Please note our live blog can sometimes be slow to load. If it seems to be taking too long, try refreshing your browser.
- News

Live blog: Active travel campaigners slam Budget, Italian ex-pro dies in plane crash, £330 Bournemouth prom cycling fine + more

Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
21 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@Mr Blackbird It's quite a skill.
@Terry Hutt good point, although while doing testing without a helmet I broke my shoulder and have suffered various other contusions. So I suggest the control should not be "no helmet" as in my experience that adds the confounding variable of your other limbs and appendages as (for some) instinct will mean you sacrifice them to protect your head...
@mdavidford or the highly skilled cycle football / radball players...
@No Reply dunno about childish, but I haven't heard that one since the 90s. Can't say I miss it.
Bit harsh on the BMXers.
@No Reply Er, nope - there are no age restrictions on the site. As previously noted, though, if it were restricted to adults, your choice of language would seem to mark you out as someone who shouldn't be on it.
@Mr Blackbird This is an adult forum. If adults are getting so worked up over the term bum chum, then they need to get a grip. People have a right to be offended, people have a right to offend. But if someone finds offence in something, it doesn’t mean its offensive. It means they are offended. Two different things. I am as free to offend as you are to feel offended. Freedom of speech. Do you want to silence freedom of speech? Or just silence things you don’t like?
@No Reply You obviously have a lot of knowledge of cyclo cross and make a valid point, but why detract from your comment by using a phrase that is probably offensive to the majority of readers?
@chrisonabike I think the important message here is that your head will fly 20% further if you are wearing a collapsible helmet. Has anyone researched how far your head will fly if you're not wearing a helmet at all? Seems worthy of a research grant.
Any cyclist caught cycling backwards (on a non-fixed wheel bike) should be jailed for at least 2 years and have their bike confiscated. Such a despicable manoeuvre is dangerously confusing to motorists and pedestrians.
21 thoughts on “Live blog: Active travel campaigners slam Budget, Italian ex-pro dies in plane crash, £330 Bournemouth prom cycling fine + more”
Ermm – they do understand
Ermm – they do understand that “£420m for potholes in today’s Budget” is total and utter f-ing peanuts, right??

Same old shit, different day.
Same old shit, different day. So you can beat someone up, attack with your killing weapon of choice and get no charges but a cyclist on the prom gets a bigger slap than someone distracted driving or speeding.
Fucking ridiculous!
£330! Totally
£330! Totally disproportionate. This driver was under the influence of drugs, put other road users at risk but was fined about the same, even if he did have to do some community service https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/17001272.drug-swipe-on-driver-in-boscombe-gave-positive-result-for-cannabis/?ref=ar
Mind you, they did the right thing with this idiot https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/16986349.mitchell-stuart-drove-his-porsche-at-55mph-near-lilliput-c-of-e-infant-school/?ref=ar “He is one of those start-up child prodigies.” I think they meant one of those upstart children.
£330 fine is rediculous when
£330 fine is rediculous when compared with what drivers get for more dangerous offences, however, the cyclist was stupid to get back on his bike after being informed of the ban. When taking into account the situation and that he was let off and then decided to try and take advantage he probably deserved a good chunk of what he got.
ClubSmed wrote:
Fixed that
ClubSmed wrote:
Such as running over an elederly man who’d fallen into the road, despite the car 100m ahead managing to swerve around him, while driving your car with a defective headlamp, on the (handsfree) phone to your boyfriend arranging to meet up (presumably for some rumpy pumpy), failing to stop, turning around, coming back, and then skulking away when spotting it was in fact a person she’d hit (as she suspected, despite having said she thought it was rubbinh but suspected it was a person – go figure that out).
Depriving a family of a family member and she’s fined 500 for leaving the scene, not for the intial accident, or the defective lights.
Random thought in response to
Random thought in response to the Bournemouth article; does dabbing count as cycling? That somewhat archaic practice of having one foot on a pedal and using the other to scoot along like a scooter user?
kil0ran wrote:
Given that even pushing a bike down the pavement is technically illegal – you should carry it – I would imagine “dabbing” would also fall foul of this.
vonhelmet wrote:
I don’t believe that pushing a bike is technically illegal – got any references for that?
From this article http://www.bikehub.co.uk/featured-articles/cycling-and-the-law/ :
Scooting on a bike (I’m pretty sure that dabbing is something entirely different in modern vernacular) would thus be considered to be riding it.
vonhelmet wrote:
Not true https://www.cyclinguk.org/cycle/scooting-cycling
kil0ran wrote:
Scooting, or dabbing as you call it, is as far as I know, technically legal as you aren’t riding the bike. I’m sue I’ve read legal opinion about this, but perhaps someone with more knowledge than me could elucidate?
Found this, https://www.cyclinguk.org/cycle/scooting-cycling which makes it clear that pushing your bike with both feet on the ground is definitely legal.
Cycling back towards
Cycling back towards Greenwich from Bethnal Green the other night, 11.30pm, going through Greenwich foot-tunnel I got an earful from a drunk woman walking the opposite way to me because I was cycling through. She stepped out in front of me to stop me, shouting at me to get off my bike. OK, strictly speaking, the rules say don’t cycle (they also state you’re meant to walk on the left, and she wasn’t, but I digress). There needs to be some kind of proportion (as I tried to explain to her). It was an empty tunnel, apart from her. At 11.30pm I’m not causing anyone any harm by cycling. “What about small children walking in here” she ranted. I looked up and down the deserted tunnel and looked bemused. At busy times, during the day I’ll always get off the bike and walk. That evening I’d come across so much agressive driving on the streets of east london, I couldn’t help thinking, as this angry woman ranted at me, we have our perspectives all messed up.
£330 is too lenient.
£330 is too lenient.
People who think they are above the law should, and will, be made to pay, entitled cyclists are no exception.
A440 wrote:
I’d be happy to agree if the same standards were applied to motorists as well.
A440 wrote:
Ooh, Charles Bronson! Go on, baby, make me pay! Make me pay ’til I beg for more! Wear your superhero mask for me, big boy!
The full Herald on Sunday
The full Herald on Sunday piece is truly appalling. (They don’t appear to have made it available online.)
“…cyclists are allowed to run riot on our roads, never signalling, rarely obeying traffic lights or pedestrian crossings, and often exceeding 20mph speed limits in towns or wobbling along on 60mph country roads, causing drivers on blind bends to have heart attacks.”
“They cause cars to overtake into oncoming traffic, but don’t give a damn as long as they get to practise their smug hobby and display their disturblingly distended calf muscles.”
“Humour” indeed…
PS – sad farwell to Norman Sheil – Class rider – brilliant coach – nice guy who had little time for the UK “blazer brigade”
JohnnyRemo wrote:
Oh how I love this one: a clear confession that the driver is not in control of their car and hence had no way of preventing it from swerving into the oncoming traffic.
rkemb wrote:
It’s the sense of entitlement that does it. “The speed limit is 30mph, therefore I am entitled to travel at 30mph no matter what.” Well, no, that’s not how it works.
rkemb wrote:
I think we’d always assumed motor vehicles were like bicycles (short of a mechanical failure, the rider is completely in control of them) when clearly they’re actually more like horses (and horsists are constantly reminding us that they have very little control over their two tonnes of very nervous and jumpy still-almost-wild animal).
Cycling UK and Sustrans are
Cycling UK and Sustrans are right, and this budget is yet another disaster for active travel and sustainable travel. £30bn for roads and £650m for alternatives to driving, which is exactly the inverse of what it should have been. This government has gone way beyond hopeless, hurtled past totally incompetent and is currently at abysmal.
I stand corrected – I was
I stand corrected – I was misinformed.