Category Archives: “Road Safety”

Do bicycle lights make any difference to cyclist safety?

3 Replies

After a week where cyclist safety in London has hit the headlines, it might seem strange to look at this issue. I was pleased to represent the RDRF at the Bow roundabout protest organised by the London Cycling Campaign addressing issues about danger to cyclists and pedestrians there.

Bowroundaboutprotest1113

Spot the RDRF Chair at Bow roundabout protest (Photo London Cycling Campaign)

But actually the comments by the Commissioner of Transport for London on this subject – bike lights, that is – tell us a lot about the way “road safety” is thought of. Here are his comments: Continue reading →

Hi-viz for cyclists and pedestrians: the evidence and context

2 Replies

scan0001

UPDATE: 24/04/2014- the scan below should now be readable! Below I post a scan of Chapter 9 from “Death on the Streets: cars and the mythology of road safety“. Since the subject of cyclist and pedestrian conspicuity has raised such interest, I took another look at the evidence for conspicuity aids such as h-viz clothing, and the context in which the advocacy of such items occurs. In the twenty years since publication, I am not aware of any fresh evidence which contradicts the conclusions to this Chapter, or the Precaution  which I suggest is taken when considering advocacy of hi-viz. Continue reading →

Intellectuals’ resistance to motor danger in the first half of the 20th century in Britain

2 Replies

We take a break from today’s debates to look at the response to motorisation and its attendant danger from some commentators at the time. Britain tends not have a group of people described as “intellectuals”: however celebrated and articulate people who would pass as such in any other European country existed and gave their views on road danger. Some of this work comes out in ordinary journalism – see the reports on Carlton Reid’s web site such as this others elsewhere. Here I give extracts from AP Herbert  ,  Max Beerbohm   and W.S. Gilbert (the Gilbert of Gilbert and Sullivan).

180px-Max_Beerbohm_1901_retouched220px-William_S__Gilbert_(1878)APherbert

Max Beerbohm; W.S. Gilbert and A. P. Herbert

Continue reading →

How pro-cycling is Labour?

Leave a reply

MariaEagleDailyTelegraph

Maria Eagle (Photo: Daily Telegraph)

In the parliamentary debate on “Get Britain Cycling”   it wasn’t just the CTC who thought that “the most impressive speech came from Labour’s frontbench spokesperson, Shadow Secretary of State Maria Eagle”.

We look at her contribution below, in the context of the evidence we have to assess what Labour is likely to actually do if it comes to power. For while Labour formally endorsed “Get Britain Cycling” at their annual conference , there are key areas where necessary commitment to achieve the aims of the report is apparently lacking. Continue reading →

How pro-cycling are the Liberal Democrats?

Leave a reply

The last post gave some detail on how anti-cycling this Government is. Of course, we are aware that the current government is a coalition with the Liberal Democrats in it. But the Liberal Democrats have now officially adopted the Get Britain Cycling report recommendations as Lib Dem policy , and it is fair to say that the Liberal Democrats have, on the whole, tended to be more positive on the cycling front. Indeed, they may well have been a corrective force against some of the worst of the Conservatives’ efforts  on transport policy. Let’s look in more detail at the Liberal Democrats and cycling. Continue reading →

The “Get Britain Cycling” Parliamentary debate: Should anything be “done for cyclists”?

2 Replies

Now that I have your attention: the clue to my question is in the quotation marks. As we line up for the September 2nd House of Commons debate on cycling  , I discuss below how the phrasing of the question tells us about many of the problems confronting cycling. Continue reading →