… in favour of compulsory testing for cyclists !!

drugs are bad, mmmmk

compulsory cycling proficiency testing or compulsory drug testing?

http://www.bikebiz.com/index.php/news/read/bikeradar-slammed-for-supporting-campaign-that-would-suppress-cycling/013522

Certainly some of what they’re suggesting isn’t such a bad idea.

Gosh that does seem spectacularly ill conceived.

Are Future publishing prepared for the backlash?

Not read it in detail, but it seems to suggest that the cycle training should be aimed towards children in school, which to me sounds like a great idea.

No harm in having a cycle safety element in the driving test either, surely?

matt – It does start out mentioning national curriculum etc but concludes with:

“Compulsory training and testing for cyclists before they take to the road.”

which is a fairly blanket statement.

I did cycle proficiency at school, teaching kids a bit of road safety is not a bad idea.

Personally I’d like to see a cycling segment in the driving test. It would raise awareness of how vulnerable cycles are.

“Compulsory training and testing for cyclists before they take to the road.”

Best stay on the pavement then…

Knobs, so what age will you be able to take the test from, 6?

some good points but a few which the Jeremy Clarkson lot will no doubt latch on and rant endlessly. tbh they’ll rant at anything given the chance

Just share the space and show a bit of respect for fellow humans and pay attention when driving is the crux of it at the end of the day IMHO

As the article says “we” all know that but getting it through to the other lot though will take a bit more than a poster with celeb’ endorsements.
better than nothing though

Having know some folk involved in future publishing i can confirm they were not at all anti drugs.

Having a set standard before going on the roads is not a bad idea but it is

Like they have put us in a cage with lions and they are training us to use the chair to defend ourselves rather than doing anything about the **** lions

Stolen and reworded from a previous thread.

They are supporting this
http://www.ingenie.com/share-the-road-uk
which makes three requests….

1. Mandatory cycle safety should be included in the national curriculum for both primary and secondary schools to help promote co-operation and tolerance between the motorists and cyclists of the future.

2. Mandatory cycle safety elements should be included in the driving theory and practical test.

3. Compulsory training and testing for cyclists before they take to the road.

Its the 3rd one that seems particularly crazy. Its basically a license to cycle (how else do you check someones been trained). Costs a fortune, negligible benefits. Been suggested and then rejected numerous times and in many countries, but to hear its being supported by MBUK , Cycling Plus, ProCycling and WhatMTB is just nuts. Especially since they’ve teamed up with a car insurance company.

Especially since they’ve teamed up with a car insurance company.

Which is probably advertising heavily in the youth orientated car magazines that Future also produce….

It’s give and take.

You will never get these;
1. Mandatory cycle safety should be included in the national curriculum for both primary and secondary schools to help promote co-operation and tolerance between the motorists and cyclists of the future.

2. Mandatory cycle safety elements should be included in the driving theory and practical test.

If you don’t conceed something like this;
3. Compulsory training and testing for cyclists before they take to the road.

Or things can just stay as they are.

There’s got to be a financial aspect to this.

They will be suggesting we need a registration next, so they can tell if we have passed a test and fine us if we havent.

why not 1) on its own wrecker?

over a genration or two we’d end up with all afults having received cycle training and testing before they took to the road just because they’d been through the education system?

Fair one wwaswas but I would have thought that #2 would be quite desirable.

The problem is the assumption is that cyclists are incompetent fools throw themselves under the wheels of motor vehicle through lack of training and awareness

I am pro education but we need to tackle both sides of it not just cyclists

this is just more of the anti cycling tosh that makes car drivers think it is all our fault and somehow think all car drivers are repectful, obey the laws, give cyclists room etc
The assumption is still that it is our fault

A survey of 2000 road users conducted by ingenie,

0.0003% of the UK population. 🙄

Splitter’s!

I would categorically refuse to do such a test, especially if you have to pay for the privilege.
if we have to be licensed to ride on the roads then that opens the doors to requiring that we ride ‘safe’ bicycles (MOT) and then insurance… who was it who was sponsoring this cause? oh yeah, an insurance company.
**** off.
never did like Bike Radar anyway, or MBUK, What Mountain Bike and Cycling Plus.

What about visitors to the UK? Will they be able to ride here on their foreign cycling licenses? Oh wait, no other country is retarded enough to have them

I just wish I could remember my bikeradar login for their comments page!

I’ve remembered why I never visit BikeRadar – their forum is dreadful! How many forums and sub forums and sections do they think they need?!

There’s weirdly little about it in the bikeradar forums. It seems like they’re trying to ignore the “cycle licence” part and support the rest but that’s not going to work at all. Unimpressed.

do they have a thread about this where I can pour my scorn?

After 29erGate i can’t bear to look at what they write.

do they have a thread about this where I can pour my scorn?

They have a page with comments here

I was looking for forum threads but just gave up search the countless subforums (as I usually do with BR)

Gary lineker seems to be claiming he’s not being paid for this as well?
https://twitter.com/GaryLineker/status/238215652689719296

I find this hard to believe, given he’s their “Brand Ambassador”. Maybe he’s just really generous (to insurance companies)?
http://www.ingenie.com/blog/2012/04/gary-lineker-pledges-to-support-dontdrivedistracted

Following that Twitter link you posted, there’s a suggestion he’s a shareholder.

I do wonder how long before they start thinking that the money from the insurance advertising doesn’t justify the grief from their readers.

The whole ‘we print 29er reviews for cash’ thing pales a bit next to this one.

I was looking for forum threads but just gave up search the countless subforums (as I usually do with BR)

There’s something in the “Commuting – Chat” section but not a lot. I think threads just get lost in the maze of sub forums there. Crap layout.

Edit: http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40012&t=12873728
Another edit: there’s more comments on the actual article
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/gary-lineker-and-bikeradar-back-ingenies-road-safety-campaign-35017/

umm 29ergate? Links?
(really gave up with the place ages ago but I do like I good scandal [awaits on-one link])

z1ppy – in essence they dropped some reviews of 29ers because the bikes weren’t from advertisers. The MD/Publisher admitted that this was the case.

ahh… vaguely remember hear of that, cheers

Apparently, you are all “uncompromising extremists” if you’re not in favour of this campaign.

Not a problem – we pass the test we get a chip, just like our pets.
Rozzers then get a scanner that can read them as we pass – no chip, no reading, nice fine for the coffers, prosecution for no insurance, more revenue for insurance companies, safer roads for car drivers – who loses? Oh aye, us!

What is depressing about this is that instead of looking at other nations where cycling is very popular, such as Holland and Denmark, organisations in the UK often seem to talk about increasing ‘proficiency’ amongst cyclists, rather than tackle the real issue, which is that our roads systems are almost always designed and built exclusively for motor vehicles, with little or no consideration for cyclists. Hence the poor attitudes towards cyclists and cycling from too many drivers. Whilst the UK situation is unique and distinct to that of other nations, there is much to be learned from them, and there are many workable solutions that we seem loathe to try.

Whist more bike paths and ‘cycle friendly’ measures are being introduced, it is often little more than lip service to the notion of encouraging cycling as an alternative form of transport, such as painting white lines to denote a ‘cycle lane’ down the side of busy roads. This does not make cycling any safer at all, and in many instances, is often totally ineffective really. To the naysayers who moan that it can’t be done here, take a look at Portland, Oregon, in the USA where the Car is King. Activists, campaign groups, city planners and politicians have worked effectively together to transform the city for cyclists. So, even in areas with high motor vehicle use, it is possible to effectively integrate cycling into the system.

I can’t really see any sort of Cycling Proficiency scheme doing anything but putting many people off cycling, which would be disastrously counter-productive.

Anyone else wonder why an ex-footballer with no kind of cycling or motoring reputation is being headlined as backing it?