A Conservative councillor has called on the Worcester City Council to introduce mandatory number plates for cyclists in order to “create a level playing field with lorries, vans and cars”, after the popular cycle hire scheme Beryl Bikes was introduced in the city last month.
Councillor Alan Amos, who’s the only remaining Conservative councillor on the Worcester City Council after the Tories lost six of their elected representatives in the 2024 elections, put forward his suggestions to the deputy council leader Jabbar Riaz, arguing that more needs to be done to enforce penalties for cyclists who break the law.
He sought assurances, following the introduction of the Beryl Bike scheme in June, that monitoring will take place to ensure that users do not cycle along the pavements and taxpayers’ money is not used to subsidise the scheme.
Councillor Amos even pointed out where the number plates can be put on the bicycles— the mudguard of the Beryl Bikes. “It’ll have to be fixed there. It’s not an optional extra,” he said, Although adding that the number plates should extend to all cyclists, not just the Beryl Bikes.
He said that he believed cyclists who ride on pavements or ride dangerously should be give penalty points, just like motorists caught breaking the law, reports Worcester News.
Councillor Amos said after the meeting: “I think it should be compulsory for all cyclists to have a number plate which all vehicles on the road have to. My concern is about enforcement.
“All bikes should have a registration number by law so there is a level playing field for any vehicle that uses the road – lorries, cars, vans and bikes. They should all be subject to the same rules.”
He said he saw three cyclists riding along the pedestrianised High Street as he left the meeting at Worcester Guildhall.
“It’s a pedestrianised shopping centre full of elderly people. Some elderly people are hard of hearing and don’t hear the cyclists coming up behind them. Cyclists need to follow the rules like everyone else,” he said.
> Is there anywhere cyclists are required to be licensed, and how has it gone in the past?
A spokesperson for Bike Worcester said in response: “I’ve offered to Alan (and other councillors) on a number of occasions to do a tour of the city by bike (still waiting on the call), so he can see first hand the issues that are faced by people travelling by bike, not least when trying to cross the city centre (we’ve even got an infrastructure safari route which looks at the good and the bad).
“I’m happy to ride my bike on the roads in Worcester, mixing with multiple lanes of motor vehicles (worst case is 4 in a single direction), but have my fair share of interactions with substandard drivers as a result (substandard = antisocial = dangerous = illegal).
“As such I completely understand why many people would choose not to do that, and instead cycle of footways, or through the city centre roads covered by TROs, especially when cycling with children or less confident adults. As a pedestrian including when walking my dog I often encounter children and adults cycling on footways, and all both parties does is avoid each other, usually with a cheery salutation as they pass.
“Not mentioned by Alan or Jabbar is the point that the Highway Code also prohibits driving on the footway, something that is happening near continuously throughout Worcester, in some cases blocking footways when parking, in other cases in the vicinity of pedestrians.”
> “Dangerous cycling” law will be passed following election, Labour and Conservatives confirm
Councillor Riaz said at the meeting: “Cycling on the pavement is in breach of the Highway Code which applies to all road users and all cyclists whether riding a Beryl bike or not and is enforceable by the police.
“There are no specific plans to monitor pavement cycling although data could be made available to police if requested.”
In May, Conservative MP for Shipley, Sir Philip Davies, was the latest high-profile politician to fan the flames of the registration plates for cyclists debate.
In a written question to former Secretary of State for Transport, Mark Harper, he said: “People have been saying to me that there have been incidents of anti-social behaviour involving cyclists and there is no way of tracking those that cause problems or flout the laws of the road.
“They have suggested that if cyclists were forced to have a registration plate it would mean they were identifiable and could resolve the problem as those who chose to cycle in an irresponsible manner would know there will be consequences.”
The former Tory Government had already decided to clamp down on cyclists riding dangerously with the “dangerous cycling” bill, that was passed in the House of Commons but was then eventually shelved following the announcement of the general elections.
However, the bill received cross-party backing, and is expected to be brought back by the new Labour government, despite the current Secretary of State for Transport Louise Haigh being a recent convert of cycling, and just earlier today posted on Twitter that she’s been enjoying Laura Laker’s book on cycling ‘Potholes and Pavement’, calling it “eye-opening and instructive”.
This isn’t the first time registration plates for cyclists have been suggested by a Conservative politician in the UK. Two years ago, then-transport secretary Grant Shapps threw British cyclists into a state of frenzy by announcing his wishes of cyclists having insurance, carrying licence plates on their bikes, and being subject to the same speed limits as motorists.
And then in a hasty U-turn, the Tory cabinet minister appeared to contradict his widely-reported pledge to enforce tougher rules, just hours later saying that he was “not attracted to bureaucracy” of number plates for cyclists.
90 thoughts on “Councillor suggests mandatory number plates and penalty points for cyclists — so that bikes are on “level playing field with lorries, vans and cars””
This will never go anywhere
This will never go anywhere for one simple reason. Number plates don’t stop motorists breaking the law.
alexuk wrote:
This will never go anywhere because vehicle registration is not done at city council level. A city councillor should know this.
A Tory city councillor. They
A Tory city councillor. They’ve abandoned reason and policy and instead they have bet their electoral future on culture wars.
He’s a Tory, silly.
He’s a Tory, silly.
Silly comment. While I’ve
Silly comment. While I’ve never voted Tory in 50 years of voting, I’m fully aware that there are many Labour councillors at least as bad as Amos
It would be dumb to have to
It would be dumb to have to register each bicycle. And on most bikes there’s nowhere to mount a plate that would be large enough to be visible at a distance
It would make more sense to register the rider ie have to wear a number plate on your back, but a level playing would require that of drivers also, and for the plate to be visible at all times. This would negate all the nonsense with the notice of intended prosecution and people claiming that they weren’t driving the vehicle. The whole system as it stands is stupid and registering bicycles is utterly ridiculous.
Cyclists have been wanting a
Cyclists have been wanting a level playing field with motor vehicles for decades. Something tells me that number plates won’t magically give us the equality in the road that we are craving.
Sorry to say, we’ve probably
Sorry to say, we’ve probably got several years of this from the Tories, while they sort out their internal conflicts, before they get back in contention for power and start going after scapegoats that can be blamed for more wider societial issues. Until then, bashing cyclists keeps them getting coverage, as journos love the engagement that it gets from the phalanx of Clarkson wannabes in the comments sections of the Daily Mail and local newspaper web sites.
In terms of local politics
In terms of local politics they’re really all as bad as each other, ive seen Labour councillors locally claim cyclists are a self entitled lycra brigade who do more harm to the road network with their constant demands to have free road space.
I guess Sir Keir won’t be asking them to speak at the next party conference.
In terms of local politics
In terms of local politics they’re really all as bad as each other,
I disagree with that, and this comment resembles those which come from Tory apologists.
Yet another of the locals who
Yet another of the locals who wakes up every morning shouting “tories, tories”. Get a grip. And no I do not vote Tory however I do wish people like you werent intent on turning every public forum into an echo chamber.
Possibly more Tories are like
Possibly more Tories are like Amos than Labour, but plenty of Labour councillors I’ve known of and known personally over 40 years have been at least as anti-cycling as Amos
OK- so all you have to do now
OK- so all you have to do now is find verifiable evidence of a Labour MP and a Labour councillor advocating number plates for cyclists (see heading of topic), as opposed to unverifiable statements about how you ‘have personally’ known these dreadful anti-cyclist Labour councillors over 40 years and have never voted Tory in 50 years.
Active travel is very low on
Active travel is very low on most people’s agendas, never mind cycling. Then there are some quite bonkers antis everywhere in the political spectrum. And as ktache points out not only does this chap have a selection of … unusual views but has swung between parties himself!
All that said there have been quite a few examples of Conservative councillors in particular apparently relishing being “the nasty party ” on active travel. Could it just be a selection effect by road.cc or is there something further?
A lot of the more mad stuff
A lot of the more mad stuff seemed to be the result of a government that knew it was on its last legs desperately hoping to find something that would get people talking that wasn’t all of their many other failures. Unfortunately it did get (some) people talking, and while I think we’ll see less of this driven by senior Tories, the ‘war on motorists’ and anti-cycling mentality is something that will stick with some.
But yes, it’s only fair to say that anti-cycling rhetoric is not exclusive to the Tories (or Reform), and while the senior politicians from other parties might be more sensible, the lack of meaningful enthusiasm for active travel remains pervasive and there will always a few at a local local cllrs that think they are being a man of the people (it is almost always men) by raising concerns about cyclists on behalf of the old ladies the motoring lobby claims to care about.
The Uxbridge bi-election had a lot to answer for. The idea that the general public was anti-clean air/cycling and that politicians needed to be more pro-car has, I hope, been proven to be incorrect. We need to remind politicians of all persuasions that the politicians that rallied against active travel are the ones that lost their jobs.
FionaJJ wrote:
There was a bit of that – but
a) unfortunately this provoked Labour to follow (strategy seemed to be “hug the opponent close”)
b) bit like a certain other issue of the last decade while there was a recent focus on this there are clearly enough politicians with firm long-term anti-views. Or who – at best – think this is a waste of time/energy if not a vote-loser. Or perhaps it’s “don’t really care about active travel, but absolutely not going to challenge motoring culture and priveledges”.
Things have been announced but then not pursued, or effectively parked / funding removed. That has been a pattern for more than just a couple of years: see the comprehensive review of road offences (announced 2014), Road Safety Investigation Branch, Gear Change (2020), funding for eg. Active Travel England (seems to be sidelined)… (there are others)
Well … yes, but I doubt that’s the lesson that will stand out to the politicos. And due to current money troubles it seems they’re going to be rather keen on investment from private industry / “growth” . That doesn’t suggest to me that things will leap forward for active travel, rather the opposite.
i really hope I’m mistaken!
Alas, once certain paranoid
Alas, once certain paranoid views are out there, trying to undo the harm will be akin to putting the toothpaste back in the tube. The best we can hope for is that the heat will gradually dissipate from the argument. Regardless of what any politicians do or say going forward (and some will continue to agitate), every council announcement of spending on active transport will be met with predictable complaints, often from people who don’t even live in that area.
Hopefully at least some of them will get bored of complaining, and council officers and councillors won’t give them undue attention.
I think they just trawl
I think they just trawl newspapers for stories and Tory councillors have an inate ego for self promotion, so the two things collide.
But I’ve spent probably best part of 25 years talking to local councillors of all political persuasions about active travel & cycling and absolutely very few get it properly, but certainly among the 3 main parties there’s often wafer thin differences in outlook on it.
We had a Lib Dem councillor lead opposition to a proposed LTN inspite of overwhelming support from local residents. Consequently the Tory council who had funding for it & had suggested it, scrapped the idea.
So this idea that all Tories are raving anti bike nuts whilst Labourites or Lib Dems are fully on board, maybe it’s the flavour of politics oop north, but it’s not my experience.
Tories don’t matter for the
Tories don’t matter for the foreseeable, which is the good thing from my point of view. We can pivot from rearguard actions fighting BS to trying to get stuff done.
The one to look forward to is the Local Elections in 2025.
In Notts / Derby we are now Tory MP free (except one, and the Leeanderthal Man), Tory Mayor free, and Tory PCC free (the new one in Notts is not yet even banned from driving, like the last one).
Councillors getting a haircut next year.
ubercurmudgeon wrote:
But we’ve just had fourteen years of it, so are you suggesting that there are only another couple of years to go? I beg to differ, and it seems unlikely that the tories will suddenly become sensible any time soon, or even in the next few years.
I think we’d all welcome a
I think we’d all welcome a level playing field where death by motorist is as rare as with a cyclist, where motorists are no longer seriously injuring hundreds of people a day and destroying lives with impunity.
Lets make a level playing where pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders, mobility users have the same safety to go about their journey and get to their destination as those driving cars.
Those are the level playing fields that really matter, putting all human lives before the convenience of motorists.
I’d love to see a level
I’d love to see a level playing field where the spend on cycling infrastucture and facilities is the same as the spend motorists get on their infrastucture & facilities.
Time to move on, Alan, just
Time to move on, Alan, just suck it up. No one is interested.
more needs to be done to
more needs to be done to enforce penalties for cyclists who break the law
Possibly, as soon as something is done to enforce penalties on drivers who break the law. This driver, of whom I have numerous photos and who is regularly seen driving around Garstang, drives a vehicle with no VED for 61/2 years and which previously had no MOT for over 6 years and a failed MOT for 6 months. The police must have been working really hard at looking the other way. The vehicle has been reported by me for over a year, and the PCC has known about the vehicle for almost 9 months.
Raise a complaint against the
Raise a complaint against the police force. Their stats for complaints are subject to more rigorous checking than reports of RTA offences. I had cause to report a local who decided to have the same index plate on his Bentley and his Range Rover. No response from local police on this, until I raised a complaint that there was no response. I was promptly contacted (several times) and assured that the matter was being dealt with. It was. I saw an ARV at the premises within a couple of hours after the complaint had been posted. Pester them with a complaint aginst inaction and report to the office of the Police Commisioner.
You must be new if you have
You must be new if you have just come across wtjs and lancs police !
You must be new if you have
You must be new if you have just come across wtjs and lancs police !
I’m hurt! It’s almost as if you think I’m always harping on about the hopelessly ineffective, useless, bent, lying b******s. As for those who think making a complaint to the police about the police is something the long suffering victims haven’t already thought of…
https://upride.cc/incident/md68fwc_apcovernight_whitelinecross/
I think this was the first video submission where I made a complaint about the decision to take no action. The official response to the complaint was that they had to have confirmatory video from the APC vehicle, and there wasn’t any so they couldn’t do anything. There was a camera in the van, but ‘it wasn’t working’. There was an additional feature- I pointed out the oncoming Ford that the Transit had to swerve in to avoid (closing speed at least 60mph)- the official response said ‘the driver of the other vehicle was not contacted’
Then there’s complaining to the PCC about the police. Everything, and this may depend on the particular PCC, that you want to complain about turns out to be ‘an operational decision of the police which the PCC cannot interfere with’, even if it’s vehicles driving around Lancashire for months and years without MOT/ failed MOT, red light offences, mobile phone offences etc., and the police refuse to take action- that, in Lancashire, is an operational decision of the police. Like this- no response, no action
https://upride.cc/incident/px12dnd_stagecoach42_closepass/
Genuine question, have you
Genuine question, have you report to DVLA about the car in question rather than the police?
It may be the police that will ultimately take action, but getting the gov’t dept that is actually due the money may be rhe quicker way to ensure clamping and towing.
https://contact.dvla.gov.uk/report-untaxed-vehicle
DVLA is determined to NOT
DVLA is determined to NOT know about VED fraud/ evasion because there are so many offenders. I have been reporting these for several years, including WU59 UMH, and I think none of them have been acted upon. They just can’t be bothered, as is evident from your ‘link’ which gives no means of sending GPS dated photos, or anything else except the number of the vehicle. This must be one of the most inept government departments – if they had even worked out how to read their own database, they would identify many thousands of people whose vehicles have been MOT’d but have no VED.
I don’t report VED evasion to
I don’t report VED evasion to the police because there are so many of them even in a tiny part of N Lancashire, and because the police openly declare that it’s nothing to do with them and refer everybody to DVLA, which just bins the reports. WU59 UMH was an exception because he had no MOT for over 6 years as well. I have a list of vehicles regularly seen, with no VED for years and years
Councillor Alan Amos.
Councillor Alan Amos.
If you look like a twit and you sound like twit, then maybe you are a twit?
Good man – let’s get the
Good man – let’s get the level playing field – some suggestions:
I like the Tory idea of a level playing field… There must be a reason why the german word “Tor” translates to “fool”…
No driving on the footpath
These number plates just don
These number plates just don’t seem to work with drivers, do they? Maybe the police would take more action over Terror-Cyclists! It’s just another stupid-moron Tory councillor hoping to receive all the votes from the equally stupid moron voters
“They should all be subject
“They should all be subject to the same rules.”
So that’s tachographs, speed limiters, max 56 mph, no using the outside lane of 3 or more lane mways, reduced speeds on non mways.
Of course no pavement parking as we wouldn’t want people driving on the pavement.
56?
56?
I think you mean 15mph from motor to match e-bikes.
Oh and a max continuous power output of 250w (about half what the first production car could manage…)
Hirsute wrote:
25kmh is the speed limit for e-bikes. doesn’t he want a level playing field?
So he wants a “level playing
So he wants a “level playing field with lorries, vans and cars” eh?
I think that’s a very good idea. Cyclist should get the same priority lorries, vans, and cars do when infrastructure is designed, the same level of safety they have with their airbags seatbelts and crumple zones (of course this will have to be provided through proper design of infrastructure since such safety tech isn’t available on bikes), etc.
This councillor sounds like a genius!
To level the playing field,
To level the playing field, motorists should have to use mandatory shared paths with pedestrians so they have to drive at 3mph navigating past dogs on or off extended tripwire leads pushchairs and lamposts dotted in the middle.
Right-wing “logic”, again …
Right-wing “logic”, again …
But then you’ve got to be quite off the rocker to be a right-winger anyway.
Cycling on footways should
Cycling on footways should not be an issue for anyone, I rarely do so, however, I have arthritis in my knees and, whereas cycling is therapeutic, walking any distance is not, so I sometimes have no option. When I do so it’s at walking pace! Also there are road situations which, for safety, demand it; near me is a steep hill on a narrow road, halfway up there are traffic lights on a very short time cycle, if try to join the queue on the roadway, you’ll find vehicle drivers will not wait for you to struggle up the hill and you’ll be taking you life in your hands; you go up the pavement at walking pace. Luckily our police generally understand these problems, SO LONG AS YOU TAKE CARE!
It’d be great to have bikes
It’d be great to have bikes in the class of mobility vehicles – but possibly it’s a case of “but then a few people spoil it for everyone” (e.g. maybe for commercial gain)?
In the UK so often it ends up non-motorised interests “fighting over scraps” after we’ve allocated the lion’s share to the motor vehicles without questioning this. If you do question this it’s suddenly “won’t you think of older people / what about those with disabilities / cyclists are a threat to those with visual impairments“…
I believe the ultimate “answer” (if there is such a thing) is simply to enable efficient wheeled mobility for everyone; mostly separate from people on foot and definitely separate from motor traffic of much speed and volume. I’ve potentially got some decades left but not sure I will live to see that in the UK though. (It’s cyclic – we were “considering/investigating cycling” with the National Cycling Strategy 28+ years ago, we rushed back for the latest round in 2021…).
Perhaps I’ll end up migrating somewhere more suitable?
The councillor’s Wikipedia
The councillor’s Wikipedia entry makes for interesting reading.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Amos
Crumbs. What one might call a
Crumbs. What one might call a somewhat chequered career, to say the least…
He seems to defect to
He seems to defect to whichever party is in government. Clearly power hungry rather than principled
I was cycling through St
I was cycling through St Pancras last Friday and a phone zombie stepped out in front of me. I swerved and the Zombie glanced up, sneered, and carried on crossing even though the lights were green for me and red for her. I think it’s time to put number plates on pedestrians so that there is an equal playing field for all road users.
No, just numberplates on
No, just numberplates on headphones. But let’s be sensible – they can use the smaller bicycle type plates – the car-sized ones are too heavy… 😉
There should be a pavement
There should be a pavement tax for pedestrians, who should have to wear a hi viz tabard with their registration showing they’re allowed to use the pavement.
With that logic we should
With that logic we should introduce number plates for pedestrians so we know who they are when they are being antisocial, especially if they make their getaway unseen on a bicycle
karlssberg wrote:
don’t give them ideas
Anyone whose argument for
Anyone whose argument for more requirements on cyclists is based on creating a level playing field should be asked if they are therefore calling for all the same requirements on lorries and lorry drivers to apply to cars and car drivers.
After watching Dr Brian Klaas
After watching Dr Brian Klaas explain about highly functioning psychopaths, I get it now
https://youtu.be/BJIOLTMitK4?si=8K1gUTwrTktY2sjm
Ive only read the head line
Ive only read the head line but are we honestly here again
‘in order to “create a level
‘in order to “create a level playing field with lorries, vans and cars”’
Does the proposal also include adding a tonne or two of boxy metal with crumple bars so that we don’t have to die on impact? All at no expense to the taxpayer, of course. Tool.
I’m more concerned that his
I’m more concerned that his “opinions” are actually given coverage. It seems everytime a random Councillor makes a poorly constructed comment, it is reported in the local press, when it should be consigned to the bin with all of the other rubbish….
He’s a Tory, there could only
He’s a Tory, there could only be 1 left in the whole country and the UK press would still print every word like its gospal, but we dont have biased press in the uk…… honest
Does the councillor have any
Does the councillor have any objection to council money being used to subsidise drivers?
Since we want a “level playing field” I propose
motor vehicles have the same speed limit as e-bikes in urban environments, not just posted on signs mechanically limited so they don’t have a momentary lapse and exceed the limit.
tacographs on all cars to ensure drivers are not doing too many hours in one go, and taking their required breaks on the motorway.
It’s only a speed limit on
It’s only a speed limit on motor assistance – they’d be free to push them as fast as they like.
You may not be aware that at
You may not be aware that at some time in last few months, 20 on a white background in a red circle now means ‘Advisory minimum speed’. Driving around SE London at 20 mph, I’m constantly getting overtaken as I can’t find documentation about the change.
Before Covid lockdown and a heart attack, I helped with the community speed gun team. It made a significant difference to most driver behaviour though it didn’t affect the complete nutters
‘Conservativce counciller
‘Conservative counciller says… ‘ stories – it’s like shooting fish in a barrel isn’t it.
“He said that he believed
“He said that he believed cyclists who ride on pavements or ride dangerously should be give penalty points, just like motorists caught breaking the law, reports Worcester News.”
Giving him the benefit of the doubt for a second I presume he’s thought this through and that he wants those penalty points added to Cycling Licences, administered by the CVLA? And that cyclists will need to pass a cycling test before being allowed to ride a bicycle without another licenced driver on the same vehicle? And that cyclists are not allowed on public roads until the age 17?
Just no.
I can’t resist this! Warning:
I can’t resist this! Warning: this message contains attitudes of the time of its writer. I’ve just made a spot- it’s an orange car, with flowers (or something small and colourful) around the periphery of the number plate (making it illegal, but illegal plates are routine around here), the male driver has an ear-ring and the plate is **59 GAY, and it’s obviously much newer than a 09 car
Given all taxpayers who don’t
Given all taxpayers who don’t own cars are the ones subsidising motorists, does the councillor want to retract his comments “asked the council to not use taxpayers’ money to subsidise the scheme”… ?
I won’t hold my breath.
Funnily enough, while on my
Funnily enough, while on my commute home today, on this fabulous Glasgow bank Holiday, I was thinking similar about how car users believe themselves in the majority (because they are on the road) but are actually in a very small minority of the population of not only those that drive vs don’t, but those in the populace even that hold drivers licences.
I appreciate the drift (and
I appreciate the drift (and certainly people who actually regularly drive are likely in a minority because kids, older people, those whose medical conditions don’t permit it, those who can’t afford to own / run / store a car etc).
… BUT I think there are more licence holders than you think (I was wrong on this also) – national travel survey 2022 records that 75% of people aged 17 and over have a full driving licence.
I have postulated the theory
I have postulated the theory that the tories are engaged in a competition to be the most rabidly lunatic out of touch person, and I now contend that the theory is proved.
one Tory Councillor too many.
one Tory Councillor too many. They should have registration plates attached to their backs so we can hold them accountable for what they say and do.
It should be noted that at
It should be noted that at the time Cllr Amos left the meeting in the evening the TRO which prohibits cycling in the city centre wasn’t in force, as it is only applies between the hours of 10:00 and 18:00.
its likely he also saw delivery vehicle as well.
Is it me that all
Is it me that all Conservatives are out of touch with reality and don’t know what other people actually are?
Another future dictator we should avoid at the minimum having a voting place on a council position.
In the book, All The
In the book, All The President’s Men, it says how they didn’t check out one of Nixon’s heavies because he rode a bike into work. They assumed cyclist, therefore good guy. Boris Johnson rode a bike everywhere at all times of day and night in London. Bad people can, and do, ride bicycles
Yet never a mention of the
Yet never a mention of the 150 cyclists killed on the roads each year. Cycling on pavements should be fully legal, that will save far more lives. If victims are who they are campaigning for what about the dozens who would be alive today if cycling on the pavements was allowed? And as for number plates to reduce crime – we would need to first give pedestrians number plates because all street stabbings, assaults and rapes are carried out by pedestrians who are just as unidentifiable as someone on a bike.
You might cycle carefully on
You might cycle carefully on pavement to allow for my partially sighted and mobility challenged friends and relatives and my grandchildren in buggies and my pregnant daughter and d-i-l, but remarkable few cyclists and ebikers on pavements are careful.
What about bringing back UK
What about bringing back UK-wide licences for dogs- who are regularly antisocial and don’t follow the rules like everybody else- but with fixed registration plates for i.d (since one miniature Italian greyhound looks much like the next one) and points on their licence for naughtiness? Not to mention cats, who I regularly see exceeding acceptable speed limits around pedestrians.
Certainly restrict cats.
Certainly restrict cats. Neuter them all and let them die off. Cat poo stopping grandchildren playing in garden. So far, deterrents tried don’t work as well as promised
If I am made to have a
If I am made to have a registration plate on my bike and be placed in the same bracket as motor cars, motorbikes and trucks. Then I’ll be riding slap bang in the middle of the carriageway every time I go out. I envisage a long queue of irate motorists behind me complaining.
Fear not – it’s not going to
Fear not – it’s not going to happen outside the crazed fantasies of Tory berserkers seeking to compete with Braverman etc. for the extreme wing of the party. The police can’t cope with red light and mobile phone offences, white line offences, vehicles without MOT and VED, speeding… never mind the ones they’re definitely not interested in such as offences against cyclists. They might like to ‘throw the book’ at cyclists, but the hard reality of all that work will soon put them off
Like this?
Like this?
https://www.lifegate.com/san-francisco-cyclists-protest-against-rules
I think it’s an opportunity
I think it’s an opportunity to enhance safety by helping motorists judge passing distances? (Plate now out of date, also not shown to scale – needs 1.5m or more each side).
chrisonabike wrote:
ID54RSE?
Perhaps we could have
Perhaps we could have licences and registration plates for politicians, with an appropriate set of rules, covering lying, cheating and hypocrisy. Every infringement reduces their salary by 10%: some of them would be owing us money after a week.
I’m not sure you’ve
I’m not sure you’ve understood how percentages work but completely agree with the sentiment.
I’m sure he meant Every
I’m sure he meant Every infringement reduces their salary by 10% of the starting salary
It’s too late councillor,
It’s too late councillor, Labour already won.
Bad news for the owner of the
Bad news for the owner of the bicycle registered VX67 DXC: I’ve just checked the MoT status:
This vehicle’s MOT is overdue
You can be fined up to £1000 for driving without a valid MOT.
This vehicle may be MOT exempt, for more information refer to MOT exemption guidance
But I’m not sure what kind of vehicle is a RIESE & MULLER
Would you care to explain Road.cc?
eburtthebike wrote:
I would imagine it’s a speed pedelec, which have to have numberplates, insurance, helmeted & licenced riders, etc as they’re closer to an electric moped than they are to an e-bike.
What I would agree with is
What I would agree with is enforcement of any road user where there is an issue, through proper Policing where judgement is applied. A call for number plates is aligned with camera enforcement, which temporarily changes road user behaviour although rarely attitude providing limited long-term effect.
Another gimmick, about as
Another gimmick, about as useful as artificially low speed limits and dangerous Highway Code rule changes at junctions rather than adjusting road markings.
2000 to 2010 was a decade of road safety with multiple agencies working together, and the wide introduction of Police Diversion courses for offences. In this decade fatalities in the UK dropped 46%. 2012 to 2022 saw a drop of just 2% – and any drop was due to manufactures building more survivability into vehicles than an improvement in road user standard. We saw Police numbers slashed too, and traffic policing replaced by armed response units.
Perhaps something to campaign for?
Ben Graham wrote:
“Artificially low speed limits” – you mean like 70mph (for cars) on motorways, dual carriageways and 30mph on roads with street lighting (unless otherwise marked)?
What are these “dangerous Highway Code rule changes at junctions”? Do you mean they’ve allowed jay-walking now and cyclists don’t have to dismount?
We have certainly lost both police per head of population and specific road investigation expertise. Curiously in 2010 the government changed, IIRC some of their early work was to “reduce the war on the motorist” and defund things like speed cameras! That sounds rather familiar…
OTOH while we may have stagnated I suspect we also may be getting towards a point of diminishing returns under the current system. Even if we remove vulnerable road users from the roads (as we are doing well at ) having made mass motoring the priority (above all other modes) probably means a certain death toll is inevitable, although some folks think this will be fixed by our new robot overlords…
Personally I am also quite interested in places which are not just “safe enough” but are actually pleasant to live in / get around outside of a car.
chrisonabike wrote:
Judging from what I’ve seen recently it’s that it’s now OK to park anywhere up to six inches away from them.
mdavidford wrote:
Definitely not new in Scotland…