced against dirvers who break them.

While the annual report from Transport for London on collisions and casualties on London’s roads is not due to be published until September, Mr Johnson says the number of cyclists seriously injured on the city’s streets was 475 last year, reports ITV.com.

That represents a 27.7 per cent decline on the 657 cyclists who suffered serious injuries in London during 2012, and is also 14.4 per cent down on the 2011 figure of 555.

It is 17.6 per cent higher than the 2005-09 annual average of 404, although that needs to be set against the background of a strong increase in cycling in London over the past decade.

The number of deaths remained unchanged at 14 in both 2012 and 2013, when six riders died in a two-week spell in November. In 2011, there were 16 cyclist fatalities in London.

According to ITV’s Simon Harris, who tweeted a picture of the mayor, Mr Johnson was speaking at the launch of a new campaign targeting law-breaking motorists and bike riders.

In January, the Metropolitan Police revealed that its Operation Safeway campaign, launched last year, had resulted in more than 14,000 road users, three in ten of them cyclists, being fined or summonsed for a variety of offences. Our report has a detailed breakdown of the type of offences involved.

Mr Johnson said today: “Whilst these new figures are encouraging and a real move in the right direction one death or serious injury is one too many. That is why I am building new, protected cycle routes and better junctions, the first of which will be delivered this year.

“It is why I intend to ban all lorries not fitted with cyclist safety equipment from London. It's why we are investing the thick end of £1 billion on cycle safety and infrastructure.”

Andrew Gilligan, London’s cycling commissioner, commented: "If we are to improve safety still further, we need to be honest with ourselves about why accidents happen and why they have come down so much.

"We need to build safer roads, and the introduction of more segregated infrastructure can improve things still further, but as coroners have emphasised in recent inquest verdicts, people also have a responsibility to use those roads safely."

That is an allusion to inquests into deaths such as that of Khalid al-Hashimi last November, who Poplar Coroner's Court heard had nearly twice the legal driving limit of blood alcohol when he was killed after riding in front of a bus.

The campaign group Stop Killing Cyclists accused Mr Johnson staging “yet another photo-opportunity stunt” and urged him “to instead urgently tackle the real crises, failures and bias in London’s Road Safety Enforcement.”

Its co-founder, Donnachadh McCarthy, said: “The mayor rather than staging photo-stunts should sort out the mess his Traffic Enforcement schemes are in. Police resources should be targeted at the truly alarming levels of lethal trucks being driven on London’s roads.

“Whilst he fiddles, cyclist and pedestrian lives continue to be endangered by dangerous trucks being driven illegally on London’s roads and children are forced into the path of double-decker buses by inconsiderate drivers parked on un-enforced cycle-lanes.

“We recognise that safety enforcement should be targeted at all road users including cyclists, but it must be targeted in proportion to the danger caused and in proportion to numbers using our streets.

“Operation Safeway failed on both counts and the mayor and Metropolitan Police must ensure future operations do not mimic this flawed approach,” he added.

24 user comments

Oldest firstNewest firstBest rated

Well, what will they actually be doing this year?

I know some people complained, but I didn't particularly mind operation safeway last year. It wasn't great, but better than nothing. At least for the first time ever, I could cycle into town and find the majority of ASL boxes without a car in them.

Most of the penalties against cyclists were for failing to have lights, which it's quite right that people should be fined for. However, it's too early in the year to enforce that.

If all I'm going to get is another couple of weeks during which I won't be about to cycle somewhere without a PCSO dressed like a hi-viz lemon, asking me to pull over so that they can explain to me how I should also wear more hi-viz lemon, I think I'll just ride on.

posted by bikebot [735 posts]
27th May 2014 - 12:38

21 Likes

Take a look at Mark Treasure (‏@AsEasyAsRiding) for some better analysis on these numbers.

posted by VeloPeo [221 posts]
27th May 2014 - 12:50

13 Likes

The year is still young. Saying that there have been fewer KSIs this year is meaningless. We are inly 40% of the way through the year. Don't forget last year we had six fatalities in a two week period.

posted by levermonkey [387 posts]
27th May 2014 - 14:00

17 Likes

It seems a bit tempting fate to say there's a drop. I owner about the statistical significance of the numbers

Not advocating drunk riding - but there isn't a legal limit for blood alcohol while riding a bicycle.

posted by pique [18 posts]
27th May 2014 - 14:25

16 Likes

I was told off this morning for wearing black shorts and jersey - at 8:30am, in broad daylight. The "officer" also had a go at a bloke who was wearing earphones. Given that he had a conversation with her without removing them, I think he could still hear his surroundings...

posted by srchar [60 posts]
27th May 2014 - 15:13

15 Likes

Quote:
The year is still young. Saying that there have been fewer KSIs this year is meaningless. We are inly 40% of the way through the year. Don't forget last year we had six fatalities in a two week period.

I think the statistics are for 2013, it just takes a while to collate them and get them ready for publication. That's what the article suggests.

posted by HarrogateSpa [121 posts]
27th May 2014 - 15:49

20 Likes

HarrogateSpa wrote:
Quote:
The year is still young. Saying that there have been fewer KSIs this year is meaningless. We are inly 40% of the way through the year. Don't forget last year we had six fatalities in a two week period.

I think the statistics are for 2013, it just takes a while to collate them and get them ready for publication. That's what the article suggests.

Sorry! Your quite right. I misread right at the start of the article and then my brain seams to have refused to auto correct as I read further. Turns out on rereading to be a bit of old stuff, a non-news story, a bit of new stuff and a 'dead-cat'.

posted by levermonkey [387 posts]
27th May 2014 - 16:12

14 Likes

srchar wrote:
I was told off this morning for wearing black shorts and jersey - at 8:30am, in broad daylight. The "officer" also had a go at a bloke who was wearing earphones. Given that he had a conversation with her without removing them, I think he could still hear his surroundings...

Black shorts? Seriously?

I really hope that was a misunderstanding. I have a lot of respect for the Police, but I think my instinct to see the humour in everything would get the better of me if an officer told me I needed to wear hi-viz pants!

posted by bikebot [735 posts]
27th May 2014 - 16:34

21 Likes

There were three MPS BMWs parked up next to the junction with Tooley Street and Tower Bridge Road this morning. The coppers stationed themselves at opposite corners of the junction.

I'd never seen so many cyclists obey the red light. Plain Face

Anyway, as I waited for the green, two big Transit-size vans went through on the amber from 90° to my right, and couldn't clear the junction, so stopped dead on the junction box.

Did plod nick them?

Do I have to answer that?

'It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning' (Henry Ford)

cyclingDMlondon's picture

posted by cyclingDMlondon [226 posts]
27th May 2014 - 17:16

20 Likes

Operation Safeway was NOT the supposed “blitz on unsafe driving” that it was publicised as. See http://rdrf.org.uk/2013/11/29/is-there-a-police-blitz-on-unsafe-driving-... for an account of what really happened. Law enforcement is a good idea, but as Mr McCarthy says “We recognise that safety enforcement should be targeted at all road users including cyclists, but it must be targeted in proportion to the danger caused and in proportion to numbers using our streets. “Operation Safeway failed on both counts and the mayor and Metropolitan Police must ensure future operations do not mimic this flawed approach,”

There is a lot that the Met could and should do for the safety of all road users: see http://rdrf.org.uk/2013/11/29/what-traffic-policing-could-be-like/

posted by ChairRDRF [159 posts]
27th May 2014 - 20:24

8 Likes

I'm glad I don't have to ride in a city.
Sad

Endorphines going up and adrenaline going down, who needs drugs?

posted by banzicyclist2 [248 posts]
27th May 2014 - 20:55

17 Likes

pique wrote:
Not advocating drunk riding - but there isn't a legal limit for blood alcohol while riding a bicycle.

Right this one is a little complicated. Here are the offences
1) Riding a cycle on a road or other public place while unfit to ride through drink or drugs (RTA s.30)
i.e. Your wobbling all over the place. Basically this is not that much different from 'being drunk in a public place'. They've got you on being unable to exert proper control.

2) Being drunk while in charge of a carriage on any highway or other public place (LA 1872, s.12; Corkery v Carpenter [1951] 1 KB 102)
This one is a little naughty. You've been to the pub and decide that you are incapable of riding. You decide to push your bike home. Your nicked. Again it's basically drunk in public.

Right having said that. You cannot be forced to provide a sample or undergo an impairment test. However, if you do and you fail then it can be used in evidence.

If you want a bit more info then use the link below

http://ukcyclerules.com/2010/09/21/can-you-ride-when-youve-been-drinking/

posted by levermonkey [387 posts]
27th May 2014 - 21:06

10 Likes

srchar wrote:
I was told off this morning for wearing black shorts and jersey - at 8:30am, in broad daylight. The "officer" also had a go at a bloke who was wearing earphones. Given that he had a conversation with her without removing them, I think he could still hear his surroundings...

I hope that you reminded the officer of rule 14.

posted by Matt eaton [451 posts]
27th May 2014 - 21:57

5 Likes

Matt eaton wrote:
srchar wrote:
I was told off this morning for wearing black shorts and jersey - at 8:30am, in broad daylight. The "officer" also had a go at a bloke who was wearing earphones. Given that he had a conversation with her without removing them, I think he could still hear his surroundings...

I hope that you reminded the officer of rule 14.

'Rule 14' of what? Because it's not the Highway Code. Clothing for cyclists is Rule 45 and as far as I'm aware the HC makes no mention of earphones.

Could you please expand. Thank you. Big Grin

posted by levermonkey [387 posts]
28th May 2014 - 5:39

6 Likes

levermonkey wrote:

'Rule 14' of what? Because it's not the Highway Code. Clothing for cyclists is Rule 45 and as far as I'm aware the HC makes no mention of earphones.

Could you please expand. Thank you. Big Grin

Dude! Rule 14! Shorts should always be black! Call yourself a cyclist?

Check out the Velominati Rules mun.

posted by bendertherobot [373 posts]
28th May 2014 - 6:57

7 Likes

bikebot wrote:
Well, what will they actually be doing this year?

I know some people complained, but I didn't particularly mind operation safeway last year. It wasn't great, but better than nothing. At least for the first time ever, I could cycle into town and find the majority of ASL boxes without a car in them.

Most of the penalties against cyclists were for failing to have lights, which it's quite right that people should be fined for. However, it's too early in the year to enforce that.

If all I'm going to get is another couple of weeks during which I won't be about to cycle somewhere without a PCSO dressed like a hi-viz lemon, asking me to pull over so that they can explain to me how I should also wear more hi-viz lemon, I think I'll just ride on.

I'd be interested to see what the reaction of plastic plod would be.

Cyclist pulls over.

Plastic Plod: Good morning, Sir. How are you?
Cyclist: I'm all right. Did I do something wrong?
Plastic Plod: Not at all, Sir. I'm just enquiring as to why you're not wearing a hi-viz vest...
Cyclist: Sorry?
Plastic Plod: A hi-viz vest, Sir. Why are you not wearing one?
Cyclist: *looking around for hidden camera* Erm.. I'm not sure I underst...erm.. is this a joke?
Plastic Plod: No joke, Sir. We're just attempting to encourage cyclists to take responsibility for their own -
Cyclist: Goodbye. *prepares to cycle off*
Plastic Plod: *grabs arm* Oi, I'm not finished with you, Sunshine!

.... as the famous line goes ... whaddya do???

'It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning' (Henry Ford)

cyclingDMlondon's picture

posted by cyclingDMlondon [226 posts]
28th May 2014 - 7:34

13 Likes

For a report on Khalid al Hashimi's killing please read

www.visionzerolondon.org/2014/04/victim-blaming-again-and-again.html?m=1

TfL was responsible for the killing; and has done nothing to ameliorate the situation.

It was classic victim blaming, a practice ingrained in TfL; and indeed in most Brits, when the victim has a foreign sounding name.

posted by andreacasalotti [5 posts]
28th May 2014 - 7:47

2 Likes

Oh why, oh why are we always fed half a stat to prove bugger all? 475 deaths out of how many journeys, cyclist or from lemons?

475 deaths from 200 million miles by 20 million cyclists is not bad at all.
475 deaths out of 480 cyclist doing one mile is bloody horrendous.

If there is a drop in people cycling then claiming it's because of a police operation is total and utter poppy cock. It's like saying that driving standards have improved as nobody crashed when the motrosport circuit was not in use.

Real shame we can not report near hits, I'll start 25miles and 6.

Goes into a dark room, muttering to oneself. At Wits End

posted by Yorkshie Whippet [309 posts]
28th May 2014 - 8:01

6 Likes

cyclingDMlondon wrote:

I'd be interested to see what the reaction of plastic plod would be.

Cyclist pulls over.

Plastic Plod: Good morning, Sir. How are you?
Cyclist: I'm all right. Did I do something wrong?
Plastic Plod: Not at all, Sir. I'm just enquiring as to why you're not wearing a hi-viz vest...
Cyclist: Sorry?
Plastic Plod: A hi-viz vest, Sir. Why are you not wearing one?
Cyclist: *looking around for hidden camera* Erm.. I'm not sure I underst...erm.. is this a joke?
Plastic Plod: No joke, Sir. We're just attempting to encourage cyclists to take responsibility for their own -
Cyclist: Goodbye. *prepares to cycle off*
Plastic Plod: *grabs arm* Oi, I'm not finished with you, Sunshine!

.... as the famous line goes ... whaddya do???

I've changed my mind. With the tick box nature of this form of policing, I would instead tell him that I was indeed wearing a hi-viz vest, and that I had it on under my jersey.

After that, I'm sure he would wish me a safe trip and let me go about my business.

posted by bikebot [735 posts]
28th May 2014 - 18:25

3 Likes

bikebot wrote:
cyclingDMlondon wrote:

I'd be interested to see what the reaction of plastic plod would be.

Cyclist pulls over.

Plastic Plod: Good morning, Sir. How are you?
Cyclist: I'm all right. Did I do something wrong?
Plastic Plod: Not at all, Sir. I'm just enquiring as to why you're not wearing a hi-viz vest...
Cyclist: Sorry?
Plastic Plod: A hi-viz vest, Sir. Why are you not wearing one?
Cyclist: *looking around for hidden camera* Erm.. I'm not sure I underst...erm.. is this a joke?
Plastic Plod: No joke, Sir. We're just attempting to encourage cyclists to take responsibility for their own -
Cyclist: Goodbye. *prepares to cycle off*
Plastic Plod: *grabs arm* Oi, I'm not finished with you, Sunshine!

.... as the famous line goes ... whaddya do???

I've changed my mind. With the tick box nature of this form of policing, I would instead tell him that I was indeed wearing a hi-viz vest, and that I had it on under my jersey.

After that, I'm sure he would wish me a safe trip and let me go about my business.

No, he'd be 'You bein' cheekaï, mayte?'

You would then be arrested and charged under s. 1(1)(b) of the Contempt of Cop Act 2013.

'It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning' (Henry Ford)

cyclingDMlondon's picture

posted by cyclingDMlondon [226 posts]
28th May 2014 - 18:31

2 Likes

cyclingDMlondon wrote:

No, he'd be 'You bein' cheekaï, mayte?'

You would then be arrested and charged under s. 1(1)(b) of the Contempt of Cop Act 2013.

Well, I'm running out of options now, you decide!

Plan C) Look down at my bike in complete bemusement, and say "where's my bloody car gone!"

Plan D) Pretend to be French. May require onions.

Plan E) Engage in Chaplin inspired arse kicking of Police officer, following by chase sequence with musical accompaniment. May require orphans.

posted by bikebot [735 posts]
28th May 2014 - 19:14

4 Likes

bendertherobot wrote:
levermonkey wrote:

'Rule 14' of what? Because it's not the Highway Code. Clothing for cyclists is Rule 45 and as far as I'm aware the HC makes no mention of earphones.

Could you please expand. Thank you. Big Grin

Dude! Rule 14! Shorts should always be black! Call yourself a cyclist?

Check out the Velominati Rules mun.

My original statement is still valid as without a common frame of reference saying 'rule 14' is useless.

I'll give you an example. Say you are stopped by the Police and you are given a summons. If he just states that you are in breach of Regulation 7 how will you be able to prepare a defence. You would expect to be informed that it is Regulation 7, The Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986 at the very least.

What you should have written is maybe "Rule 14 (Velominati)" maybe. After all you were referring to a Policeman approaching a cyclist on the public road so therefore it would be natural to assume that your point of reference would be the Highway Code. So, instead of being a facetious prat quoting 'rules' from some random list might I suggest you make your posts clearer in future. Big Grin

See Rule 4 (Levermonkey). Rolling On The Floor

posted by levermonkey [387 posts]
29th May 2014 - 4:39

3 Likes

You know, I think we've all failed to take this subject seriously.

Carry on.

posted by bikebot [735 posts]
29th May 2014 - 12:36

1 Like

bikebot wrote:
You know, I think we've all failed to take this subject seriously.
Carry on.

What is there to take seriously? Old news (soon to be overtaken tragically by events), Boris on a photo-opportunity, yet another victim-blaming crackdown on cyclists, more old news about unsafe lorries and more promises to look into the causes of accidents (no promise to eliminate the causes accidents).

All froth and inconsequentialities glossing over very real issues. A complete waste of an article trying to cover too much and in the end covering nothing. Are you really surprised that the string is the way it is? I'm not! Rolling Eyes

posted by levermonkey [387 posts]
29th May 2014 - 19:21

8 Likes