Car v Cycle

It should not be downplayed that there is a very real running battle on our roads between motorists and those on pedal cycles.

I have been a cyclist for leisure, sport, exercise and commuting for most of my life and in that time I can personally vouch for the breakdown in relations between four wheel and two wheel users.

My unpleasant experiences have included a head on impact with a car, having dubious liquids thrown from an unwound window, being taken around a street corner that was not on my planned route and being nudged from behind at a traffic light controlled junction. 

I was, with all of those incidents, the innocent victim.

I am of course the first to that say that cyclists are not all sensible and conscientious towards the rules of the road and others who compete for the same space but this also applies also to drivers of vehicles.

Against this background of conflict the UK Retailer, Halfords, who have over 150 years trading history in automotive and cycling products and services published in 2017 their statistic based Report entitled “Sharing the Road”.

It set out to try to establish if indeed there was a willingness amongst the two factions to be able to co-exist out on the carriageways, byways and lanes of this country.

Some very interesting facts were revealed in the responses.

It is beyond doubt that inspite of its contribution to pollution and accident fatalities the motor car is still King and along with its entourage of all other engine driven vehicles they represent  a supremely strong economic lobbying group.

In the UK 76% of adults hold a full driving licence and with a further 9% of wannabees under a provisional licence. This is an overwhelming proportion of the population. Not everyone is, however, a petrol head and some 15% of the nation do not drive at all.

There is, importantly, in the perpetual state of war the statistic that only 15% of those holding a full driving licence cycle more than twice in any month. The percentage of those who cycle between once a year and twice monthly is only 18%.

Currently some 2.5 million cyclists over the age of 18 cycle between 2 and 5 times a week which seems to comprise those taking it seriously as a hobby/pursuit/sport or as a necessity to get to and from a college or workplace as a cheap means of personal transport.

Therefore there is a worryingly thin segment ,if put into a Venn diagram representation, of those who drive and those drivers who are also cyclists.

This seems to be the crux of the confrontational situation out on the roads.

It has deteriorated into an Us and Them situation.

In the best of clichés it is of course a two way street. I see the need for better bike training in the antics of cyclists in and amongst the flow of traffic in my local area.

It is sad to see that only 7% of schoolchildren now take the Cycling Proficiency Course with that great institution just passing its 70th anniversary. Evidently a victim of local authority cutbacks this is contradicted by the Halfords Report findings that 56% of respondents felt that cycle training should be part of the National Curriculum.  In tandem the same survey saw 60% in favour of more Central Government spending on cycling safety and 32% wanting a new Highway Code for young riders.

These figures serve to highlight concerns over how safe our streets are for cyclists and in particular those who are just starting to use a bicycle.

I cannot agree more strongly with the chronic shortage of cycling facilities in the UK, specifically dedicated cycle lanes and paths.

The pro-car/anti bike lobby has been a bit more controversial in its expressed demands through the Halfords poll.

A common theme amongst those interviewed was that cyclists should be subjected to spot tests on the Highway Code and a whopping 86% supported tougher penalties on cyclists who did not follow it. 81% saw aggressive cycling as worthy of sanction and 59% would be in favour of bicycles being fitted with number plates for traceability.

In response to this cyclists have counter attacked with 80% wanting tougher penalties for motorists who behave dangerously and at best discourteously and with 18% believing that as part of the standard Driving Test there should be a segment of riding a bike to appreciate the stresses and issues associated with it. Leaving enough room when a car passes a cyclist appears a discretionary option rather than being a statutory requirement.

I can only reflect where the battle lines were first drawn up in the car versus cycle war.

After all in this country there has always been a very high level of nostalgia around cycling and it has played a major part in the formative years of much of the young population. 47% of Dads and 20% of Mums were responsible for getting us from wobbling on stabilisers to free riding as a unique bonding experience.

However, in later life, as adults we have been seduced by motoring and the unique joy of cycling has been largely forgotten.

It is not a surprise then that out of an average 954 annual trips by the UK population using all modes of transport only 1.5% is on a bicycle.

Things can only get worse.

We are now being drip fed insidiously about the perceived advantages of driverless cars and commercial vehicles.

That brings into play a whole new set of ethical issues.

What sort of algorithm will determine the outcome where such a vehicle has to make the decision in a potential confrontation with a cyclist whether to save its passengers (or itself)  resulting in the unfortunate demise of the rider?

Before we get to that can of worms we would surely hope to make some real and lasting progress towards sharing the road.