Transport Minster - new cycling policy?

[mike killay]

The problem with licensing, testing cyclists, compulsory headgear etc. is that people tend to stop cycling.
Safer roads are the answer.
The Dutch do a huge amount of cyclist training and have done so for decades. They start with little children in school and continue this for many years.
Many of their roads are better than ours from a cycling point of view.
So, why do we apparently do better?

 

[Emo Rider]

So you are happy wth the 11 London cyclists who died this year? Ir the 118 nationally? Ofcourse you are not ! So what are your suggestions ?
We,ve been trying to reduce road deaths and injury since 50's. Had Ford, Volvo and a few others had tho attitude we,d not be bothering with seat belts( which many argued against when made compulsory)
Same with CBT and helmets...

Is this really the best you can do? To insinuate that I may be happy with cyclist deaths, to insinuate that I am not advocating increased safety on the roads, and then side step my direct question by asking me to repeat what I have said in two previous posts on this thread.

I get you want manditory training for cycling. Answer my question about what "you" propose for this training. It is not my question to answer. Please try not to be insulting.

 

[flecc]

The Dutch do a huge amount of cyclist training and have done so for decades. They start with little children in school and continue this for many years.
Many of their roads are better than ours from a cycling point of view.
So, why do we apparently do better?

It's partly because we have a fundamentally safer way of approaching our cycling.

There's a startling statistic in Dutch cycling which illustrates this:

An astonishing 40% of their cycling deaths involve no other person or vehicle. In other words, self-inflicted deaths presumably due to dangerous cycling behaviour.
.

 

[Emo Rider]

It's partly because we have a fundamentally safer way of approaching our cycling.

There's a startling statistic in Dutch cycling which illustrates this:

An astonishing 40% of their cycling deaths involve no other person or vehicle. In other words, self-inflicted deaths presumably due to dangerous cycling behaviour.
.

A startling revelation. Do they use s-pedelecs there?

 

[flecc]

A startling revelation. Do they use s-pedelecs there?

Not at that year, I discovered that Dutch government statistic in 2014, but they introduced the S pedelec class about a year later. It was a government in depth investigation of the deaths that exposed the 40% self inflicted deaths, some 80 cyclists a year there.

It particularly struck me since so much Dutch cycling is very sedate in nature. Maybe they just have to compensate with occasional mad moment flings.
.

 

[Emo Rider]

Not at that year, I discovered that Dutch government statistic in 2014, but they introduced the S pedelec class about a year later. It was a government in depth investigation of the deaths that exposed the 40% self inflicted deaths, some 80 cyclists a year there.

It particularly struck me since so much Dutch cycling is very sedate in nature. Maybe they just have to compensate with occasional mad moment flings.
.

It would be interesting to see what the root cause analysis of these deaths revealed. Hopefully that information was put to good use in preventing futher loss.

 

[anotherkiwi]

We would need to see what time of year is the most dangerous then we might guess that black ice and freezing cold canals may have something to do with it.

 

[flecc]

We would need to see what time of year is the most dangerous then we might guess that black ice and freezing cold canals may have something to do with it.

Combined with alcohol maybe?
.

 

[mike killay]

We would have to be certain that the Dutch record deaths the same way that we do.
There was that problem over red wine and olive oil reducing death by heart attack in s. European countries, but it was because they had a category of 'normal death without suspicion' or something like that, so that their heart attack figures were lower.
For instance, beds are extremely dangerous, loads of people die in them.

 

[flecc]

There was that problem over red wine and olive oil reducing death by heart attack in s. European countries, but it was because they had a category of 'normal death without suspicion' or something like that, so that their heart attack figures were lower.

When they can't be sure of the cause, French doctors can record cause as sudden death. Here in the UK doctors have to record a cause, so when they are uncertain they tend to specify heart failure.

This causes a huge and false imbalance between the two countries death rates from heart failure.

However I'm satisfied the Dutch cycling deaths are exactly that and recorded accurately with all details just as we do. In one respect we shouldn't be surprised that many of those deaths don't involve motor vehicles, since they have so many segregated cycle routes.
.

 

[Danidl]

For the umpteenth time, it is not a death a month now!

There's been huge improvements in London as I've pointed out, and that's resulted from all the efforts made which you appear to now nothing about. That is why I'm angry at your assumption that nothing is being done about the situation when so much has been done and is still being done, including by me!

The reduction in deaths from well over 20 when cycling was far less than half as common, to single figures now with such high cycling rates hasn't happened by accident. It's resulted from all the changes made.

They've included the following:

Trucks operating in the central area now have to meet minimum equipent standards, including a mix of such measures as extra mirrors, repeater indicators along the side of the truck, sound buzzer warnings of a left turn going to happen, additional warning signs on the left rear of the truck.

Truck operating companies have been helped to have cycle awareness training sessions for their drivers, in addition to all the added measures on the trucks.

TfL and the police have had cyclist and truck driver sessions to get them to appreciate each other's difficulties. This has included putting cyclists in the truck driving seats and drivers on bikes in the blind spots around trucks, forcing the message home.

The specific issue of the way women cyclists far too high death rate has been widely publicised, and I've taken part in that, including posting threads here three years running to bring their attention to what is going wrong and what to do about it.

And in Autumn last year, the Metropolitan Police had a several week session of flooding London's streets with officers specifically tackling the cyclist accident issue. During that time they kept watch at junctions and issued tens of thousands of behaviour warnings to drivers and cyclists. From memory they also fine ticketed over 8000 people, split roughly evenly between drivers and cyclists.

TfL had an advertising campaign with full page ads in the various London newspapers promoting awareness of cyclists to drivers.

Both ITV and the BBC regions had specific items on the issues, including a half hour peak time ITV program about the truck v cyclist issue, which included a re-enactment of how a cyclist is so easily accidentally run over by a truck at a left turn.

So much is being done and the results prove how effective that's been.

As for you saying a death a month is unacceptable, without reference to context, I remind you that it's a cyclist death per over 600 cycle commuting lifetimes, which is entirely acceptable, indeed excellent.
.
.

I consider that this is impressive evidence of a concerned society.

 

[Danidl]

I cant launch a boat, go for a dive,go jet skiing or anything ( especially in Europe) without either training and insurance

I had not wished to return to this discussion but I find it difficult not to do so when untruths or half-truths are being peddled as fact.
You are free to put any unpowered boat into the seas of Europe. There are not licences on canoes. The reason why powered boats need regulation is exactly the same reason motorcycles need regulation... The hazard increases with speed and the danger to third parties increases with speed. I understand that the regulations come into play above 3.7kw
You certainly do not need a licence or insurance to snorkel dive, ... Have there been any court cases where an unlicenced or unregistered scuba diver has been cited? (I am not advocating that scuba divers should be untrained, as it recognisably a hazardous activity.)

There were 3 times more deaths by drowning in the UK in 2014 than deaths in cycling.

Look again at the UK statistics of 2014. Of the listed modes of transportation cycling had significantly the least deaths.
It is not a hazardous activity

There is one and only one point where we agree..... The future will be agast that we allowed heavy goods vehicles share the same spaces as pedestrians and cyclists, just as I was agast to see large locomotives and trains travelling ( slowly ) through villagesand across roads in Switzerland without protective barriers

 

[Zlatan]

In Holland 31% pedal to work and similar %age name cycling as their primary transport.
In England under 2% of population cycle to work.
Comparing total number of deaths between the two countries is flawed.
Holland also has compulsory cycle test for all 12 year olds. They manage to test 200,000 cyclists annually...
We should be looking at each and every scheme to reduce total deaths and halt the rise in serious injury.
If there is so much being done why is death rate fairly constant and serious injury rising. ( could be argued death rate dropped a few years ago because of better health care post accident, its also valid to point out rural areas have longer waits for ambulance as opposed to urban areas, which must also influence death rates between the two areas)
To argue everything is fine is burying your heads in sand.
Wether it needs dedicated cycle lanes specifically built for cycles ( and not stolen from car/ lorry lanes) or compulsory training in mixed use areas something must be done if government really want to get more on bikes.
Last year by family hired bikes in Wales, intending to not do any cycling on roads. It amazed me how many cycle paths simply stop leaving no choice but to join traffic doing at least 40mph more than cycling. Its simply barmy. I would never allow any of my family near a road on a pushbike under current situation, no matter how safe you tell me it is...because it plainly is not.

To blame drivers all the time is missing the point completely. If I dove with sharks and got bitten it would be my fault. If cyclists must share space with dumper trucks, lorries and speeding cars its their own responsibility to make sure they have the skills to deal with it. Its proving (IMO) that many do not do that so then it becomes the responsibility of governing body to act. If they don't the government should.
All those folk cycling to work do not justify the deaths we are seeing or the serious injuries folk are living with.
Yes my perspective is as a none cyclist, 90% of the population ??? I suspect some of you cant see the wood for the trees. Cycling on roads is dangerous, arguing otherwise is more so. You will not convince me otherwise of either point.

 

[Zlatan]

According to Cycling Intelligence there is massive variation in Lindon cycle deaths year on year. The lowest on record was in 2004 with 8. Unfortunately the following year there were 21.
Over last 15 years ( their figures) the average is 17 pa.

 

[flecc]

According to Cycling Intelligence there is massive variation in Lindon cycle deaths year on year. The lowest on record was in 2004 with 8. Unfortunately the following year there were 21.
Over last 15 years ( their figures) the average is 17 pa.

Which means there has been a large reduction!

What you fail to consider is the huge increase in London cycling over the period. Up until the introduction of the London Congestion Charge in 2003, cycle commuting was very much a small minority activity, I hardly saw bikes in my car commuting then.

But the greatly increased costs of driving, traffic congestion, the increases in public transport fares and the rush hour overcrowding on buses and trains has meant a continuous increase in cycle commuting to today's over tripled levels. All while cyclist deaths have stayed around the same and are currently low.

To see how dominant London cycle commuting has become, have a look at this link.

As for cycling being dangerous, I was born in central London and have lived here most of my life. In my 70 years of cycling I've never had any collision with a vehicle or person and haven't a single cycling accident mark on me.
.

 

[grldtnr]

Which means there has been a large reduction!

What you fail to consider is the huge increase in London cycling over the period. Up until the introduction of the London Congestion Charge in 2003, cycle commuting was very much a small minority activity, I hardly saw bikes in my car commuting then.

But the greatly increased costs of driving, traffic congestion, the increases in public transport fares and the rush hour overcrowding on buses and trains has meant a continuous increase in cycle commuting to today's over tripled levels. All while cyclist deaths have stayed around the same and are currently low.

To see how dominant London cycle commuting has become, have a look at this link.

As for cycling being dangerous, I was born in central London and have lived here most of my life. In my 70 years of cycling I've never had any collision with a vehicle or person and haven't a single cycling accident mark on me.
.

I have to say that I have only skimmed this current topic re cycling safety, myself ,had enjoyed cycling for 30 yrs uptill 2001, when out leading a club ride was struck from the front by an out of control car on a narrow country lane, I was knocked off,sent into a high hedge with serious leg injuries.
The 'accident' was through no fault of my own, wholly due to lack of care and attention of the driver,who was to blame entirely, he got of with 12 points and a small fine.

It's my view that motorist are under trained in what to do when meeting cyclist,we are often treated as a nuisance and obstacle to be got around when on the road, this needs to change, the onus is not training cyclist ,it has is instilling caution in meeting cyclist, after all cyclist have a natural interest in cycling safely, as we are so vulnerable.
In conclusion it isn't training safer cycling , it's necessary that we have the basic rules of the road, but the need to instruct and train future drivers.

 

[flecc]

It's my view that motorist are under trained in what to do when meeting cyclist, we are often treated as a nuisance and obstacle to be got around when on the road

This is the core of the problem.

Basically car drivers have been spoilt ever since the abolition of the law requiring a man with a flag walking in front of a car. Of course I'm not advocating that returns, but drawing attention to the way in which progress has always suited the driver most.

First drivers were allowed to get away with treating roads as free car parks for any period of time, something that should have been banned at the outset.

Then roads were improved to permit higher speeds and widened to give higher capacity. Various forms of junctions were developed to aid the free flow of vehicles.

All of the changes tended to be with the motor vehicle in mind, the human pedestrian and others then being accommodated in some often inadequate way, so as to not too greatly inconvenience the driver.

The sum total is that drivers too often have an attitude of right, expecting and demanding priority over all other interests.

We need radical changes in the way in which drivers are trained, the ways in which our legislators approach their task and the existing laws affecting personal travel.

The car has been God for far too long.
.

 

[mike killay]

I have said it on here before, but a responsible Government would put out short 'ads' on TV to educate drivers as to their responsibilities towards cyclists.
Leave at least 5 feet between cycle and car when overtaking.
Understand what a cyclist is doing when 'taking the road' at keep left signs.
Avoiding the door zone and so on

 

[Zlatan]

I have said it on here before, but a responsible Government would put out short 'ads' on TV to educate drivers as to their responsibilities towards cyclists.
Leave at least 5 feet between cycle and car when overtaking.
Understand what a cyclist is doing when 'taking the road' at keep left signs.
Avoiding the door zone and so on

Agree with that Mike but it cuts both ways. Years ago when I learned to drive the unwritten rule
was assume car doors would open when passing parked vehicles and leave corresponding room to accommodate....but cycles undertaking can not possibly do that..look at the video that started this thread...IMHO the cyclist is equally in wrong, uf not more so...
Trouble is to make system work with road network under strain we all have to operate in smaller space than ideal. Look on motorway, if we all drove to highway code , braking distance etc to car in front some motorways would be in operable.
Yes drivers need to be more aware of cyclists but likeways cyclists should both follow same rules drivers operate under and be equipped to expect worst from drivers.( obviously within reason)
People who have managed to negotiate London roads over extended periods are the ones who should be passing on their skills to others rather than simply blaming drivers.
Yes ,standards of driving could always be improved but its well recognised Uk roads are amongst safest in world..so drivers cant be that bad.
Cyclists need to take some responsibility as well.
Its impossible to say (cycle) training would not help, its not happened or been tried to find out, seems Dutch think it helps. A million cyclists tested every 5 years !!!! Its helped with motorcycles...why not cycles ???
How many of the 6 females crushed by lorries turning left would be here had they had training before hand ???The fact it was / is such a specific group indicates something they did or didn't do contributed.

Being in the right legally does not save lives. Recognising the hazard and taking avoiding action does. Drivers will never be perfect, seems you are expecting them to be so for cyclists to be safe. That is being unrealistic.

 

[Emo Rider]

In Holland 31% pedal to work and similar %age name cycling as their primary transport.
In England under 2% of population cycle to work.
Comparing total number of deaths between the two countries is flawed.
Holland also has compulsory cycle test for all 12 year olds. They manage to test 200,000 cyclists annually...
We should be looking at each and every scheme to reduce total deaths and halt the rise in serious injury.
If there is so much being done why is death rate fairly constant and serious injury rising. ( could be argued death rate dropped a few years ago because of better health care post accident, its also valid to point out rural areas have longer waits for ambulance as opposed to urban areas, which must also influence death rates between the two areas)
To argue everything is fine is burying your heads in sand.
Wether it needs dedicated cycle lanes specifically built for cycles ( and not stolen from car/ lorry lanes) or compulsory training in mixed use areas something must be done if government really want to get more on bikes.
Last year by family hired bikes in Wales, intending to not do any cycling on roads. It amazed me how many cycle paths simply stop leaving no choice but to join traffic doing at least 40mph more than cycling. Its simply barmy. I would never allow any of my family near a road on a pushbike under current situation, no matter how safe you tell me it is...because it plainly is not.

To blame drivers all the time is missing the point completely. If I dove with sharks and got bitten it would be my fault. If cyclists must share space with dumper trucks, lorries and speeding cars its their own responsibility to make sure they have the skills to deal with it. Its proving (IMO) that many do not do that so then it becomes the responsibility of governing body to act. If they don't the government should.
All those folk cycling to work do not justify the deaths we are seeing or the serious injuries folk are living with.
Yes my perspective is as a none cyclist, 90% of the population ??? I suspect some of you cant see the wood for the trees. Cycling on roads is dangerous, arguing otherwise is more so. You will not convince me otherwise of either point.

Whom here is blaming drivers for all cycling deaths and injuries? Whom here has said that cycling is not dangerous? Whom here has not said said that cycling infrastructure needs to improve. Just whom is arguing with you on these points. You are doing a great job of regurgitating statistics but other than beating the "cyclists must be trained drum" I read no other contributions to this thread. You have not made one point or suggestion on how to prevent incidents that invovle negligent drivers. In my opinion, negligent use of a motor vehicle is the major cause of all incidents involving vunerable road users.

Would training of cyclists be a bad thing, no. An expensive program to implement with limited effect it would be as it would offer little protection from negligent road users. Again, inspite of repeated request for your input on what this cycle training should include, you have chosen to ingnore.

Training children on road safety up to and at the age of 12. It is a program that teaches basic traffic laws and how to hopefully not get run over. The vast majority of cyclist that commute and get killed and injured know those basic rules just from reaching the age they are. Most operate vehicles themselves. Again, without three paragraphs of statistics, would you please state what kind of training for cyclist will help them/us survive sharing the road with vehicles.