A Reform UK councillor has told cyclists to “take their own responsibility” for their safety on the roads, as a campaign was launched in Lincolnshire, featuring support from Halfords and the local police, urging people on bikes to wear hi-vis clothing and use front and rear lights.
The ‘Don’t Be Dim, Be A Bright Cyclist’ campaign was launched in Spalding, South Holland this week by Mark Le Sage, the founder of the Rightside Trust and Ella’s Project, a community group which collect and distributes children’s clothing in the area.
The campaign, which runs between 21 January and 21 February, aims to “raise awareness about keeping cyclists safe on our roads” by emphasising that “visibility can save lives”.

In a social media post, the group encouraged local cyclists to “use bike lights – front and rear” and “wear high-visibility or reflecting clothing”.
“Whether you’re commuting, training, or cycling for fun, making yourself visible helps drivers see you sooner and react faster,” the group said. “Let’s work together to keep every cyclist safe.”
The group is collaborating with Lincolnshire Police and Halfords during the month-long ‘Don’t Be Dim’ campaign, with Halfords offering 15 per cent off all lights in its Spalding branch until 21 February.
Discussing the campaign at a meeting of Spalding Town Forum, Le Sage – a local independent councillor – said that the drive to improve the visibility of cyclists on the roads was sparked by a collision between a motorist and a woman riding a bike in “dark clothing”, the Spalding Voice reports.
“It all started after I promised a local resident, Jackie Stanberry, that I would do something after her she and her vehicle were involved in an incident with a female cyclist wearing dark clothing as well as not having lights on her bike,” he said.
“Last week in a two-hour period I counted 27 cyclists without any lights at all and only five of those were wearing hi-vis jackets.
“I’m very grateful for the support and encouragement I’ve had from the Deputy Chief Constable Chris Davison and local Inspector Matt Dickinson.
“I must also say a big thank you to Spalding Halfords’ deputy manager Leanne Boswell who has worked tirelessly behind the scenes to get the special discount arranged, and local cycling group Pedals are also very pleased to hear we are doing our bit to help make South Holland’s roads that bit safer, and are fully supportive of the project.”

In January 2024, Le Sage was injured in a road traffic collision after his car was struck by Casualty and Holby City actress Amanda Mealing, who pleaded guilty last year to driving while under the influence of cocaine and was banned from driving for 22 months.
Meanwhile, South Holland Neighbourhood Policing inspector Matt Dickinson also told the meeting: “It’s not a new issue, it’s been around for years. I got told off for having no lights on my bike when I was young.
“The boundaries have changed and we maybe struggle to enforce this as we’d like. All these offences, while they could have a significant impact in a collision, in the eyes of the law they’re minor in terms of if we prosecute what the outcome could be.”
Le Sage then asked Dickinson about the police’s capacity to deal with the number of people riding bikes “illegally” in Spalding, to which the officer replied: “I regularly see what you see, but I haven’t got the capacity or resources to those times every day and I’d be lying to you if I say I could.
“I like to look a bit wider. We have the town centre hot spot patrols, but we’re looking to negotiate with them and continue funding and ask that to be part of the patrols.
“The whole point of that funding is that they concentrate on what the community want them to. We could task them that. It wouldn’t be too difficult to ask them to enforce it as the same time as they’re out and about.”
Le Sage’s fellow independent councillor, Aaron Spencer, also called for better education for young people when it comes to safe cycling, arguing that the town forum itself should aim to fund protective equipment which could be handed out in local schools.
Reform UK councillor Ingrid Sheard agreed that the responsibility for ensuring cyclists wear lights and ride safely is “not just down to police”.
“It’s also down to parents to ensure their kids have lights on their bikes and everybody to take responsibility,” she said, before describing an encounter with a young cyclist she had told to “get off” his bike in Spalding town centre.
“I’ve been in town and when a young person has cycled past me I’ve said, ‘please get off your bike’,” she said.
“They biked away, came back and gave me a mouthful. I had a conversation with them. I asked them why they felt the need to ride through and they said, ‘because everyone else does it’. So I said, ‘why does that make it right?’
“I think that’s the opportunity I need to spin. Also, people need to take their own responsibility.”
Lights campaigns like the one in Spalding, despite their stated aim to improve safety for people on bikes, have often attracted criticism from road safety campaigners, who feel they “feed into a victim-blaming culture” which places the onus for safety onto the most vulnerable road users.
For example, the ‘Be Bright Wear a Light’ campaign, launched in 2023 by pro rider Rachel Neylan and endorsed by four-time Tour de France winner Tadej Pogačar and former world champion Elisa Balsamo, was described by Dr Robert Davis, the chair of the chair of the Road Danger Reduction Forum, as “well-intentioned” but lacking awareness of “what’s required to not being hit by drivers”.
In any case, it’s unclear to what extent Sheard’s party leader Nigel Farage would back Spalding’s bike light campaign. Earlier this month, however, the Reform chief did brand the Labour government’s plans to lower the drink drive limit in England and Wales as “absolutely ridiculous and wholly unnecessary”.
He then claimed the proposals were the work of the “Islington, north London bicycling classes” who “hate” rural Britain, and that the UK’s roads are now “incredibly safe”.
“This is because we’ve got laws being designed by the Islington, north London bicycling classes. What about rural Britain? No-one cares, of course. In fact, many in Labour seem to hate rural Britain,” Farage told a press conference.
“But the drink drive thing is absolutely ridiculous, wholly unnecessary. We’ve been where we’ve been since 1967, it’s worked pretty effectively. If you actually look at road casualty figures, through whatever cause, we are now incredibly safe on our roads. Incredibly safe. Much safer than France, way safer than Germany.
“We’ve actually reached a level on accidents, beneath which it is impossible to go, because there will always be human error of some kind.”

44 thoughts on “Cyclists should “take own responsibility” for safety says Reform councillor, as Halfords and police join forces for bike lights campaign to “make roads safer””
“Last week in a two-hour
“Last week in a two-hour period I counted 27 cyclists without any lights at all and only five of those were wearing hi-vis jackets.”
How the hell does he know how many there were if they didn’t have lights and/or weren’t wearing hi-vis?!
Maybe he was waring night
Maybe he was waring night vision goggles.
The biggest problem is not
The biggest problem is not cyclists “lacking awareness of what’s required to not be hit by drivers”, the biggest problem is a general lack of awareness amongst drivers.
In the road food chain,
In the road food chain, cyclists are the most vulnerable users. Like it or not, this is a fact that calls for people on two wheels to take proactive measures to be safe and visible at all times. In turn, dangerous motorists and reckless drivers who injure or kill cyclists shall be sentenced to jail terms.
MaxiMinimalist wrote:
Well said.
Comments in social media
Comments in social media channels often quickly reveal that many cyclists *do* take responsibility for their own safety, they are often outnumbered by wankers driving cars that dont give a fuck about anyone’s safety.
“Last week in a two-hour
“Last week in a two-hour period I counted 27 cyclists without any lights at all and only five of those were wearing hi-vis jackets.
how did he manage this??
I can’t say I have a problem
I can’t say I have a problem with encouraging cyclists riding at night with no lights to think again. A “be seen” light can be had for less than a fiver in most good cycling retailers.
I do have a big problem with some of the other stuff in the article demonising cyclists. Yes, they may have seen 27 cyclists with no lights in a two hour period. I wonder how many speeding / uninsured / drunk / drugged / amber gambling drivers they could have spotted sitting at any local junction for a couple of hours. Way way way over 27 but of course they were earning a living / taking a sick relative to hospital / sole carer for an elderly parent. Another example of motornormativity from councillor and police alike.
My own experiences suggest
My own experiences suggest even though I use lights day and on the odd occassion, at night, plus wearing bright clothes other road users do not seem to be able to see me. I believe that you can be lit up like a Christmas tree, Blackpool illuminations even and other road users still do not or will not see you.
“Last week in a two-hour
“Last week in a two-hour period I counted 27 cyclists without any lights at all and only five of those were wearing hi-vis jackets.
how did he manage this??
And, I do not see any mention
And, I do not see any mention of WHEN they made that count. Was it at night or daytime?
David9694 wrote:
Watching the cyclocross on Discovery.
You should use lights at
You should use lights at night. It is much harder to see someone ahead of you with no lights given the ridiculous headlights from on coming traffic.
Not sure if Alessandro is joking but you can see people when they are close but not when they are at a distance that they should be seen.
As to hi Viz, please see wtjs on being hit by a driver on the wrong side of the road.
As to hi Viz, please see wtjs
As to hi Viz, please see wtjs on being hit by a driver on the wrong side of the road
It’s a long pre-headcam time ago in 2018, and is the reason I got the camera. I didn’t have HiViz, but I did have a bright flashing light on my helmet where I now put the camera, as well as a bright ‘see-ahead’ light on the handlebars. It was early evening, late December, mental Christmas traffic and raining, and I was waiting to exit the bi-directional, single carriageway Sainsbury’s access road onto the main road, on the right side of my lane standing astride the top tube. A Freelander turning right off the main road cut the corner, presumably to get across in front of oncoming traffic, and hit me on my right shoulder with his offside mirror. I was really lucky: a couple more inches to his right and he would have hit my front wheel and slammed the head tube and old-style stem back into my pelvis at speed. As it was, I got away with a stiff neck for a few days. The police decided: NFA as it was only “a momentary loss of concentration”. They haven’t changed their attitudes since.
This is from last night’s video, showing the viewpoint of the Freelander (road was much more potholed then, and the road markings were well worn) as he cut across the give way road markings where I was standing. I think the street lighting was the same.
I hate Farage so much.
I hate Farage so much.
I guarantee if they get elected they’ll bring in some real anti-cyclist laws, such as forcing cyclists to use cycle lanes, number plates, or something else stupid.
Farage and his horrible
Farage and his horrible followers have spent years attacking the WEF – as they call it, the World Economic Forum as it’s known to the rest of us, as elitist, out of touch, globalist. Where was Farage this week? In Davos of course, all paid for, hotels included, by an Iranian Billionaire whose company he is apparently an advisor. Yet, the FT couldn’t find any mention of this ‘job’ in Farage’s declaration of MP’s interests. Why do people fall for this ‘man of the people’ shite? Why, why, why?
Rome73 wrote:
Don’t forget about Farage’s silence when his boss (Trump) slags off NATO troops despite some of our servicemen giving their lives in Afghanistan. He is such a slimy, racist piece of shit without an ounce of integrity.
He’s not even a man of
He’s not even a man of Dulwich College’s people. Many Old Alleynians dislike him intensely.
I think I just learned
I think I just learned something. Played football against Old Alleyns many times in my younger days as a combative centre half. Never realised they were the old boys of Dulwich College. Always a good bunch to play against, and to share a pint with afterwards.
There won’t be bread, so let
There won’t be bread, so let the angry (motorised) masses at least have circuses.
I am a big proponent of using
I am a big proponent of using lights day and night to be visible. So good on that.
BUT, I am so very tired of non-cyclists insisting that cyclists need to be more visible. It’s victim blaming. Does anybody say “oooh, they were driving a black car, they should have had an orange one and I wouldn’t have hit them”? Of course they don’t.
Motor vehicle drivers MUST pay attention to all users of the road. If visibility is poor, they need to take actions to make it safe for all.
Cyclists SHOULD take precautions for our own safety and because we are indeed smaller and thus, perhaps, less visible.
Do not accept people blaming cyclists because of what they were wearing or not wearing “Oh, they weren’t wearing a helmet. If they had, they would have survived being run over by the bus” is stupid and making excuses for ‘car brain’. (but do wear a helmet whenever practical, please)
There is no mention of after
There is no mention of after dark in this article. Are they suggesting lights and hi viz are required at all times, so that myopic drivers don’t have to wear spectacles?
The people who vote for these
The people who vote for these insane lunertics need to be very, very careful what they wish for. Good luck everyone.
The endless stream of dim
The endless stream of dim-witted victim blaming nonsense pouring through Road cc is unbelievable. I feel for you all at Road cc having to report on and edit this cavalcade of tripe on a daily basis. As if we cyclists are so dim we don’t know how to stay as safe as possible already despite the dim wits close passing us or worse on a daily basis! All best wishes to everyone suffering under the dim wits telling us not to be dim!
The problem is that both
The problem is that both sides are right. Idiots on bikes who don’t use lights at night are a nightmare. You cannot see them easily and often no lights goes hand in hand with dark clothes and poor bike handling.
On the other hand, I can be lit up like a christmas tree and shit drivers still won’t give me enough space or even look for me.
Had some knob who was parked on my side of the road facing me just swing his car across the road without even looking in my direction and then look absolutely dumfounded when I nearly crashed into him. I’m 6’2″, on a white bike, red clothes and a bright orange gilet on. He just didn’t look. I watched him and he just pulled across me without even a glance.
As a driver and a cyclist I see and experience far more danger from the cars than I see cyclists who put themselves at increased and unnecessary risk.
Agree with cyclists needing
Agree with cyclists needing to use lights and reflective gear. Too many don’t, and get injured or killed. Not totally their fault though. Idiot dangerous drivers are to blame for a lot of cyclists deaths. As for Reform, Farage would be leading mass cycle rides and campaigning for more cycle lanes if he thought they were vote winners. He just tells people what they want to hear. Don’t be dim – don’t vote Reform.
60somethingcyclist wrote:
Farage certainly has listened to *some* people’s complaints. And being a populist politician no doubt he’ll give the people *some* things they want.
But no, I doubt he’d be leading bike rides any more than he’ll suddenly decide that renewables are the way forward * or switch to being pro much closer relations with the EU because there are definitely votes in that…
* Actually I think that is more likely than promoting cycling.
60somethingcyclist wrote:
Given that drivers are running over pedestrians every day also, presumably they should be using lights and reflective gear too? (And cycle helmets – they are just as good for pedestrians when a car knocks them over)?
Then – what about the pedestrians on the footways who are killed each year – is the issue that they need to be dressed up like Christmas trees there also? Or perhaps the footway itself should have more reflectives?
Then what about all the drivers trashing themselves into large not-very- movable objects? Could it be just that they would be stopped by hivis and reflectives on them? What about all the “professional drivers” of lorries or buses being surprised by those bridges – with signs, lights and reflectives – throwing themselves upon their vehicles?
I do agree that it *is* actually quite hard to see vulnerable road users in low light conditions – and there are some marginal gains to be had by dressing defensively. But we all seem to have accepted that’s “just how it is”. Some drivers simply not not looking a lot of the time, but LOTS of drivers not looking some of the time (x million people driving times “forgetting to look” how many times per journey / week)?
And I suspect it’s a LOT harder to notice things and respond appropriately if you’re driving at higher speeds (over 20mph). Or you’re driving with lots of other motor vehicles. Or your motor vehicle has been optimised for driver protection (wide A pillars) or convenience. Or you’re an older driver who hasn’t realised your eyesight has declined and the stiffness in your body means you don’t move your head to see better…
“I do agree that it *is*
“I do agree that it *is* actually quite hard to see vulnerable road users in low light conditions”
No, it is not. At least within towns where roads have street lights. I have no problem spotting an object as small as a hedgehog crossing the road, or a fox which happens quite a lot where I live, let alone a cyclist or a pedestrian, even if they are wearing dark clothes. And I wear correction glasses as my own eyesight is far from ideal.
Most cases where a cyclist or a pedestrian is run over by a car, at any time of the day, is through a deliberate choice to drive dangerously made by the driver.
whosatthewheel wrote:
No, it is not. At least within towns where roads have street lights.— chrisonabike
Umm – so not in those low light conditions where there’s light?
I almost collided with
I almost collided with another cyclist at a crossroads in town. He turned right into my road, as I turned left into his.
Since he was on the wrong side of the road, in black, no lights, with loads of bright headlights in play, I only saw him at the last moment.
On rural roads, it is very hard to pick out road users with no lights or reflectives with the lighthouse lumens of car headlights.
Always have a minimum of 2 rear and 2 front lights.
Not that long ago, I was
Not that long ago, I was cycling home late at night. I will as lit up like a Christmas tree with a decent “see by” front light on as much of my route is unlit. In a section of the route that does have, admittedly old and not great, street lights on one side of the road, I nearly collided with another unlit cyclist going in the same direction as me. No lights or reflectors, dark clothing. The first thing that I spotted was the movement of the Tesco’s carrier bag swinging from the end of his handlebars. He was no more than 10m in front of me. Luckily I was only catching him slowly and had time to avoid him. Yes, you can see hedgehogs and foxes but only when the light is right. A bit of a shadow or poor lighting or unlit roads like 75% of the roads around here and you can easily miss an unlit pedestrian or cyclist, let alone a small animal. It amazes me that a significant proportion of cyclists round here still ride unlit roads with no lights, no reflectors, nothing. I ride overnight a fair bit but I am always lit up like a Christmas tree. There are enough idiot drivers on the road that will hit me even with lights, why make it easy for them? And why risk myself or my loved ones losing compensation if the worst happens because I wasn’t using lights?
A cyclists clothing choice is
A cyclists clothing choice is irrelevant to wether a driver hits them or not ,its an excuse and one of the reason courts seldom jail driver who kill people on bikes ITS THEIR FAULT .Cars have 1000 to 4000 lumen headlights and if you fail to see a human sized object at that point you should never be driving in the first place .Lights are a no trainer but its worrying seeing people talk about clothes
On the continent they seem to
On the continent they seem to be grasping that if we have mass motoring, we simply can’t expect drivers to have a high enough standard of observation when it comes to vulnerable road users.
So eg.the Dutch work with the humans they have (even though they have a more stringent driving test than the UK). They reduce the volume of motor traffic where there are lots of vulnerable road users, and reduce the speed to 20mph or below (using infra, not just signs).
And elsewhere they work to separate road users – but avoiding eg. tempting vulnerable road users into increasing their risk in the interest of convenience.
They avoid the temptation to take short-cuts across roads by giving pedestrians more direct routes and making the motor traffic divert. They try to reduce the number of interactions between modes. And where that’s necessary they keeping waiting times low at traffic light crossings.
That’s basically the opposite path to “safety” than the UK takes..
It would be lovely if they
It would be lovely if they did more of that but its deeply unpopular because the vast majority of people drive and a minority cycle and walk any distance. You hear the constant parroting of “why is this a 20?”. Its a 20 because its safer and you twats can’t be trusted to drive to conditions or even remotely stick to 30. At least 2 means that some drivers stick to that rough limit and hold up the rest of the people who would completely ignore it some of the time.
I genuinely think that 50-75% of drivers are speeding on many of the 30mph roads around me. I routinely see people going 40-50 despite it being a busy road with cars parked periodically along it and pavements with people walking on them.
People have been told the car is king for so long that they genuinely think that the solution to cars being dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists is for those people to get in a car themselves.
mctrials23 wrote:
Thing is though, before everybody drove, a minority drove, and before that nobody drove (or rather – a relative few drove carts and carriages and drovers drove livestock, different thing).
Before we had speed limits and traffic lights, we didn’t *.
And here we are. So perhaps we can go somewhere else that later everyone doesn’t really think about, because it’s obviously how things are *and must be*.
* Although there’s possibly a deep history of cantering and galloping restrictions and directing traffic which I’m overlooking here?
Reform councillors could also
Reform councillors could also take responsibility for their safety (and others’) by not stoking hate and fragmentation – and by following science occasionally.
I was sitting on my balcony a
I was sitting on my balcony a few years ago when a car went through the front wall of a neighbour’s house. Road was straight and it was daytime, but my neighbour had failed to leave their porch light on, so was charged with reckless dwelling.
Just this morning I had to
Just this morning I had to run out at 0730 so took the bike. I was wearing a bright yellow jacket with reflective lettering, and had two front lights, one flashing, one solid, and one rear light.
Two minutes in a car pulling out of a driveway pulled into the same space that I was riding. I’d seen him look both ways but he clearly just didn’t see me. I perhaps could have had a helmet light and another front light, but I don’t think it would have mattered – he was looking for cars, not cyclists, and he didn’t see any cars so he went.
Luckily there was enough room to avoid a collision but it could have easily been different
“Two minutes in a car pulling
“Two minutes in a car pulling out of a driveway … I’d seen him look both ways but he clearly just didn’t see me.”
So cars (inanimate objects) have genders now?
Or should it be:
“Two minutes in someone pulling out of a driveway … I’d seen him look both ways but he clearly just didn’t see me.”
Hope you are OK.
Hope you are OK.
I had a SMIDSY on Friday night (around 6.30pm) who fortunately stopped before he t’boned me when he pulled out of a side road. The angle of the junction and me being in the primary position would mean he would of had to turn his eyes 3-4deg (but thats too much effort of course). I have a green hiviz jacket, a 500 lumens flasher and a 800 lumens solid front light. It wouldn’t have mattered what I had as he didn’t look. Then again maybe he did look but can understand that a cyclist can go faster than 5mph and the apology was SMIDGAF!
“Cyclists should “take own
“Cyclists should “take own responsibility” for safety…”
OK, so should we go back in time when there was no highway code or laws to protect ANYONE from anything?
If it is all about being responsible for one-self…
mitsky wrote:
As long as we know those are the rules I’ll remount the forward and rear facing machine guns!
Backladder wrote: