A win for cyclists

[cfsmtb[_241_]]

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".


--
cfsmtb

[Peter]

cfsmtb > wrote:

> 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

[Dave]

On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 08:21:49 +1000, Peter wrote:

> 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 |
Against boredom, the Gods themselves struggle in vain.
- Nietzche

[Shane Stanley]

In article >,
"Dave" > wrote:

> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 08:21:49 +1000, Peter wrote:
>
> > 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

[TimC]

On 2007-06-02, Shane Stanley (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
> In article >,
> "Dave" > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 02 Jun 2007 08:21:49 +1000, Peter wrote:
>>
>> > 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).

> 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

[Darryl C]

In article >,
cfsmtb > wrote:

> 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
crap.

cheers,
Darryl