- 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
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
When the red mist descends cyclists are more vulnerableUpdated: "Oi! Cyclist! Get off the road!" DfT report highlights anti-cycling attitudes
“They don’t pay road tax, they block the road, they are inconsiderate, they overtake, they are bloody slow . . . I pay road tax, so I should have priority.”
That statement may sound like it was made by road.cc’s new friend Councillor Lawrence Abraham, but in fact it came from an unnamed motorist interviewed as part of a just-released Department for Transport-commissioned report into cycling safety and the attitudes of other road users towards cyclists.
The report, snappily titled, Safety, cycling and sharing the road: qualitative research with cyclists and other road users does not make for uplifting reading and will confirm what many cyclists already know to be the case, i.e. that some drivers view cyclists as inconveniences at best and a road-using underclass who shouldn’t be there at all, at worst (maybe "Oi Cyclist! Get off the road" might have been a more apt title - ed)
Tellingly, the report was released last Thursday with little attendant publicity indeed road.cc understands that a draft copy was prepared over a year ago, perhaps the DfT's reticence on the matter is because the report does paint such a depressing picture of the interface between cyclists and what it terms other road users (ORUs). Some of the main conclusions are:
• The evidence suggests a failure in the culture of road sharing, with a lack of consensus about whether, and how, cyclists belong on the roads.
• There was higher empathy for car drivers across all types of road user than for minority road users such as cyclists. There was also evidence of a stereotype of cyclists, characterised by failures of attitude and competence.
• Some infrastructure may create further room for disagreement about the norms of road sharing. Different types of cyclist also have differing, and potentially conflicting, needs from infrastructure.
• When it comes to encouraging cyclists to make themselves safer, it may be easier to promote visibility than helmet wearing. Promoting visibility could also be linked to the promotion of safer road-sharing.
• Cyclists in our groups used different behavioural approaches to manage perceived risks from ORUs, in the context of choices and limitations created by the bike.
• There were important attitudinal differences between adults and young cyclists. Children do not have experience of driving a motorised vehicle, and so lack an understanding of the perspective and needs of ORUs.
• Cyclists and ORUs explained the failures of road sharing in different ways, ranging from acts of aggression to failures of expectation or other situational factors.
The CTC said the report genuinely sheds light on detailed issues that are normally only dealt with in broad brush strokes.
“We feel this is a balanced report with the author taking a nuanced, well thought-out approach that is helpful in reflecting motorists’ attitudes towards cyclists,” said Chris Peck, the CTC’s Policy Coordinator. “It goes further than just casualty and collision figures, providing useful qualitative data that will assist us in influencing Government attitudes towards cycling in future.”
You can download a copy of the report here.
Latest Comments
- john_smith 1 sec ago
Straight into the sun is perhaps an exaggeration, but at that time it would be about ESE, and there are bits of the road which head roughly SSE, so...
- john_smith 8 min 45 sec ago
7 October was just a bit of harmless fun until the "msm" ramped it up.
- hawkinspeter 8 min 58 sec ago
It's not censored if you just pirate it
- stonojnr 1 hour 13 min ago
an example of Kesgraves "best cycling infrastructure in the country" https://maps.app.goo.gl/GsCMbzDUTPdq59qS9
- ktache 1 hour 16 min ago
They are not going full gas at every point. They would destroy themselves. And tactics, they save themselves for when effort is really needed....
- wookey 1 hour 21 min ago
It turns out that that is national police policy. We found out from this process that there is national 'secured by design' policy which causes...
- mtbtomo 2 hours 1 min ago
Been available for quite a while, full GRX mechanical 12 speed. Probably around the same time as 105 mechanical 12 speed if I were to guess.
- TheBillder 2 hours 6 min ago
Less harmful citrus degreaser is easy to find at £8 or less for 5 litres. Works ok for me, even diluted up to 4:1. Both paraffin and white spirit...
- Veganpotter 2 hours 12 min ago
Nope, it's to keep your straps down and quieter. Plus most sunglasses are polycarbonate and aren't going to shatter like glass anyway
- Steve K 2 hours 43 min ago
And, more seriously, where's the coverage of the closure of the cycle lane which forces you to cycle on the Totton bypass.
Add new comment
37 comments
I'm not keen on compulsory cycling proficiency, but like the Dutch idea that cycling is taught at school, so that it's just second nature to most.
No. That gesture demonstrates the kind of abuse a significant number of cyclists suffer when trying to get from A to B.
How many of these "dangerous" cyclists have injured you while you were driving? Have you seen one wipe out a bus queue? Has one pulled out of a side road without looking and hospitalised you? To whom are they a danger? None of the 27,000 people killed or seriously injured on the roads last year were hit by a cyclist.
While I don't agree with wearing an ipod or using a mobile phone while cycling, your husband can't do an awful lot about the 2-ton car approaching from behind, particularly as he should be paying attention to what is in front of him. It's up to YOU as the following (and heavier and much more powerful vehicle) to give him plenty of room and anticipate his movements. YOU are the one in charge of the killing machine. Perhaps you should reacquaint yourself with the relevant section of the Highway Code. However, if he ignores the traffic, turns right without warning or rides in all black 'stealth' clothing then I won't be surprised when some SMIDSY half-wit driver with an attitude problem knocks him off.
There will always be cyclists that hop onto kerbs, jump red lights etc etc. There are silly/dangerous/stupid people everywhere, and unfortunately some of them ride bicycles, but please don't tar us all with the same brush. And you might like to bear in mind that cyclists riding on the pavement, talking on the 'phone and annoying you with their behaviour are FAR less dangerous to the people around them than you and me when we are driving a car.
To be clear, I was joking.
No, it's not. You pay for the emissions of your car, not the use of the road.
In other words, you pay for the right to pollute the air!
As i said earlier, VED is for the use of the vehicle on the road and generally clogging up the place, you can use it off the road (ie. private land) as much as you want without having a VED disc thing. Afterall you dont pay VED on petrol or diesel generators do you?
I think i might invent VBD for road use, its based on how many Bananas you can carry and how quickly you could transport them a set distance, therefore effectiveley taxing big cars and fast ones equally, especially big fast ones! and not penalising cyclists at all as we can only carry about 4 and only slowly at that. Makes about as much sense as the current system.
Yes, I did realise, though it may not have been obvious. I expect if your suggestion was implemented there would be a flurry of companies making P60 holders. Knog's would be colourful and squidgy (easy to spot when the need arose) while the Rapha offering (probably black with pink detailing) would be 'reassuringly expensive'.
I'm not sure that many people iron their tyres any more so can't see a market for portable ones
PAVEMENT TAX and PEDESTRIANS
What i would like to know is this. If drivers think they pay for roads and the right to use them, who do they think pays PAVEMENT TAX? and why don't pedestrians walk around with Pavement Tax discs on their foreheads?
Pages