New Transport Minister convicted in 2009 of careless driving in incident that left cyclist with broken neck

"Immediately following the incident in April 2008, he had told police that the road was clear – a claim that was disproved through CCTV evidence."

Isn't that perjury, the **** got of lightly.

So he runs over a cyclist with his SUV, breaks his neck, lies about it, and gets off scot free, he's probably a millionaire, £400+£200 is a joke.

David Cameron is desperate, which is why this clown has been given a post for which he is so obviously ill-suited. If the Labour Party has any teeth, when the matter of road safety is discussed in the house, he will be the subject of sustained barracking.

The moral of this story (and the other article) seems to be if you get squeezed by a car and clip his wing mirror stop, drag motorist out of car and break his bloody neck it will only cost you £50.

"Hopefully you don't think that cyclists who hit a 'normal' car's front wing just go sailing serenely over the bonnet"

Actually that happened to me once. I flew over the bonnet and more or less landed on my feet.

No injuries to me or damage to my bike, but a huge scratch in the car.

It was my fault

What bothers me is that a man who committed a crime leading to another's injury and lied about it is in a position of power.

Would this have happened if he'd injured the Major in a punch-up after closing time at the Red Lion?

But then there's that Blair chap...

In a 4x4, it's amazing his vision was obscured by anything. But he had time to notice the critical mass of 7-foot tourists and avoid them, but not a cyclist?

We could always adopt that old Tory line 'bring back hanging'...

Looking at the story from yesterday we have:

Careless driving => broken neck and likely permanent damage => £400 fine and 4 points

Careless cycling => wing mirror broken => £350 fine

It's just so wrong that it's funny.

"District Judge Timothy Workman agreed that the manoeuvre Burns was attempting was a difficult one..."

Difficult? Is he a bit "challenged" as a result of inbreeding? I hope he doesn't have to perform any three point turns.

Is a man with a conviction for careless driving, and who considers it appropriate to drive a monster 4x4 in the middle of a city, a suitable chouice for a transport minister? Justine Greening was moved presumably because her highly public opposition to Heathrow Runway 3 (actually 4 - there is already a third runway going NE/SW across the site) called into question her impartiality, manifesto committments notwithstanding. Does not this man's background call similar questions?

And why do they need to drive there anyway? I saw in the news the other night Camerson arriving back at No 10 from the House - by car. It must be all of 300 yards - and parents who drive their kids 500 yds to school (rightly) get stick for it!

Hopefully this will mean he will be more aware of the dangers on the roads in London particually to cyclists.

Cars exiting the Palace of Westminster car park are a real hazard. They always seem to pull out too fast across several lanes to get round Parliament square. I've had a few near misses there.

I'm going to add 'old looking Rovers' to the list of vehicles to give a wide berth to. I'm sure the vast majority of elderly drivers are superb, but I'd still rather not be near them...

No one *has* to drive a Range Rover, we must remember that people who have them *want* to own them, or be seen to own them. Completely unjustifiable cars. If you were in the country you'd have a disco or defender anyway.

In my small cyclist brain anyone in a RR is a cock. I know that's reductive and one of my best friends has one - he is definitely a cock when he's driving it!

List of cars automatically given a wide berth and a cock ranking:

Range Rovers
BMW X?
Audis over A4
New minis
Addison Lee anything
Private Hire anything
Anything with dark windows
People carriers in North London
Anything white with panels
Turning trucks
Scooters

But I digress.

Yes, actually I think AV Lowe might have a point. At least he's (hopefully) felt the guilt of injuring someone. Empathy is a good quality in a politician.

londonplayer> Why do people need to drive such bloody huge cars in central London?

article> ...hit his head on the *top* of the front wing of the car...
(my emphasis)

Suggests that if he had been driving a lower, "normal", car the victim may have gone straight over the bonnet, and possibly received less severe injuries ?

Over the years, on this web site, we have learned that being convicted of causing serious injuries to someone else does not mean you will go to prison, as long as you cause those injuries with your car. Nor does it mean you will be prevented from using your car again. But now it turns out it doesn't even prevent you from becoming a transport minister! What a ridiculous omnishambles. All I can say is that The Thick of It is back on this weekend. Watch that, enjoy it, but don't ever, ever think anything will change for the better, because it won't. Not from where we, as a species, have got ourselves. The people get the government they deserve. Personally, I'm hoping for a massive asteroid strike - then, maybe, in a few million years, something more rational will have evolved from the cockroaches or something. Goodbye, good luck, peace out.

"as he drove his Range Rover"

Why do people need to drive such bloody huge cars in central London?

One way to look at this is that at least the new minister will have an acute personal awareness of poor road design in London, and the particularly bad access for the HoC car park, where a rapidly arriving or departing official car has to cut through a milling crowds looking up at Big Ben's tower, occasionally assisted by the Police on duty.

Perhaps a Road Safety campaign based on all road users using their eyes more effectively is on the card. A campaign there methinks?