For Bike’s Sake – Making Cycling Safer

Following the introduction of ‘Boris Bikes’ and the success of Team GB’s cyclists at the Olympics more and more people are taking to two wheels to get around London, but as the number of bicycles has increased so has the number of accidents.

This poses a major problem. How do you get people to leave their cars at home and make cycling safe at the same time?

Cycling should be encouraged in this country as it cuts the number of cars on the road, cut carbon emissions, encourages people to get some exercise and reduces the pressure on public transport at peak times. 

However, it is difficult to extol the virtues of pedalling if there are regular accidents and fatalities.

Surely the best way to approach this is to treat cycling in the same way we deal with sex education in schools by not encouraging people to cycle, but by encouraging people to cycle safely.

Unfortunately, one of the key problems is cyclists themselves. Large numbers of them seem to think they are Bradley Wiggins or Victoria Pendleton when, apart from the fact they ride a bicycle, they have nothing in common at all.

Cyclists also seem to have a flexible relationship with the Highway Code, regularly jumping red lights, pedestrian crossings and other road safety features. While I am not saying all cyclists do not follow the basic rules of the road the ones who do are putting themselves in very real danger by flaunting measures put in place to save lives.

What this comes down to is the fact that bicycles are the only vehicle you are allowed to drive on the road which requires no licence at all. Even 16-year-olds tearing around council estates on scooters have to demonstrate some basic road skills before being unleashed atop their 4 horsepower Vespa’s.

While the idea of making every cyclist get a license before they can go on the road is a little counterproductive there are certain measures which certainly could be introduced, some in the short term, others in the future.

The first thing to do is introduce a mandatory dress code for all cyclists. Helmet, gloves and high-visibility jackets must be worn and all bicycles must be fitted with lights which should be on at all times when being ridden.

This would ensure cyclists are at least slightly protected and most importantly more visible for other road users.

Motorcyclists are already required by law to wear a helmet and most other protective clothing comes with built in Kevlar and luminous strips to improve visibility, not to mention bikers are instructed when taking their tests to have their lights on at all times.

Unfortunately, no matter how much training they go through, lorry and bus drivers are never going to be able to see a cyclist in dark clothes on a bike without lights careering up the inside of traffic and this may at least save some lives.

This kind of regulation could be implemented overnight and could be regulated by police officers who could impose on-the-spot fines.

However, a more pressing issue is of road safety. Without forcing cyclists to take a license test before being allowed on the road it is hard to ensure the UK’s prolific peddlers have any kind of road sense at all, but the answer to this might already exist.

The cycling proficiency test has been around for many years, but unfortunately is not offered at all schools. Surely the best way to ensure all our children grow up to be safer drivers, cyclists and even pedestrians is to make road safety and cycling proficiency a mandatory requirement.

Many might be tempted to say this post is forcing all the blame for this onto the cyclists and asking for nothing to be done to improve the behaviour of car, bus and lorry drivers and the reason is this.

Every time you hear of a cyclist dying or getting badly injured on the roads it is almost always happened in the same way. They were hit by a large vehicle turning left.

This leaves many motorcyclists asking the question what were they doing on the inside line of a large vehicle turning left. One of the first things you’re are taught during compulsory basic training for a motorbike license is never do this as you will get knocked-off, neatly bringing us back to the original point of why is there no mandatory test for cyclists.

In the long-run it would also be a good idea to make sure all bicycles used on the roads are licensed and carry a number plate like a car so all riders who break the rules of the road can be pursued in the same way as speeding motorists.

The question of whether or not it is practical to introduce tests and strict licensing laws on cyclists is certainly a difficult one as it is something to be encouraged, but at the same time is very dangerous.

However, as mentioned earlier bicycles are the only vehicle you can drive on the road without a license and this fact alone speaks volumes about where the changes need to be made.

An Ode to The Iron Lady

‘To the living we owe respect, but to the dead we owe only the truth’ French author Voltaire once wrote. With this in mind is it now not time to stop romanticising about the first, and so far only, female Prime Minister?

The news of the death of Baroness Thatcher spread across the world in a very short amount of time and while her sad passing was not totally unexpected the reaction to it certainly was. All of a sudden it became unacceptable to criticise one of the most divisive political leaders just because she was no longer with us.

This is the reason this post started with the quote from Voltaire as it has long been my personal opinion if Maggie Thatcher had been a man she would have gone down as one of the worst Prime Ministers in history and is responsible for most of the problems we face today.

Her lasting legacy is of course an economic one. The modern UK economy, dominated by private companies and the financial sector, is all of Mrs Thatcher’s doing. While it is true some have benefitted from this it is harder to claim everyone has.

The privatisation of the power, utility and transport sector has resulted in inflated prices and poor service as the companies running the service aim to make them as profitable as possible.

While it is true British Gas, BT and BP had significant flaws at least they understood what they did was for the benefit of the people and not for profit. Instead what we ended up with is annual news stories about how much money Thames Water makes while providing a third-rate service.

Her savage deregulation of the financial sector may have greatly increased the power of London’s banking industry, but led directly to the problems causing the credit crunch, creating an industry obsessed with money and lacking moral guidance.

At the same time she set out to destroy the traditional manufacturing industries which had powered the UK economy for centuries and did nothing to help those made unemployed as a result. Yes, the heavy industries in mining and metals were faltering, but what happened in the aftermath was tantamount to abandonment of certain areas of the country by the government.

While many of us agree with the principles behind the trade union movement, we have to accept come the 1970s and 80s they were far too militant and overstepping its remit. However, the way to go about it was to reform the industries not to directly set-out to destroy them.

All this resulted in was inflated unemployment and economic depression in Northern England, Scotland and Wales which directly led to what we refer to today as the welfare trap and weak unions unable to stand-up for the workers they represent.

This leads us on nicely to what can be seen as the Iron Lady’s worst policy, right-to-buy.

While the idea of letting working class families buy council houses at a discount seems like a great idea you only have to scratch the surface to see how flawed the fundamental idea is.

Thanks to spending cuts local councils during the 80s were desperate to raise cash and so, when right-to-buy was introduced, almost all council housing in the UK was sold, but no additional capacity was built, the idea being this ‘housing gap’ would be filled by private landlords.

However, what actually materialised was central government spending billions over the last couple of decades paying extortionate rents to private companies to house what would have previously been council tenants.

Today low-income families (and yes, immigrants) have to be put-up in private homes as there is no low-cost or council homes available. This is why you get news stories (usually reported in the Daily Mail) complaining about how a single mother with six children lives in a mansion while lower middle-class families struggle to afford a deposit.

While we are on housing we should also take a look at the Poll Tax. This policy was designed to replace council tax, but again was not thought through at all as it rewarded one-person living in a mansion, while penalising a large family in a small house who could not afford to move somewhere larger.

Thankfully this levy did not last long in part due to rioting on the streets, but it should be remembered the Thatcher years saw some of the worst civil unrest in history.

To her supporters however, Mrs Thatcher will also be remembered for her foreign policy and most importantly the Falklands.

Her steely resolve is certainly to be admired, but 255 British servicemen lost their lives in a conflict over a strategically unimportant spit-of-land in the South Atlantic while little effort was made to deal with the underlying problem of a military dictator in Argentina.

Closer to home it would be fair to say her relationship with the European Union was frosty, something which has cost the UK and the Conservative party many problems since her departure from Downing Street, and while she made progress with China and the USSR and developed a strong relationship with America she also referred to Nelson Mandela’s ANC as a terrorist group.

What we see time and time again here is while she might have had the courage of her convictions and an ability to see unpopular policies through many have a long-lasting negative legacy.

It is true she should be respected and possibly even revered for what she stood for and for her position as the first female Prime Minister and a truly great Briton, however it is time for us to stop romanticising about her historical significance and focus on what she left behind.

I do not agree with people celebrating her death or the #danceonhergrave on Twitter, but as said at the start of this post you owe the living your respect, but after their death you owe them the truth.