Lord Winston’s not letting it lie. Days after being told by the Government that the costs and complexity of licensing cyclists would significantly outweigh the benefits, he says he’s considering introducing a private members’ bill to force them to have number plates. He says a woman attacked him when he challenged her for riding on the pavement this week and that he didn’t report it because she is “impossible to identify.”
Last year, without citing evidence, Lord Winston claimed that cycle lanes have led to increased air pollution in London – something that was flatly rejected by the mayor. He has since been campaigning for cyclists to have licences and insurance.
After he tabled a question at the House of Lords, Winston was told that licensing and insurance were considered as part of the cycling and walking safety review in 2018.
Conservative peer Baroness Barran told him: “Over three million new cycles are sold each year. Licensing and insurance would require the establishment of a central register, and the government’s view is that this would be very cumbersome and expensive to administer.
“There is evidence that other countries that have trialled these schemes have then withdrawn them.”
But Winston is undeterred. This week he tried to support his position by telling The Times about a recent encounter with someone who had been riding on the pavement in Bloomsbury in London.
“I went up to her and told her very politely that it was against the law to cycle on the pavement and it was dangerous,” he said.
“I thought she would apologise and walk off but she became very aggressive and was swearing. She snatched the telephone out of my hand and then threw it into the road. She then kicked me repeatedly.”
Two passers-by came to his aid and the woman – who he said was ‘clearly well-educated’ and in her late 30s or early 40s – rode away.
Winston said he had not reported the incident to police because it would be impossible to identify her.
“The requirement for number plates would mean cyclists who are blatantly breaking the law can be identified,” he concluded.
























69 thoughts on “Lord Robert Winston says a woman kicked him when he told her not to cycle on the pavement”
Even MPs don’t have any faith
Even MPs don’t have any faith in the police these days.
While he’s at it, he should
While he’s at it, he should introduce a private members bill calling for pedestrians to be licensed. That would solve all the muggings and knife crime at a stroke!
He’s lying, of course.
He’s lying, of course.
Sent to the House of Lords e-mail address, for the attention of Lord Winston:
Good afternoon, Lord Winston,
I read with interest the article in the press where you allege that a cyclist ‘kicked’ you when you politely asked her not to cycle on the pavement. I cannot sympathise enough, and can assure you that very few cyclists consider this appalling behaviour to be acceptable.
I should be very grateful if you would confirm for me:
* where this incident occurred
* the date and time of the incident
Also, since I presume that your telephone was broken in the attack, you will no doubt have reported this to the Metropolitan Police. Can you tell me where and when you did so?
Feel free to write to him to ask for clarification: contactholmember@parliament.uk
EDIT: just saw that he said he hadn’t reported it to police. That wasn’t in the report I saw. Funny, though. I mean, his telephone was presumably damaged, and a couple of people came to his aid. That’s got to be worth reporting. But of course, that would mean a paper trail somewhere, and he has to be able to make these claims without being caught out….
How do liars like this get away with it?
cycle.london wrote:
Because we allow them to.
And because our country is full of moronic fucks who think that everyone in Parliament is ‘generally decent’.
So he was assaulted, there
So he was assaulted, there were two witnesses, and he didn’t report it? I don’t wish to cast aspersions on his honesty, but why not? It is likely that the assailant was local and easily identified, but rather than reporting this abberation, he decides to punish all cyclists. Reminds me of a friend, who believes that cyclists should pay road tax (his words) and then we’ll all be respected, and it doesn’t matter how many times he is told he’s wrong or by how many people, he still believes it.
Everybody has told Winston that his idea of licensing cyclists is impractical, horrendously expensive with no good features, but he keeps pushing it; how much is the car industry paying him?
burtthebike wrote:
If the road tax for an electric car is £0, what should it be for a bicycle?
John Pitcock wrote:
I did have a discussion once with someone who told me it should be £200 but when I pointed out that you could easily buy a bike for less than that, he didn’t see the problem.
Pedantically, if the electric car costs more than 40k, you get stung with a luxury tax of £310 a year (for 5 years ??)
John Pitcock wrote:
Given we on bikes are actually benefitting society we should be getting paid a few pence per mile, deffo all for that and that would grind motorists and the likes of the liar Winston something chronic.
John Pitcock wrote:
I’m afraid all rational arguments fail with him “Cyclists must pay road tax then drivers will respect us.” is all he says and he literally walks away from any discussion. The only problem is that the local BBC radio station know his views and ring him every time they want to wind up cyclists.
burtthebike wrote:
x
I call BS on this story.
I call BS on this story.
I think he’s making it up.
(or, he doesn’t want anyone to mention that the cyclist kicked him after he (Lord W) went all vigilante and poked an umbrella through their spokes or something…).
brooksby wrote:
Interestingly, while the news story in the Times has the line about “very politely” told her not to cycle on the pavement, the noble lord’s letter to the editor in the same edition starts “I managed to halt a cyclist…” which sounds rather closer to the umbrella through the spokes scenario.
brooksby wrote:
Interestingly, while the news story in the Times has the line about “very politely” told her not to cycle on the pavement, the noble lord’s letter to the editor in the same edition starts “I managed to halt a cyclist…” which sounds rather closer to the umbrella through the spokes scenario.
I believe the modern response
I believe the modern response would be “Cool story, bro.”
How very convenient that
How very convenient that having had his daft idea for licencing and registration slapped down by Baroness Barran, he immediately goes out and engineers a confrontation with a cyclist to create a story that supports his narrative.
If the incident did actually happen then I would urge Lord Winston to report it. 2 witnesses who came to his aid and London is well covered by CCTV. Also the Police do actually have some record of success in apprehending suspects who were not wearing personalised registration numbers whilst commiting offences.
I would also caution “Have a go heroes” to think about the appropriateness of accosting ladies in the street. She may well have felt fully justified in shouting and lashing out when a creepy old man blocked her path and looked like he may be trying to film her with a mobile phone.
Mungecrundle wrote:
And how convenient that he only mentions this confrontation after his absurd ideas have been totally demolished.
Somebody should tell him that
Somebody should tell him that considerate pavement cycling is allowed thanks to an amendment in 1999 to the anti pavement cycling law, and reasserted? in 2006.
Oh and Bloomsbury? A rich area? That maybe has cctv to back him up?
I call bullshit on his story. It should be investigated and if there is cctv (that doesn’t back him up) he should be prosecuted and thrown out of the lords (will never happen)
With the abundance of cctv
With the abundance of cctv these days, I’m sure there’s some footage this alleged assault?
Like the Brexit Bill, it’s No No No and trice No Lord Winston
Just sent this to the Daily
Just sent this to the Daily Mail via their contact form.
Good afternoon,
I just read the story on how Lord Winston was attacked by a cyclist. This is appalling, and I condemn it without hesitation or reservation.
I wonder if you could ask Lord Winston why he didn’t report this to the police. After all, he was assaulted and had his phone presumably damaged. There were two witnesses, and there is CCTV all over central London. Not to mention loads of drivers with dashcam in their car. Someone would have got a look at this woman, and considering who Lord Winston is, the Met would not have just told him to piss off as it does to so many cyclists who are bullied, assaulted and threatened.
I look forward to your (and his) response.
I know.. pissing into the wind. I know.
I would back him…if all
I would back him…if all pedestrians had an identification number tattoed on their foreheads and had a tracking beacon inserted under the skin. Then any time any body did anything they could be identified…
Several months ago a drunken
Several months ago a drunken pedestrian began kicking my bike and pannier bags while screaming and abusing me. I couldn’t identify him to police either.
Looking forward to Winston putting in a bill for all pedestrians to wear licence plates on their hoodies.
Only the other day I was
Only the other day I was having a peaceful stroll through some local woodland and was set upon by a small furry critter that seemed to be wearing glasses and a bushy moustache. I tried reporting it to the local constabulary and they wouldn’t take me seriously.
Maybe I should call for compulsory license plates (and insurance?) for all the woodland critters.
How incredibly convenient for
How incredibly convenient for him.
As others before me – I’m calling BS on this.
The other option is that he’s attacked a woman on a bike.
For a clever dude – he’s a bit of a nob.
Delusional old tool should be
Delusional old tool should be put down, I hope he gets a right kicking with regards his proposal and outed for the lunatic, discriminatory gammon liar that he is!
I’m wondering on the
I’m wondering on the pracicality of sitting on a stationary bike and being able to kick someone…
If only there were some means
If only there were some means of easily identifying individual motor vehicles via a series of numbers and letters, then misdemeanours would stop immediately.
For a supposedly bright bloke, Robert Sir Lord Winston seems to have a sketchy grasp on reality.
PRSboy wrote:
It’s not enough -as is evident in several cases reported on this very site, that only identifies the vehicles, not who is driving them. I trust Lord Winston will be going on to demand all drivers have a registration number tatooed onto their forehead, to solve this problem?
Also – with the alleged ‘epidemic’ of knife-crime, it’s clearly time for all pedestrians to wear licence plates. I hope Lord Winston is setting an example by wearing one himself when out-and-about?
I don’t agree with cyclists
I don’t agree with cyclists using footpaths, but he is clearly wildly out of touch with the real world if he thinks his plan would make the slightest difference.
Law-abiding cyclists would be registered, at a cost and inconvenience to themselves.
Those who couldn’t give a monkey’s about not riding on footpaths won’t register for this. What will happen to those who aren’t registered and ride on the footpath? Between reduced numbers and spending their time on policing the interweb in case people say nasty things, what Police does he think will be about to arrest cyclists without number plates. If a copper should see a cyclist without a number plate what will they do: run after them or manage not to see them?
To be a little fair to the Police, they can only work with the resources they have and if they are told to prioritise the nonsence of people being offended as a crime,and don’t have the available resources to investigate drug dealing and burglary, I don’t think they’ll have the helicopter out for a cyclist without a number plate.
Do doctors wear masks so they
Do doctors wear masks so they cannot be identifed? I think all doctors should have their General Medical Council registration details tatooed on their forehead so they can be identified while wearing a mask.
He is one of those
He is one of those ‘scientists’ whose understanding of ‘evidence based practice’ comes off with the white coat.
Now, of course, there are
Now, of course, there are many things I don’t get with this, but why the glaring inconsistency of this just applying to city centre cyclists?
ktache wrote:
Because they are the ones that affect him personally of course.
If he was able to simply
If he was able to simply “walk up and politely point out it was illegal”, then the cyclist was clearly travelling slowly, otherwise he’d have had to run. The police have been advised to accept that many people do not feel comfortable cycling amongst some of today’s extremely aggressive traffic and that in areas with no cycle lanes they should not enforce the letter of the law if they are cycling safely. (Idiots weaving through pedestrians at speed are fair game to stop) Current regulations on licence plates haven’t stopped drivers breaking the law with a recent survey finding over 50% of drivers admit to “regularly” exceeding the speed limits, huge numbers still using hand held phones, etc etc etc
Just a thought. Maybe we
Just a thought. Maybe we should consider number plates, and licensing requirements?
Come on – a bit of honesty here. Some of these “peers of the realm” are downright dangerous, and (frankly) I’d be very happy to have loony-tunes peers like Lord Winston to be obliged to wear a number plate, and a VERY prominent L-plate until they have passed a stringent test of competence regarding their ability to tell truth?
Lost all respect for this
Lost all respect for this clearly nutty, illogical, anti-cylist facist professor who conveniently forgets roads are dangerous to cross or ride on 2wheels. He ignores shared pavement staggered around here and there but does he complain about them? No.
He has no authority to stop anyone going about their buisness on what may have been a shared pavement. Why does he not stop dangerous drivers and step out in front of them and save an actual life rather than letting them kill in the 000’s and many more through toxic exaust fumes? Why does he not step out and stop speeding motorists and pick on them instead of picking on a vulnerable female cyclist who has no protecrion as motorist’s have. Why does he not call for a dirty diesel ban since he has a medical background? Get your priorities in order, mr Robert Winston…no longer a professor in my book.
The nutty professor was
The nutty professor was probably up skirting the poor female cyclist with a hidden camera in his umbrella which is why he has come up with this cock and bull story.
Projectcyclingfitness wrote:
(Edited to remove beavis & butthead-ism)
Seriously, though, I honestly believe that Lord W was being more forceful in stopping the Evil Cyclist than he lets on, and that’s why he got kicked. Possibly mad moustachio’d posh bloke being all vigilante and stops a woman who is a stranger to him and starts hectoring her…
(BTW, did I imagine it or did some sketch show once have a regular piece with Professor Robert Winston in the style of Groucho Marx?)
brooksby wrote:
i’m waiting for him to say “I’m a cyclist myself…”
https://road.cc/file/groucho-marx-3jpg
The nutty professor was
.
I do wonder why this man’s
I do wonder why this man’s views are even reported. If other politicians are actually standing up for something that benefits cycling, he should realize he has no hope whatsoever of having his dreams fulfilled.
Luca Patrono wrote:
Sadly, and the last 3 years ought to be evidence enough,there are plenty of buffoons in parliament who would agree with him, and vote it through on the nod if it came to it, you actually need people in both houses to be actively against stuff like this for it not to come to pass, and who could name an MP/peer actively engaged in cyclists interests? The parliamentary cycling group ought to be making as much noise about this to counter his claims.but there is nothing is there?
Awavey wrote:
Ben Bradshaw, MP for Exeter. Google him.
CaribbeanQueen wrote:
yep the chair of the parliamentary cycling group, and has he issued any statements lately on this that have been lost in the noise of Brexit ? or from the All Party group ? their twitter feed just retweets Road.ccs articles, and also the news article in the Guardian, in fact youd be forgiven for thinking the amount of retweets Prof Winston got from them this week, all offered without stating their own policy view on it, they dont wholly disagree with the noble lords suggestions on this.
its no good simply saying you are in support of cycling as a thing, or be a member of a group who like to promote cycling, youve got to campaign as passionately & as actively for cycling as those that are against it, make as much noise as those detractors, not let nonsense ideas like this gain a foothold.
because this is the kind of stuff that gets passed into law all too easily in times when governments are distracted by other things, because it never feels quite as important for them to focus on the detail and it probably matches alot of their biases and would be a sparesly attended debate, look how quickly they decided new laws for dangerous cycling were needed of from one mans campaign and how not quickly they are bothering with the full review on driving part.
there is a steady stream of stories on Road.cc highlighting the appalling lack of understanding and knowledge of any form of cycling that politicians from all parties and at all levels have, and these people end up making decisions on cycling that affect us all
Electronic tags for all.
Electronic tags for all.
This will end all crime!
Rick_Rude wrote:
I like this idea.
What we need is some kind of electronic device that can always be located. However, probably the easiest way to do this is to have the device communicate with some stationary objects (probably tall towers which would be able to cover a large area) and then by triangulating the signal between 3 or more of these, the powers-that-be could easily locate the individual.
However, that kind of plan is going to be expensive. Who is going to pay for the triangulating towers? Who’s going to pay for the electronic tag devices? How do you get everyone to carry around a locating device that would need to be re-charged every so often?
HawkinsPeter wrote:
But who would, who COULD, invent such a gadget? I mean, we don’t even have Moonbase Alpha yet…
brooksby wrote:
That’s just what THEY want you to think.
(Is it true that NASA actually stands for Need Another Squirrel Astronaut?)
HawkinsPeter wrote:
Squirrels are pretty agile: I imagine they’d be pretty effective in microgravity. Or hilarious. Or both…
(You realise that Space:1999 was set *twenty years ago*??)
brooksby wrote:
But, do you realise that it’s been about 16 years since Drusilla (played by the daughter of Martin Landau and Barbara Bain) appeared in Buffy?
But, do you realise that it’s been about 16 years since Drusilla (played by the daughter of Martin Landau and Barbara Bain) appeared in Buffy?
[/quote]
Youngsters all! Your erudite post reminds me that its 40 years since Drusilla (played by Theresa Ann Savoy) appeared in the buff.
A quick google also reminds me that Caligula was directed by Tinto Brass and is to be re edited by Alexander Tuschinsky,all of which brings us nicely back on topic…Sir Robert is a bit of an arse!
pockstone wrote:
Yes, I wouldn’t have been old enough to see Caligula when it came out.
Alexander Tuschinsky? Didn’t he make a little known film from 2008 called Killereichhörnchen? (Known in english as Killer Squirrels)
HawkinsPeter]
Yes, I wouldn’t have been old enough to see Caligula when it came out.
Alexander Tuschinsky? Didn’t he make a little known film from 2008 called Killereichhörnchen? (Known in english as Killer Squirrels)
[/quote
Little known in some circles, but to the cognoscenti, a seminal work!
(Peter, I bow humbly to the breadth of trivia you have squirreled away.)
HawkinsPeter wrote:
Hadn’t known Juliet Landau was related to Martin. Huh.
How about that Joss ‘Buffy’ Whedons Firefly came out seventeen years ago.
Erm, and that the original design for the Millennium Falcon in the original Star Wars had to be changed because it was too similar to the Eagles from S1999, which was new in TV at the time.
Sorry: lost track: what were we talking about?
brooksby wrote:
I did not know about the Millenium Falcon/Space 1999 connection. Even the name is a rip-off 1999->Millenium, Eagle->Falcon.
Did you know that 20 years ago The Matrix came out? (Why did they never make any sequels to that?)
HawkinsPeter wrote:
And Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure is 30!
(On the Eagle/Falcon – the original design got rejigged around a lot, and ended up being used as Leia’s ship – Tantive IV; its also why the apparent interior layout inside the Falcon bears so little relationship to the final shape of the ship.
Give me a Serenity any day, where they at least made some effort to fit the interior into the exterior model!
)
brooksby wrote:
You can’t take the sky from me!
HawkinsPeter wrote:
Y’know, it occurs to me that that particular quote could be applied to all sorts of modern political situations…
HawkinsPeter wrote:
you’re over-complicating this. For centuries – at least since the time of Salem, and into the 20th century and beyond – it has been perfectly easy to ask people to keep an eye on their neighbours, friends and family and whenever they do something undesirable to let the authorities know, and they will deal with them accordingly.
ConcordeCX wrote:
Maybe a phone app then?
Something like Facebook but you have foes instead of friends.
HawkinsPeter wrote:
Once you’ve achieved this ambitious task, do you think you could devise a plan so the cameras are carried so that we can have visual reports on what people are doing to provide support evidence of crimes/antisocial behaviour/cyclists.
don simon fbpe wrote:
It’d be asking too much to get people to voluntarily pay for and carry the tracking devices and then have them carry a camera all the time too. I mean, what’s next – get everyone carrying microphones and 6-axis gyroscopes?
I’m still struggling with the
I’m still struggling with the idea that ‘she kicked me repeatedly’. Did he ‘take it like a man’ or something instead of moving away. Unless of course he had her in a full nelson and she was kicking his shins…
‘Managed to halt a cyclist’
‘Managed to halt a cyclist’ does sound like an unprovoked assault on a lone female.
Probably on a shared path too, hence the lack of specific location.
I eagerly anticipate the next
I eagerly anticipate the next installment of the vigilante lords.
Will he be attempting to “halt” motorists that are speeding or attempting to park on the pavement?
Strip the nutty professor’s
Strip the nutty professor’s lordship and professorship once in for all. His anti-cylist facist views and hatred for cyclists should be treated the same as all thee fuss over antisemitic. If only we could express our digust directly at him.
Projectcyclingfitness wrote:
I don’t think removing professorships over such things is a good idea. Academic freedom, and all that. It’s not as if he’s been publishing fraudulent research, he’s been talking rubbish only in non-academic contexts.
But absolutely there are too many oddballs able to use a seat in the Lords as a platform for their personal cranky nonsense (cf Christopher Monckton). Whole thing needs reforming.
To think I (once) admired
To think I (once) admired this man.
What an out of touch fucktard he has become—-senility?
Labour peer?
His gestational period has over-reached it’s sell by date.
His ideaology is stillborn.
If I could punch someone in the mouth, he’d be top of the list.
Had a mate who had a die cast
Had a mate who had a die cast s1999 eagle, with dropable tube. I was jealous.
ktache wrote:
I remember fun times playing with my Dinky.