Blog
Interesting article from Canada which should resonate world wide…
via CBC News – Health – How pedestrians, cyclists and drivers can get along a little better.
Author Archives: Peter Bancroft
CBC News – Health – How pedestrians, cyclists and drivers can get along a little better
0
Filed under Safety
Why Do Cyclists Not Pay Road Tax?
One of the most common issues which angers many motorists is that cyclists do not pay road tax. Cyclists shold pay the tax, they argue, before they should be allowed to ride on the road. Cyclists are tax-dodgers. Criminals. Hippies. The reaction of many cyclists when confronted with the statement you don’t pay road tax is the almost-instinctive neither do you, but I think that misses an important point. Perception.
That paper disc is important. For some drivers it is more important than not running low on fuel when the garage is closed. It is more important than checking tyre pressures or tread depth. It is important because it lets motorists drive their car. Motorists have to pay to use the road, so why are cyclists exempt?
Most motorists don’t care that Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) is not road tax. It actually doesn’t matter that the money which is spent on the little paper disc which sits in the window does not go towards the road. It isn’t important. The argument that many (if not most) cyclists do pay VED is a moot point too. I own a car, currently two in fact, and pay my VED as appropriate. I pay VED for each vehicle – it doesn’t matter that I already pay it once for my other car. The tax needs to be paid for each vehicle. Motorists pay to use the road, cyclists don’t.
So what gives?
Let us spin back to the beginning, the idea that cyclists don’t pay for the road. They do, through their council tax. By and large, cyclists are not tax dodgers and pay their council tax, which in turn goes on to fund the building and maintenence of local roads. Cyclists also contribute to the general pot which funds motorways as well – they don’t get a rebate just because they can’t cycle on them. This is not to mention that regular cyclists are likely to be healthier and less likely to be a burden on the NHS. Cycling saves the tax payer money.
What was that about maintenance? Roads need to be paid for sure, but over time they get damaged and need to be repaired too. More costs mean more tax, and drivers often perceive that they pay more of it than cyclists.
So what damages the roads? Rain, ice, and vehicles are the major culprits. The heavier the vehicle, the more damage to the road. Even the heaviest bike doesn’t weigh as much as the average car… so it doesn’t do as much damage. Perfectly logical. What isn’t clear is just how many powers more damage a car does to the road than a bicycle.
Assuming fourth power axle weight ratio if a bicycle had a weight of half that of a car, the car would be causing approximately 16 times the damage to the road surface than the bike. A bike does not weigh half that of a car, but substantially less. Cars and heavier vehicles cause hundreds (or even thousands) of times more damage than a bicycle. Cycling, once again, saves the tax payer money.
This is not even including additional damage caused by air pollution, water pollution, noise pollution, space used for parking, congestion, fatal and non-fatal “accidents” all of which is exacerbated by high vehicle usage. VED paid by the poor persecuted motorist barely makes a dent in the costs.
And – get this – VED is, in many cases, an entirely voluntary tax anyway. You don’t have to pay it if you don’t want to. This is no secret although it is rarely talked about. No one will strongarm you into signing the cheque, or drag you off to court. Saving that extra cash from the Government’s pocket is easy, and all it requires is to do something people have been doing since the dawn of man: live without the car.
The automotive industry has been hugely successful in promoting the lifestyle idea that cars are necessary. They are not. Desirable, maybe. Useful, certainly. However as a culture we have become dependant upon motorised transport by choice.
A case in point: each Saturday my wife and I walk into town to do our weekly shop whilst our neighbours drive. We arrive at the shops roughly the same time, once the neighbours have found somewhere to park, paid, and walked from the car park to the High Street. Now, it is certainly more convenient to use the car to transport the shopping back home, but is it really necessary? No, of course it isn’t, but they choose to drive because it suits them. It isn’t laziness (far from it) but it is a choice.
A cyclist does not pay “road tax” because they do not inherently pollute, and because they cause substantially less damage to roads than heavier motorised vehicles. They reduce the tax burden on other government and public departments, and help to reduce congestion.
See also:
Review: Waitrose BikeHod Trailers
Waitrose BikeHod
One of Waitrose’s less publicised recent customer services has been the provision of BikeHod trailers for customers to use, for up to three days free of charge, to ship their shopping home in. Since my local Waitrose is easily within cycling distance I have always feel somewhat guilty making a car journey just to do the weekly shopping… so this had to be worth a try.
If I am brutally honest, first impressions were not good. The staff seemed to have no real idea about how to loan one out, and spent a few minutes scrambling under the desks looking for the appropriate forms. I was told I wouldn’t need to do this part again, which I hope is true as it was somewhat time consuming, even if they did have the forms to hand.
Next, a special hitch had to be attached to saddle stem. This apparently had to be done by a member of staff, and involved the use of a spanner… which they had lost.
Thankfully at this point I could leave them to it, and went off to do my shopping (whilst hoping that the spanner turned up by the time I had finished, otherwise I would be towing the trailer home by hand). I paid for my shopping, and returned to find the woman who was helping out before… who immediately passed over to someone else who had done it all before, had a spanner in her hand, and came out to set up the bike.
This is where things started to go right. The brass hitch took about five minutes to put on the bike – again, my heart sank, because there was no way most people (myself included) would want to spend time jimmying that into place everytime they went shopping, especially if it was raining. Fortunately the new woman asked if I was likely to be using the trailers again, I said I was, and she told me the hitch may as well stay on the bike as they had plenty of spares.
The hod itself fitted on quite quickly, and I was off! Despite being filled with some quite weighty items I barely noticed the trailer at all. I was expecting some odd looks, but got none. In fact, I noticed cars giving substantially more space when passing than they had on my journey down to the supermarket sans traileur.
I felt a little like a Waitrose employee making a delivery, what with the branded Hod, and ubiquitous florescent jacket. I did ask about buying one – BikeHod do have them for sale unablazoned for about £250, however Waitrose are apparently looking into the prospect of selling them to customers branded. Maybe that would be slightly cheaper (well, I would hope so for the free advertising, but then again…).
Although Waitrose recommended not cycling at night using the trailers, there are plenty of hooks and tabs for attaching lights to (though arguably there could be more). The trailer itself felt sturdy and was easy to maneouver. My only real complaint would be staff training. Either I was very unlucky, or time simply has not been spent making sure people are up to speed. Should this endeavour take off, however, I guess that this will come.
A beginner’s guide to cycling – An A to Z
Filed under Uncategorized
Adjustable Cup – How to get a bigger cup of tea.
Brake Shoe – What happened when Cinderella dropped her glass slipper.
Chainwheel – How to lock you bike so that only the frame is stolen.
Dooring – Nothing amusing to see here.
English Racer – Victoria Pendleton.
Face Plant – Why your mother told you to keep your nose clean.
Granny Gear – Cycling in bloomers.
Head Tube – Putting helmet-mounted camera footage on the Internet.
Involuntary Dismount – Driving somewhere.
Jam Nut – Owwww.
Kickstand – The proper sequence of events should someone push you off your bike.
LBS – Look Before Swerving.
Mountain Bike – A bike designed to be ridden on flat surfaces, usually pavements.
Noodle – That bit of hair which gets in your mouth but you can’t spit out.
Over the Bars – Giving up alcohol.
P******e – Something that only occurs when you’re running late.
Quick-Release – Having a pee at the side of the road.
Rim – The part of the body which hurts after the first long ride on a bike.
Stud – A male cyclist.
Touring – Taking a “short cut.”
U-brake – What to do at red traffic lights.
Vice-Grip – If you are not yet Over the Bars.
Wheel Bender – A very gay cyclist.
XC – To hug the gutter in the countryside.
You’re Welcome – The response drivers expect after informing you that you’re “awll over the farkin’ raaad”.
Zip Tie - A means to store items inside office wear.
Why Do Cyclists Ride On The Road?
Last week we looked at the road positioning that cyclists often use, and why they will sometimes place themselves in the “Primary” position despite that fact that it may slow down following traffic. We saw that cyclists will do this for the benefit of their own safety, and to prevent other road users from overtaking when the cyclist can see that there isn’t space up ahead, or to avoid other hazards. We also learned that cyclists are particularly vulnerable road users, and that minor incidents in a car can become major accidents when a cyclist is involved.
So if cyclists are in such danger on the road, why use it? Local governments spend tax payers money increasing cycling provisions, so why don’t cyclists just get off the road and use those instead? Surely it is in everybody’s interest if they didn’t use the road at all.
Firstly, lets clear up an incorrect belief that I’ve heard a couple of times. Cyclists are not allowed to cycle on the pavement. It is illegal to do so, and cyclists caught may have to pay a fixed penalty fine (Section 51 and Schedule 3 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988). It also completely disregards the needs of any pedestrians, who in comparison to cyclists are the more vulnerable party. Cyclists who do this are being selfish, but sometimes justify their actions in that they feel pressurised into using pavements to avoid the dangerous behaviour of a minority of people on the road.
Cycle lanes are often touted as a catch-all solution to this problem. Theoretically, a segregated cycle lane will allow a cyclist to be safe from other traffic, and also without the cyclist affecting other road users or pedestrians.
Sadly, many cycle lanes are so badly designed they are utterly unusable. Imagine a road where the signposts are grounded in the middle of the lane, and whats more, a tree is planted there too! Ridiculous? For cyclists this is more common than you might think. Many cycle lanes are “advisory” meaning that other road users can use them to drive in, sometimes to park in or walk on, but give the impression that cyclists must remain in them at all times.
This isn’t the case. In fact, The Highway Code was recently amended to make this clear (rule 63).
Yet some cycle lanes are installed without any consideration for the impact that their placement may have. Last week’s article demonstrated that a cyclist may need to move to the centre of a lane when passing a traffic island to prevent dangerous overtaking. However, near my home the council have painted cycle lanes to encourage the cyclist to keep to the left.
Furthermore, there simply isn’t space on the road for the cyclist and the car to pass side by side at the island, as this photograph demonstrates. The lane shown here is “advisory” which means that other vehicles may use that part of the road should they wish, however this sort of marking encourages cyclists to keep to the left, and drivers to think that there is space to pass by safely when there is not.
Cycle lanes are also poorly maintained. It is not uncommon for them to have broken glass, and other debris scattered across them. They are often used for parking other vehicles (increasing the chance that a cyclist may be “doored“), or simply be a handy place to put road signage. Where cycle lanes are not a part of the road they are often treated as footpaths by pedestrians, a problem which is exacerbated by the proliferation of shared use paths and increases the problem of cyclists having to look out for potential dangers.
Similarly, cycle lanes are quite often not the most direct route. They often cover many more junctions than a road, with frequent “Cyclist Dismount” signs.
Not that I want to portray myself as Twickenham Cyclist’s shameless publicist, but he has produced a very good video demonstrating how much longer a journey can take when using a cycle path. Cycle paths can be equated to drivers having to travel long journeys through housing estates and carparks. The route would laborious, and the progress slow. Roads, on the other hand, provide more-or-less direct routes to the required destination, with rules that are followed by most users.
Don’t get me wrong, a well designed cycle lane can be of great benefit to many cyclists. Sometimes they will be a handy route for avoiding heavy traffic, provide a shortcut (or even a longcut), give new or inexperienced cyclists somewhere to gain confidence without intimidation, or for leisure cyclists to have a gentle pedal.
But a cyclist may choose to use the road, not only because it is their legal right to do so, but for the same reason any motorist will choose to use a particular route – it is the easiest, quickest, or otherwise most beneficial way for them to get to where they are going.
It occurs to me that this post and my last portray cycling almost as an inherently dangerous activity, when this quite frankly isn’t the case. As long as a cyclist takes the appropriate measures to protect themself, and other road users do likewise (not really an undue expectation) then cycling is a perfectly safe activity.