- 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
Lord Sugar at the Cycle Show (copyright Simon MacMichael).jpg"You're nicked!" Lord Sugar sparks debate on whether cyclists should carry compulsory ID
Lord Sugar has ignited a debate over whether cyclists in the UK, like those in some parts of the US, should be required to carry identification with police being given powers to confiscate the bicycles of those who fail to provide it, but the government has said it has no plans to do so.
The Amstrad founder and host of the BBC show The Apprentice, himself a keen cyclist and owner of a fleet of Pinarello bikes, was speaking yesterday during a debate in the House of Lords following a question about pavement cyclists tabled by Labour peer Lord Harrison.
This morning Lord Sugar added to his earlier comments by saying he believed cyclists should carry ID so police could check the identity of those committing offences such as riding through red lights or cycling on the pavement, but also because of its value should a cyclists suffer a mishap that rendered them unconscious.
Lord Sugar, who regularly cycles both in Britain and when saying at his other homes in both Spain and Florida, asked government transport spokesman Lord Atlee, "Is it mandatory for a cyclist using the roads to carry some form of identification on them?”
"In the United States of America we are told to carry identification with us so that the police can take action against people who are riding on pavements or jumping lights.
"If you don't have identification with you, they confiscate your bike and it is up to you to go and get it back and pay a big fine."
In reply, Lord Atlee, who is the grandson of the Labour Prime Minister Clement Attlee, said the government had no plans to introduce such a requirement.
Speaking this morning on BBC Breakfast, Chris Peck, policy co-ordinator at national cyclists’ organisation CTC, said; “We’re very pleased to see the government has no intention” of requiring cyclists to carry identification.
“We feel it’s a completely disproportionate to measure to take,” he continued. “We don’t force people to carry ID in this country, it’s a very different attitude to identification that they have in the US or other parts of Europe.
“Pedestrians don’t have to carry identification. Even in a car, you don’t have to have your driving licence with you at all times, you have to present it if you’re challenged by the police at a police station at a later date, so this wouldn’t really be a very suitable or sensible thing to do, we feel.
“It’s disproportionate because simply the number of people being injured by cyclists doing the wrong thing is so minimal compared to the dangers presented by motor vehicles, and we feel that the solution to this is to have lots more traffic police out on the streets trying to tackle problems for everyone.”
“Cyclists fall into a middle ground between motor vehicle users and pedestrians. Are we going to do it to kids as well as adults? Where do you draw the line? A lot of people have passports, most people have driving licences.
“We don’t actually have an identification system in this country that we can force people to adopt, and if we brought it in for cyclists, that would mean an enormous amount of bureaucracy being created, at huge cost to the Exchequer. I think that’s why the government is unwilling to do this.
“What we’d like to see is the existing regulations enforced better, more police out there on the junctions where cyclist are seen to be jumping red lights, catching red light jumping there. They would also pick up all the motor vehicles doing exactly the same thing. 49 per cent of cars in 30mph areas were breaking the speed limit last year. It’s road user behaviour on a wide scale that we’re looking to improve.”
Lord Harrison’s initial question was inspired by he and his wife encountering a pavement cyclist as they left a Chinese restaurant in Chester who told them “with an entirely straight face that, as he had no lights on his bike, he was obliged to ride on the pavement.”
In response to his initial question, Lord Attlee said that there had been “680 reported personal injury road accidents involving cyclists on the footway on GB roads” during 2010, although he added that the Department for Transport did not record who had been at fault in those.
He added that during the same year, some 342 cyclists faced magistrates’ courts proceedings in connection with cycling on pavements, adding that the offence was usually dealt with through fixed penalty notices, which weren’t recorded centrally.
He added: "Education is more important than enforcement, especially with youngsters. Frankly it is not realistic to issue a fixed-penalty notice to a 10-year-old."
Labour peer Lord Young, who said he cycled to the House of Lords each day pointed out: “I experience many irresponsible motorists on my journeys.
“There are motorists who think it is okay to overtake on a humpbacked bridge and those who think it is okay to go on the wrong side of a traffic island to overtake, not to mention the motorist who kindly almost ran me over on a roundabout earlier this week.”
He also asked Lord Attlee whether he agreed that more people should be encouraged to cycle, “and that we should also be encouraging responsible cycling and driving?”
In reply, Lord Attlee urged all motorists “to regularly read the Highway Code because the contents do change.”
On Twitter this morning, Lord Sugar expanded on his comments yesterday, saying: "Cyclists should carry some form of ID, so they can get nicked by police for jumping pavement or lights. Otherwise they just lie who they are."
He added that carrying ID was also a good idea for cyclists "in case they get knocked off bike in serious accident that might render them unconscious" and that when out riding, he always carried ID, cash for a taxi and a phone.
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
- Cycloid 2 min 52 sec ago
The one thing that makes cycle racing such a great sport is that they put the Usein Bolts in with the Mo Farahs, throw in some mountains, cobbles...
- pockstone 7 min 33 sec ago
Since when was 'split public opinion' any concern of the police? Unless it is the public's opinion of the police themselves.
- JohnnyEnglish 22 min 10 sec ago
Thanks for the review. I like that Orbea have included aero extras and wish more manufacturers would stick two fingers up at the UCI - at least in...
- hawkinspeter 27 min 4 sec ago
Excellent - I think I'll replace my emergency tube that is a real squeeze to get into the little Topeak bottle cage bag thingy....
- arckuk 1 hour 2 min ago
I enjoyed this guy I captured with his hound on New Oxford Street a few years ago.
- chrisonabike 1 hour 3 min ago
That's perspective though - not a small number of americans would consider the current UK government "socialist"....
- Bungle_52 1 hour 4 min ago
I know this is a bit late but one thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is the extra wear and possible damage to the cycle lane surface due to being...
- Patrick9-32 1 hour 48 min ago
*bursts back into the room hours after the conversation has moved on*...
- notMyRealName 1 hour 48 min ago
Damn, that sucks. I generally feel pretty relaxed with my bike on Avanti trains because the compartment is locked and I don't have to worry about...
Add new comment
58 comments
Sugar - you're fired!
C'mon, someone had to say it...
Maybe we should be electronic tagged so that we can be tracked when we commit crimes off the bike too. Seems a logical conclusion really.
If only we knew of an entrepreneur with a background in electronic goods...
It's starting to make sense now
Chipped at birth, mate.
You think I'm joking - give it another couple of decades.
Don't you realise that they have been chipping us for years! Next time you are in Tesco get them to scan the back of your neck.
Oh dear.
I never realised pavement cycling was such a threat to democracy and our security. Is there a country we can invade and subjugate in order to sort this out?
When out on long solo rides I carry a business card with my home number on but I see no reason to carry ID if I'm nipping into town. I don't care what they do in America, they are happy to implement all sorts of reprehensible things, so in my view that country is NOT an example to follow.
While it might seem a bit lame to say that the police should be dealing with 'real' crime. I don't like RLJing and riding without lights. I understand some people have an issue with pavement cyclists, though how this blights their lives to the extent we are expected to believe I'm not sure. However, if the police were equally keen to stop parking on pavements, double yellow lines and zebra crossing zig-zags, clamp down on the 1.7 million uninsured drivers on the roads, on aggressive and dangerous driving, speeding in urban areas etc etc I might consider the henious crimes of jumping red lights to be worthy of a 'crackdown'.
I sometimes cycle on pavements. The alternative is to ride at 5-10 mph along a busy 40mph A-road while my children cycle along the pavement. IMO this does not aid me in my goal of living to a ripe old age (BTW consideration for peds has been drilled into the kids at from the start). If drivers were more considerate and drove more slowly around cyclists all 3 of us could ride on the road.
So as far as I'm concerned uber-MAMIL Alan Sugar can stick his poncey rider ID up his arse. That is, unless he insists that youths in hoodies, middle-aged BMW drivers, motorcyclists, white van drivers and everyone else who steps out of their front door gets one too.
Ha ha! Well said, that man.
I was pushing my 2 year old daughter in the buggy along the pavement on Hoe Street Walthamstow at 4pm when the buggy was hit by a cyclist. Thankfully she was ok, he wasn't going fast, obviously he was going too fast to avoid hitting the buggy, and he didn't have lights, so we didn't see him either.
Actually it's alright for pavement cyclists to ride without lights isn't it? That's what he told me anyway, that's the reason he gave, and that if he was on the road he'd get hit by the cars because they wouldn't see him. Also the Police, well they wouldn't let him on the road either, would they? Not without lights.
I suppose he was a bit apologetic because he kept saying that he didn't mean to nearly kill my baby. Even when I told him to walk the bike on the pavement, he carried on riding it, even though the pavement was full of,...well,... of pedestrians, you tend to get quite a few of them around school kicking out time.
He looked like he was cycling, not for exercise or speed, but because he didn't like walking.
He seemed typical of a pavement cyclist, no lights, no helmet, saddle too low, and on a bike several sizes too small.
I'm sure that if he wasn't riding a bike, he'd probably be on a Camel, an invisible one, you never actually see Camels but you do see the spit trails they leave in their wake. So yes, between dodging the bikes and the spit, they can make pavements quite hazardous on a daily basis.
My thoughts exactly.
You would think that someone in Sugar's position would need to be intelligent and broad-minded. This comment just makes him look like an idiot.
Silly suggestion and an appropriate response.
Should cyclists be obliged to carry I.D?
No, we have no plans for that.
Lord Young seems like a reasonable chap.
Although he says he is a keen cyclist, Lord Sugar sounds like a typical angry motorist. 'Grrr, those pesky cyclists jumping red lights and getting away with it. Fume, fume'.
Compulsory I.D and registration for pedestrians are inappropriate. The same goes for cyclists.
was surprised to hear Sugar being described as a "keen cyclist". Do you reckon he goes out with a bunch of mates every weekend? Can't imagine I'd want to ride with him....
As regards what he says, I can't see how any registration scheme could be made to work, and I am against ID cards. But I can see the day when we'll all (and I mean motorists, cyclists and pedestrians) need liability insurance.
I mean, what do you do if a pedestrian steps out, causes an accident and ruins your bike in the process? Write it off as bad luck?
He has a Pinarello and tries to do two 50-mile rides a week. so yes, he's keen. he likes to ride alone though.
http://www.no-endeavour.cc/2009/06/sod-all-that-have-nice-day-stuff.html
Really, wonder why?
Sugar propagates the notion that the only thing that matters is the "bottom line". Life is reduced to a set of numbers on a balance sheet. Personally I find that approach disgusting so I for one do not listen (or watch).
Have a look at this, regular 60-mile rides, that's pretty keen:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1165492/Sir-Alan-Sugar-reveals...
Tut, tut Garmin kit clashing horribly with the paint job - which, by the way, since we're on the subject of rule-flouting cyclists, is a custom paintjob in honour of one Alejandro Valverde. Oh the irony.
http://vps.road.cc/content/news/18592-alejandro-valverde-youre-fired
He's obviously got a thing for Garmin though, maybe it's the consumer electronics link, here he is in the Mail again modelling (ahem) the 2011 kit.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2026752/Lord-Alan-Sugar-get...
I thought it was Sastre's special paintjob after he won the tour?
Anyway back on topic: what qualifies him to talk publicly on this subject? so he rides a bike occasionally but never to actually get anywhere - for that he has a chauffeur.
Initial paintjob was on Valverde's bike for the 2008 Tour, rush job commemorating him winning the Spanish national RR title the week before.
Sastre won that year's TDF on a Cervelo.
Apologies, of course you're right, I stand corrected.
no, don't worry that won't happen to cycling until Sky get involved with the sport. Oh.
Surprising as it may seem, yes he is a keen cyclist. Alan Sugar is a businessman and a pretty hard nosed one at that. He's astute and not afraid of speaking his mind. That doesn't mean everything he says is a great idea. Because of who he is, people listen though.
I would imagine he starts off with a large group and fires someone ever few miles until there is only one person left with him.....
If you are bothered about being injured and emergency services knowing blood group ICE number and name then by all means carry something - even if in your mobile.
However, going from a voluntary situation to being compelled is streets apart: I can see the 'mission' creep on this to powers the state would love to have over everyone -> from cyclist to pedestrian.
Driving a motor vehicle is one of the few situations the Police can demand to know your name and address on stopping without there being much to go on.
For example: I very nearly got arrested this year for standing my ground when a WPC and her commanding officer - both traffic cops - overstepped the mark in demanding I delete a pic I had taken (I hadn't actually got any shots off) of an accident scene (a wide general view) and later my ID after I stopped my bike at the roadside. Having demanded I delete the pic - I couldn't, obviously but the officer confiscated my mobile (I only had that on me) after I told him as a journalist anything I had is subject to PACE - meaning he needed a court order as it's deemed special material. I only got it back on negotiation but later as I refused to give my ID he wanted to do me for obstruction. Crazy.
Makes good sense to me. It's the most sensible suggestion with regards making cyclists responsible for their actions and much better than other suggestions such as the "cycling test/licence".
I've just bought Dog Tags with basic ID on them and usually carry my wallet with me. I would be happy to be stopped by the Police and have my ID checked. I have nothing to hide.
Cyclists should be held responsible for the offenses they make. In my opinion there's not much difference between car or cycle or pedestrian jumping red light. Perhaps it would be more effective to register bikes ( I don't know if there is such a database in the UK or somewhere else). With that the police officer can write down serial number of the bike and send the fine afterwards.
In my country(Bosnia&Herzegovina)we are obliged to carry an ID at all times, including a drivers licence while driving any vehicle..but in the other hand there are no separate tracks for bicycles, riding is done pretty much anywhere you can, and the system is heavily corrupted. So in what ever way you take it, consider yourself lucky to be living in a law-structured country.
cheers ^^
Commuting as I do every day into Birmingham I see things you just wouldn't want to believe.
Whilst a cyclist jumping a red light (I don't condone this as it upsets other road users and gives "good" cyclists a bad name) probably won't kill anyone, a driver of a car/truck/bus most likely will.
The other day I started to navigate a roundabout with lights, having just got green and checking to my right was okay (it was), I double checked as always only to see a woman driver totally ignore her red light and the fact that other vehicles had stopped. She was talking into her mobile, held in front of her face as they do nowadays, looking down into it. How she didn't crash is beyond me, but more importantly if I hadn't double checked she would hae hit me.
Cars jumping red lights seems to be becoming a common sight these days. It is this that needs to be stopped, not worrying about cyclist not having an id card
I'd be quite happy to see more police on busy road junctions. I'm pretty sure it would benefit cyclists because drivers would be less inclined to sit in the bie box, and they might not barge their way across cyclists when turning left.
And likewise, the stupid irritating cyclists who jump red lights and give the rest of us a bad name would behave too.
Unfortunately to police every junction would be such a ridiculous waste of limited police resources that it will neer happen.
Well, I'm sure some people would prepare themselves with a fake ID in case they got caught cycling illegally, but most wouldn't bother. I know that I (and probably a majority of drivers) sometimes break the speed limit in my car, but I don't feel the need to carry a fake driving licence and register my car to a false name and address - I just accept that, if I do something wrong, I'm likely to pay a fine or some other penalty. I don't buy the idea that very minor criminality is always backed up with more major criminality - it just isn't true.
The main problem seems to be the logistical one - there is no compulsory form of ID in this country. Passports and driving licences aren't mandatory, and none of the other government issued documentation has a photo (e.g. birth certificate). So, whilst I'd be perfectly happy to carry ID with me on my bike (and generally do anyway, as my driving licence is in my wallet), it's not feasible to require people to have a passport or driving licence for cycling, and then we move in to having to hold something akin to a bike licence, which opens up a whole new can of worms.
In conclusion - Lord Sugar in ill thought out statement shocker.
"Cyclists should carry some form of ID, so they can get nicked by police for jumping pavement or lights. Otherwise they just lie who they are"
Is it me or is that one of the most ridiculous things you've ever heard? Not everyone, unlike Lord Alan suggests, is so riddled with criminality that they feel they need to verify who they are should they be arrested or cautioned...
Surely, if you're expecting to get 'nicked by the police' you'd be prepared with some fake or stolen ID (presumably the bike you'd be riding would be stolen also) ?
In a way I can see where he is coming from.
I always wear a roadid because if something were to happen to me I want my family to be with me or notified as soon as possible.
It is a matter of choice though, of course.
Would I be as happy if I had to carry ID in case I was stupid enough to run a red light or cause an accident on a pavement by riding on it?
Personally, yes. but I am not sure everyone wants accountability and responsibility.
Pages