lord winston calls for cycling licences to improve road safety

[Ming the Merciless]

But Conservative peer Lord Robathan, the former chairman of the All Party Cycling Group, said: "Should we not consider whether we wish to encourage cycling for the health benefits that it gives, and indeed the advantages to reducing congestion, or whether we wish to deter cyclists with unnecessary regulation which will keep the police busy for the next 100 years?"

 

[Deleted member 26715]

But Conservative peer Lord Robathan, the former chairman of the All Party Cycling Group, said: "Should we not consider whether we wish to encourage cycling for the health benefits that it gives, and indeed the advantages to reducing congestion, or whether we wish to deter cyclists with unnecessary regulation which will keep the police busy for the next 100 years?"

He's clearly too sensible to be listened to

 

[icowden]

So just to confirm thought you believe that because the under 35's had a hazard perception test it makes them better drivers?

You seem to be drawing your own conclusions here. I didn't make any evaluation as to whether they were better drivers. I opined that they are more likely to have had questions about cyclists in their driving tests given that they do a theory test and hazard perception test. I don't think that's an unreasonable assumption.

What I was trying to intimate is that if you don't cycle, you probably don't think twice about cyclists other than to try to make sure you don't run them over. This may (and probably should) be different for younger drivers who receive a much more rigorous driving test. It would actually make enormous sense if drivers had to have a refresher test every 5 years or so, so that they can ensure that their knowledge and skills are up to date.

All of the above statements are of course generalisations and there will of course be many exceptions. You yourself apparently found my comments insulting, but given that you are on a cycling forum, I presume you cycle? Given that likelihood, none of the generalisations applied to you.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

You seem to be drawing your own conclusions here.

Nope I'm taking your biased points I take it you are under 35? When I was taught to ride/drive we learnt about cyclist because they was far more of them, there wasn't Sat Nav's to play with, mobile phones that demand attention & must be answered by under 35's at all cost at all times, Oh these are just generalisations by the way so that makes it alright.

Anyway I think you're incorrect I genuinely believe the standard of driving is going down the extended test has done nothing to improve it.

 

[icowden]

Nope I'm approaching 45. Again, I said nothing about the standard of driving. What I said was that I believed that younger drivers receive more information about cyclists than older drivers did, based on the fact they now have a written test and hazard awareness rather than "name these 5 signs".

 

[Randy Butternubs]

I only passed my car driving test about 5 years ago and I don't remember anything about bicycles.

Sure, there were probably one or two obvious questions about them slipped into the theory test but unless you are going to hammer in the point that cyclists are a) valid road users, and b) human beings who would rather like not to die, then you are just pissing in the wind.

The only thing relevant to bicycles I actually remember from my training is the occasion when I was nervously following a cyclist on a tight London suburban road and was mildly berated by my driving instructor for not overtaking him.