A new police campaign focused on cycling and motorcycling, which claims that road safety is a “shared” responsibility, has been criticised by cyclists who say it “ignores the massive imbalance in risks” faced by vulnerable road users.
The ‘Two Wheels’ campaign, led by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), takes place every June and aims to educate, reduce risk, and improve safety for motorcyclists and cyclists on the roads.
According to the NPCC, the campaign “aims not only to encourage riders to make safer choices, but also to remind other drivers of their responsibility to remain vigilant and look out for more vulnerable road users”.
“Every person using the road network, whether behind the wheel, on two wheels, or on foot, has a critical role to play in preventing life-changing and fatal collisions,” the police chiefs’ council said in a statement announcing this year’s campaign.
As part of the campaign, motorists are urged to look twice and “expect to see” cyclists and motorcyclists, especially at junctions and roundabouts, give vulnerable road users space when overtaking, and exercise patience on rural roads.
The NPCC has also called on motorcyclists to remember to carry out pre-ride safety checks, ride to road and weather conditions, and wear appropriate protective gear at all times, while encouraging them to attend a seven-and-a-half hour ‘safe rider’ workshop.
Finally, cyclists, described by the NPCC as “equally exposed”, are encouraged to “remain highly visible, predictable in their movements, and aware of changing road conditions, particularly on rural routes shared with faster-moving traffic”.
In response to the ongoing campaign, a number of local police forces have launched their own initiatives, including in Herefordshire, where West Mercia Police are carrying out targeted patrols and engagement to “encourage safe, responsible riding and driving”.
West Mercia Police says the patrols will aim to educate riders on “skills, knowledge, and protective equipment, promote awareness of the Highway Code and road user hierarchy, and remind everyone to share the road safely”.
However, in Hereford, the local safe neighbourhood team have taken advantage of the campaign to clamp down on cyclists riding on the city’s Victoria Bridge, designated a ‘no cycling’ zone.
On Thursday morning, over 30 cyclists were stopped and spoken to by officers and reminded to dismount and walk their bikes across the bridge.
The South Wye team also explained that “advice was given around the reasons for the restriction and the consequences of not following it”.
“We’re here to keep everyone safe – whether you’re walking, cycling, riding, or driving,” they said.
Meanwhile, in Suffolk and Norfolk, the police have called on road users to take heed of the NPCC’s message that “road safety is the responsibility of every one of us”.
“We’ve spoken a lot in recent weeks about bike safety and will continue to do so whilst bikers and cyclists are being killed and seriously injured on our roads,” Chief Inspector Gary Miller, the head of the Joint Norfolk and Suffolk Roads and Armed Policing Team, said in a statement supporting the Two Wheels campaign.
“Every road user has a responsibility to travel with care and remain alert to others around them. Our rural road network brings its own challenges, with narrow lanes, bends, dips and limited visibility from hedgerows and other features.
“You can also expect to encounter slower-moving traffic such as agricultural vehicles, cyclists, horse riders, and pedestrians, all of which require patience and awareness.
“As a motorcyclist and cyclist myself, I know how the enjoyment and risks of being on two wheels. Keeping our roads safe is a shared duty.
“We need motorists to drive with care, actively look out for motorcyclists and cyclists, and give them the space they need. They have just as much right to get home safely as anyone else.”
However, cycling campaigners in Suffolk have criticised the NPCC’s initiative, describing it as “well-intentioned but poorly thought-through”.
“Whilst we can all agree that everyone has a responsibility for safety, this ignores the massive imbalance in risks imposed on other road users,” Ipswich-based activist Leo Borwick told the East Anglian Daily Times this week.
“Car drivers kill around five people every day in Britain and seriously injure dozens of others. Cyclists, by contrast, hardly ever kill anybody else.”
Recalling a recent close pass in Ipswich, Borwick emphasised that imbalance between motorists and cyclists when it comes to risk and fear on busy roads.
“I was entering a narrowed section of Wherstead Road when a builder’s truck passed me at speed, certainly above the limit,” he said.
“The gap between me and the truck could not have been more than about six inches. I was frightened and shaken and could not escape the feeling it was done deliberately to intimidate me.”
Another cyclist, Wetherden resident Keith Wolferstan, also criticised some drivers’ attitude towards cyclists, after a recent collision with a motorist left him with two broken arms and broken ribs.
“People just seem to be so angry with cyclists all the time, any excuse to cut them up and they’ll take it,” he said. “I can think of so many times where I could have died, just because of an impatient driver.”
Recounting another incident during a group ride, Wolferstan continued: “We were going past the golf course at Stowmarket when a [driver] overtook us with a really close pass.
“His passenger threw a cup of McDonald’s Coke out the window at the front riders, totally unprovoked. How dare we be on his road and hold him up for two seconds.
“I’ve cycled all over the world and all those nationalities are super conscientious and courteous towards cyclists. You come back to this country and it’s like a third world.”
16 thoughts on ““Drivers kill five people every day. Cyclists hardly kill anybody”: Police chiefs accused of ignoring “massive imbalance” as new campaign brands road safety “a shared duty” and officers crack down on rule-breaking riders”
So ‘ Priority of Road Users’ and 1.5 metre clearance at 30mph has been been reduced to ‘sharing’? NCN route 2 here in South Hams is an absolute scream with white vans, tractors and total idiots who refuse,or are totally incapable,to reverse on high Devon banked lanes
…means you have to get off and pedal back to a passing place….could be at that all day…so I don’t bother…
@Astralstroll The hierarchy of road users does not mean priority of road users except in certain circumstances, e.g. stopping to let pedestrians cross junctions before turning. It doesn’t mean that cyclists have priority over motor vehicles at all times any more than the pedestrians have priority over cyclists at all times. It certainly doesn’t mean that you have priority in the circumstances you describe; personally, unless the driver is being a complete dick, on a narrow country lane I accept that it is easier for me to turn around and go back to the nearest passing place, which is never that far if you’re on a bike, than for a tractor or other large vehicle to reverse back down the road for my benefit.
Although usually the easiest thing of all would be for them just to stop for a few moments while you cycle past them (which requires a lot less space to do safely than them passing you), but most people seem allergic to stopping, even for the briefest time.
@mdavidford Absolutely, I am assuming that the OP means those lanes where it’s so tight it’s actually impossible for a cyclist to get through if there is a large vehicle, obviously if they can squeeze by each other nobody needs to go back.
Indeed. Some lanes are so narrow, and with overgrown vegetation, that the driver may not be able to see anything behind in his wing (door) mirrors, and vans usually don’t have a rear window so no rear-view mirror either. Much easier in this situation to just turn around and head back to the nearest farm gate, it won’t be far. After all, ‘share the road’ works both ways.
And before someone comments to say if you drive where you can’t clearly see what’s behind you, that driver may have no choice – deliveries, tradespeople etc.
@Astralstroll The Hierarchy of Road Users, announced with great fanfares in 2022, has been rendered into complete fiction by the attitude of the police: there is this hierarchy/ priority list but we don’t take it seriously and if drivers ignore it we don’t care! The same applies to the ludicrous notice of close-passing – No KSI’d cyclist = No Offence
ttps://upride.cc/incident/lwa190_minicooper_hierarchy/
To be fair when I’m out on the roads, car or bike, I see very many instances of people cycling who could be doing better. Ignoring the delivery riders, most of whom we know aren’t actually riding bicycles / Ebikes, the most common issue I see is people riding too close to the edge of the road. Yes, drivers absolutely should do better, however this type of riding does little to discourage drivers from overtaking, and they will still pass too closely leaving the rider with FA room to the left either. So educating riders as to how to ride more safely isn’t a bad idea IMHO.
As for that narrow bridge, if it’s popular with pedestrians I don’t see how getting off and walking a few yards is a massive issue. And I’m normally in SPD-SL road cleats!
@Jakrayan Criticising people for not riding primary is like criticising a victim of domestic abuse for cringing when their partner threatens them with their fist. People don’t ride in the gutter because they want to, they do it because if they don’t they know there’s a better than even chance that in any given ride at least one driver will be so affronted by the ENTITLED BIKE NONCE TAKIN’ UP THE WHOLE ROAD!!!11 they’ll do a deliberate punishment pass that could kill you or leave you maimed for life. Getting over in the gutter isn’t a great solution, but multiple uncomfortable but not life-threatening passes is better than one potentially catastrophic one. It shouldn’t be a cyclist’s responsibility to put their life at risk just to remind drivers to obey the rules of the road they should be doing regardless.
And as for “just getting off and walking”, putting aside the reality that a ridden bike takes up *less* space than one with the rider walking alongside and so I’d argue the most considerate way to use that inadequate infrastructure(presumably there are no safe alternatives within a reasonable distance or why would anyone on a bike be using it at all) would be to proceed across on the bike at walking pace and then stop and put your foot down if someone needs to get by you; plenty of people use bikes as mobility aids and so “just get off” isn’t as simple as it’s made out to be. A couple of years back I had the worst sprain of my life, I could barely even hobble for two weeks and had a huge honking brace on my foot, had to sleep on the sofa downstairs because climbing them was a no go. I could still ride my bike though, do my shopping, see my mates – plenty of people have impairments that aren’t temporary, to them “just get off” is tantamount to saying “just stay home”.
Let’s keep it a benjamin as the kids say: “shared responsibility” and “keeping everyone safe” are, literally, copouts. They’ve framed the entire campaign so they can justify only taking actions that don’t piss off drivers, and don’t require them to actually do any work except harassing a few cyclists as they do a lunch run to the local Greggs, because that’s the level of seriousness police in this country – in an institutional sense – believe road crime deserves.
I’m criticising them for not riding in secondary position, not primary. At least 60cms (2 feet) from the edge of the road as the HC explicitly recommends.
Leaving aside the small minority of riders who find mounting and dismounting a bike difficult – which sounds suspiciously similar to the motorists “but, but what about disabled drivers?” when talking about LTNs – what’s wrong with able bodied riders walking the few metres over that narrow, Victorian bridge? Sure, if there’s clearly no-one on it I wouldn’t condemn anyone for riding it slowly, but if it’s not clear forcing pedestrians to stop and squeeze to the side is, frankly, a rather entitled opinion. Plus it’s easy to hold a road bike a little ahead of you and hold the saddle – normally no need to hold the bars if it’s straight – so you’re really not taking up much more room at all.
There’s a railway underpass near me that links to a shared then segregated path. It’s narrow, and the path approaches at an angle so you can’t see if it’s clear, but many riders still choose to pedal through despite the clear ‘no cycling’ signage. Why?? Personally I don’t go that way, except on foot, preferring the surrounding roads.
I cycled a lot on the continent and have done fir many years. I’ve never been close passed, and only once had a scary overtake by an oncoming vehicle. Im close passed almost daily in the UK and dangerous overtakes are common. Some serious driver education is needed here, not to mention presumed liability legislation.
@ianking Riding back from a trip to Spain through France, it was noticeable that the amount of bad driving near us cyclists increased the farther north we got, and the cars had Brit plates.
@eburtthebike I’ve found Spanish drivers to be almost entirely excellent around cyclists.
Does anyone know if ‘the police’ even read all these Roadcc road safety articles? Does anyone send them all to the relevant authorities on a daily basis? …if not we’re all wasting our breath.
Wait – I thought every comment posted on the internet went direct to the appropriate authorities *? You’re saying they don’t?
* The police, the prime minister, the pope – or for truly serious global issues the ultimate authority Elon Musk.
@GravelIsNothingNew So it’s a waste of breath to discuss politics unless we know the Prime Minister reads our comments? Pointless to chat about football unless it’s certain the England manager is reading? Are you sure road.cc management will read your comment? Otherwise you’re just wasting your breath.
I only get punishment passes when Im riding close to the gutter usually when there’s a painted farcility!