- 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
Big Ben © Simon MacMichaelTransport minister says that cyclists are more dangerous to “commuters” than drivers
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport, has said that the biggest challenge for “a London commuter” is avoiding cyclists, not trucks and cars. Answering a question as to what action was being taken to increase cyclists’ compliance with traffic laws and regulations, he pointed to the Bikeability scheme – which is likely to suffer a large cut in funding tomorrow.
BikeBiz reports that the question was asked by Labour peer, Lord Wills, who said that cycling on pavements was the issue that most incensed his constituents “apart from dog mess.”
“The situation seems to be getting worse. As record numbers of cyclists take to the roads in big cities, we see increasing examples of this sort of behaviour. Just a few weeks ago I was on Marylebone Road and I watched a cyclist jump a red light and weave off down the pavement between pedestrians, talking on his mobile phone as he went. When I said that perhaps he should not be doing that, he got off his bike and asked me to fight him.
“When I declined the invitation and pointed out that he was breaking the law, he said, ‘I know I’m breaking the law and you can’t do anything about it.’ However, the Minister could. I would be grateful if he could tell the House what more he could do to stop these bully boys on bikes terrorising pedestrians and bring some law and order to our pavements.”
Lord Ahmad agreed, saying that when he was an MP, “I often said that the biggest challenge for a commuter in London was avoiding not trucks and cars but the cyclists who were possibly jumping red lights or riding on the pavements.”
He pointed to Operation Atrium which involved London police issuing tickets to cyclists breaking the rules as well as cycle training initiatives such as THINK! Cyclist and Bikeability, saying such schemes would “help us to educate cyclists, not just about the law but also about their responsibilities.”
Earlier today, Sustrans warned that government cuts will affect the number of children and schools that can offer Bikeability training.
Conservative peer Lord Robathan seemed unimpressed by the tone of the debate and asked how many motorists are killed or severely injured by cyclists in a year; how many pedestrians are killed or severely injured by cyclists a year; and how many cyclists are severely injured or killed by motorists and pedestrians in a year.
Lord Ahmad said he would answer in writing.
Liberal Democrat peer Lord Taverne said he would also be keen to see such figures before suggesting that everything possible should be done to encourage more people to cycle.
“The serious injuries caused by cyclists must pale into insignificance when compared to those caused by motorists. Does he not agree that everything possible must be done by the Government to encourage and support cycling, as was splendidly shown recently with the opening of the cycling superhighway route in London? After all, bicycles are the most efficient machine yet invented for turning energy into motion. Indeed, the bicycle has been accurately described as a kind of green car, which can run on tap water and tea cakes and, moreover, has a built-in gym.”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- rogerwb 1 sec ago
Generalisations are valid in this case; there are enough boomers with negative attitudes to young people to be able to block good things like this....
- mattw 4 hours 58 min ago
This risks turning me into a hanger and flogger....
- wtjs 8 hours 58 min ago
In SE London, psychopath riders are the majority of people on bicycles Oh dear! another festive stealth anti-cyclist ☃️
- wtjs 9 hours 3 min ago
Well, you know the BMW drivers' saying: knock that house (hospital, social housing, care home, hospital...) down, could save 30 seconds on the trip!
- Spangly Shiny 10 hours 38 min 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:...
- Username 11 hours 43 min ago
Could Siobhán paint it red and noone would notice it?
- Spangly Shiny 1 day 2 hours ago
To paraphrase Field of Dreams, "Build it right and they will come: and use it!"
- Rendel Harris 1 day 4 hours ago
And a Happy Christmas to you, road.cc staff!
- Rendel Harris 1 day 5 hours ago
The odds of not being able to find a single pedestrian - just one, note, "any pedestrian" - in an area containing more than about ten of them who...
Add new comment
26 comments
According to ONS statistics two pedestrians were killed in collisions with bicycles in 2010 while 5 were killed by wasps and 5 were killed by their own bedding.
Yep, it's the cyclists that are the danger...
http://www.midulstermail.co.uk/news/mid-ulster-news/children-forced-to-j...
http://www.midulstermail.co.uk/news/mid-ulster-news/car-runs-red-light-w...
back up with stats (once you have made them up and distorted them). Yes, cyclists jumping lights, and ignoring zebra crossings etc are idiots. How about having more enforicement on the streets to counter this behaviour of a minority? I'm sure if we didn't have enforcement on motor vehicles there would be even more bad -and deadly- behaviour.
I was hit by a cyclist (damn hipster fixue) when he was riding the wrong way up one way street in covent garden. Thankfully I put my arm out in defence and his nose took a fair amount of the impact.
London cyclist almost certainly is a commuter.
Lord is an ....
"After all, bicycles are the most efficient machine yet invented for turning energy into motion. Indeed, the bicycle has been accurately described as a kind of green car, which can run on tap water and tea cakes and, moreover, has a built-in gym.”
Why people like this can be allowed to make decisions that affect us all makes my blood boil.
And worse, he come across as a complete victim blamer. We should be protecting the more vulnerable road users, not vilifying them.
More positively it sounds like Lord Taverne and Lord Robathan have got their sh1t together!
I see Google Translate has some new languages. If you set the input language to "Sensible" and the output to "Ignorant Tosspot" you get the following translations:
Filtering = Weaving in and out like a madman
Riding primary = Riding in the middle of the fucking road
Sorry = You don't even pay road tax
Statistics show that = I once saw
Helmet camera = Vigilante cyclist
Cyclists don't wish to die = Cyclists are entitled little cunts
Why didn't the lorry driver check his mirrors? = Was the cyclist wearing a helmet?
This traffic is unbearable = I can't believe that cyclist cunt held me up
I was using my phone = You came from nowhere
We should be careful to not injure other road users = Cyclists should be careful to not scratch my car
I'm jeallous, my life is a mess, I spend the whole time berating others from the safety of my car. I'm going to have a heart attack by the age of 60 and I'm bitter about how things have worked out = I fucking hate cyclists
Danthomascyclist said
Lord Ahmad got his facts wrong.
The DfT has the data, which he could have found out had he bothered to look for it rather than repeating a falsehood.
In the period from 2010 - 2014 there were 19 pedestrians killed following crashes with cyclists and 431 pedestrians injured. Most of those crashes ocurred when cyclists collided with pedestrians who were crossing roads, although DfT data does not record who was at fault in each incident. It is worth noting that it has been reported elsewhere on the increase in numbers of pedestrians 'walking while distracted' due to smartphone use. Meanwhile from 2010 - 2014 there were 1,203 fatalities involving motor vehicles colliding with pedestrians as well as 19,802 injuries. Again, DfT data does not reveal who was at fault, although it is known that there is a lower incidence of motor vehicle/pedestrian incidents being caused by 'distracted walking' than for cyclist/pedestrian incidents. This is because motor vehicles are larger and easier to see and more importantly, because a high percentage of cyclist/pedestrian collisions happen when a pedestrian listens for an approaching motor vehicle but does not look, prior to stepping out into the roadway (and therefore misses hearing the much quieter bicycle or electric vehicle).
While cyclists on the pavement is an issue, only three pedestrians were killed in the period from 2010 - 2014 compared with 34 pedestrians killed by motor vehicles on the pavement in the same period.
Bon Jovi once sang, "You give love a bad name." They did that because it was a great lyric . It lent itself to a good rhyme.
But, as a concept, it was utterly flawed. That relationship was in no way representative of any other. And, indeed, true love was not present, and could not be.
So I agree with the cosmic mind meld above. If motorists hold that view, educate them as to why no other category is held in such aggregate contempt. If a cyclist holds that view, just facepalm.
I looked him up on the Gov.uk website. He's the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport and Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Minister for Countering Extremism). In his former career he spent 20 years in banking and finance; it's hard to see how this experience would have prepared him for transport or extremists.
Cool story bro
I literally cannot count the number of commuters that I've injured on my bike.
Feels like a co-ordinated attack on cyclists from a variety of angles.
Cycling must be making a difference, the naysayers are frightened of change. Bring it on!
Bez's t-shirt seems even more appropriate:
From https://www.tboom.co.uk/upset-the-idiots
All the above comments are right, as far as they go, But this chap wouldn't have any ammunition if we stopped weaving in and around pedestrians. When I'm walking on the footpath I hate being buzzed by cyclists and, more to the point, so do my dogs.
Every time we do it we hand clowns like this another stick with which to beat us.
What's with we? I don't ride on pavements, but there's not a lot I can do about somebody at the other of the country who does.
But hey, maybe you and all those others who drive cars can stop people speeding up here, because you all look bad.
As already pointed out, this is a silly thing to say. I hate being buzzed by cyclists on the pavement, which is why I occasionally risk getting into confrontations with them by pointedly refusing to get out of their way (kind of depends how scrawny they look, though I do think they can't be that brave or they wouldn't be on the pavement - right? Maybe a miscalculation...).
But in what way am I fused to them in some cosmic mind-meld? There is no 'we'. No house to put in order, no broard church, no big tent, no moral flat-share.
If I did share a house with David Cameron, Boris Johnson, Peter Hitchens, assorted pavement-racing hoodies, those two Scouse Ketamine-dealers with their tandem, and Bradley Wiggins, I'd move out immediately.
"We are
the Borgcyclists. Your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own. Resistance is futile." Didn't you get the memo?Yes, and let's stop doing all the other things that people complain about: filtering (or "weaving in and out of cars"), riding in primary, wearing helmet cams, not looking like some 90s raver head to foot in day glo gear, having beards, riding two abreast, etc. Given just cycling on the roads annoys a lot of people, I guess we should stop doing that too. Only then will we be truly accepted by society, and people will stop running us over.
We?
I don't doubt some cyclists do that, I'd be surprised if they didn't do something antisocial. Not because they're cyclist, but because that's what people do regardless of their mode of transport.
What's missing from your judgement is any sort of data evidence that cyclists break the law more than anyone else, or cause greater harm by doing so. That's not a justification for what they do, just an observation that people indulge in selection bias when viewing other people's faults. Their own faults are invisible to themselves. No better example of this than a 2012 RAC survey of motorists where >80% admitted to routinely speeding. In the same survey >90% considered themselves to be law abiding motorists.
The difference between what cyclists do, and what other road users do can be boiled down to difference in kinetic energy invested in their respective modes of transport, and the risk that that poses to the rest of society.
Is it not time for every London commuter, on one specified day, to drive into London to show such tools like Wimbeldon Ahmed what a massive favour cyclists are doing for London Commuters. The ensuing grid lock would be something to behold.
There's no point trying to debate with these people there not going to change there mind. But for all the mud they like to sling at cyclists it apply a million fold to motorists, oh and there also responsible for the deaths of thousands of people a year too. So once they've sorted that out I'd be happy to listen to their rambling anecdote about a cyclist they once saw.
Pathetic. He's the under secretary for transport and yet he bases his statements on anecdote and personal prejudice. Perhaps someone in his position should be required to show some impartiality and actively participate in all modes of transport.
Yeah, and in Surrey our councillor in charge of the transport portfolio is a convicted drunk driver who has openly stated his hostility to cyclists. Like Ahmad his sole qualification for the job is that he's a Tory. You couldn't make this up.
No need to point out to the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport that a cyclist has never knocked over or crushed a motor vehicle. He must surely be well aware of that.
This is the government which promised to spend more, do more and get more people cycling. Is this a backtrack from the Under Secretary of State for Transport? Are they now going to vilify cyclists in order to justify spending less?
On another note: Why do we have unelected people in positions such as Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport? If some-one is going to have a say on our way of life and our future, shouldn't we have a vote on who that person is?