Australia and New Zealand · Public discussion

A win for cyclists

Started by cfsmtb · · Last activity · 6 posts · 830 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Australia and New Zealand
Published
1 June 2007
Last activity
2 June 2007
Original author
cfsmtb
Posts
6
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
830
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–6 of 6
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. From the CTC, a win regarding the longrunning campaign to amend the UK Highway Code. This campaign does prove that change *is possible* even in the face of well-meaning, but flawed attitudes.

    ***

    Highway Code cracked: more than 40 rules changed!
    http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4568

    How the Changes Happened
    http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4856

    Following a high-profile campaign from CTC, the Government has agreed to amend the Highway Code to improve cyclists' safety and to encourage drivers to take more care around vulnerable road users.

    In total over 40 rules have been changed to the benefit of cyclists.

    CTC has been working with the Department on these changed words for the past month and we are delighted that the Government has decided to make these improvements to the Highway Code.

    We had intensive negotiations, but the Department for Transport has listened to CTC and the new wording is a definite improvement.

    CTC Director Kevin Mayne said "I am also delighted for CTC as an organisation, for our staff, members and supporters. This has been nearly two years work and a huge investment of our resources. We thought at several stages during the process we had achieved the outcomes we sought, but now we have an agreement we can work with.

    "I am convinced that at the final stage of the process only CTC could have achieved this outcome with our focus, our knowledge, our ability to bring together the whole cycling movement and the respect we are given by government."

    The new version makes clear that cyclists have every right to cycle on the road. Rules 61 and 63 state that cycle lanes and cycle facilities, are "not compulsory" and the decision to use them "will depend on your experience and skills".

  2. cfsmtb said:

    The new version makes clear that cyclists have every right to cycle on
    the road. Rules 61 and 63 state that cycle lanes and cycle facilities,
    are "not compulsory" and the decision to use them "will depend on your
    experience and skills".

    I'd love to see that introduced here, especially when some of the lanes
    are so badly designed and maintained.

    Peter

  3. Peter said:

    I'd love to see that introduced here, especially when some of the lanes
    are so badly designed and maintained.

    It already is. The relevant phrase is "where practical", which should give
    loads of legroom. However you may need to explain this to a judge if you
    can't explain it to a cop. That said, when was the last time anyone got
    done for not riding on a cycle lane?

    --
    Dave Hughes | [email hidden]
    Against boredom, the Gods themselves struggle in vain.
    - Nietzche

  4. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Dave said:
    Peter said:

    I'd love to see that introduced here, especially when some of the lanes
    are so badly designed and maintained.

    It already is. The relevant phrase is "where practical", which should give
    loads of legroom.

    The problem is that the phrase is nearly meaningless to drivers, who
    just see cases of what they judge as cyclists yet again ignoring the
    law. A change to the law would make the situation clearer, not to
    mention freeing up some space in the letter columns of newspapers across
    the land.

    --
    Shane Stanley

  5. On 2007-06-02, Shane Stanley (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

    Quoted message said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    Dave said:
    Peter said:

    I'd love to see that introduced here, especially when some of the lanes
    are so badly designed and maintained.

    It already is. The relevant phrase is "where practical", which should give
    loads of legroom.

    Practicable. There's a legal (and lingual) difference (I have a
    feeling it gives us less choice than what "practical" would give us).

    Quoted message said:

    The problem is that the phrase is nearly meaningless to drivers, who
    just see cases of what they judge as cyclists yet again ignoring the
    law. A change to the law would make the situation clearer, not to
    mention freeing up some space in the letter columns of newspapers across
    the land.

    Yeah, but how many people noticed the change in the law that required
    drivers nation wide to signal the left indicator prior to exiting a
    roundabout, regardless of the entry point they made? Or the one
    specifying that all doors must be locked if no one is staying within
    3m of the vehicle?

    --
    TimC
    Vodka, barbeque, pizza, beer - which is essential for the post-modern coder?
    "You are forgettink caffeine, comrade." -- Pitr Dubovich/User Friendly

  6. In article <[email hidden]>,

    cfsmtb said:

    From the CTC, a win regarding the longrunning campaign to amend the UK
    Highway Code. This campaign does prove that change *is possible* even
    in the face of well-meaning, but flawed attitudes.

    ***

    Highway Code cracked: more than 40 rules changed!
    http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4568

    Now where did I put those amber reflectors from the bike I bought 20
    years ago. My last couple of bikes had no pedals when purchased.

    All seems fairly sensible to me except the pelican, puffin and toucan
    [censored].

    cheers,
    Darryl

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.