Highway Code review

There’s a review of the Highway Code, to clarify/update the rules around cyclists, pedestrians and horse riders.

It would be good to get as many people with a cycling perspective as possible to reply, to avoid the “they don’t pay road tax, I should be allowed to bash them out of the way” lot monopolising the responses.

The survey only takes a few minutes: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/review-of-the-highway-code-to-improve-road-safety-for-cyclists-pedestrians-and-horse-riders

I think infrastructure will have a much bigger impact, but we also need to do things like clarify priority at zebra crossings and side roads. The suggested changes also state a distance in metres for overtaking, rather than the meaningless “as much room as you would leave a car” that’s in there now.

Thanks for the link. Very valuable.

The new text within the ‘Rules for cyclists’ chapter of The Highway Code will:

update Rule 59 to state that evidence suggests that wearing a cycle helmet will reduce your risk of sustaining a head injury in certain circumstances

TJ incoming…

Done

Its not bad but too timid. Much of it need to be legally mandatory not advisory and we need presumed liability

I did make the comment about helmets – it should read ” wearing a helmet might make you feel safer” 🙂

Done. Agree with the comments above.

Thanks, done and I agree with TJ (shock!)

I didn’t agree with the section suggesting that cyclists move in to allow easier overtakes – it’s often a dangerous thing to do so other road users should not assume that you should do so

Yeah, Murray, I also thought that bit was confusing. The second bullet point seemed to be saying to ride central in slow moving traffic whilst also keeping left to let the slow traffic past.

I think it was much later on the there was guidance to drivers saying “cyclists can stay central, so deal with it”.

I didn’t agree with the section suggesting that cyclists move in to allow easier overtakes – it’s often a dangerous thing to do so other road users should not assume that you should do so

Likewise – IMHO it will only reinforce the entitled & privileged view of some motorists.

I commented on the bit about moving over. It suggested that cyclists should give way to motor vehicles and turns the whole hierarchy thing back round to motors being at the top and pedestrians and cyclists at the bottom.

Missed the bit about helmets, otherwise I would’ve commented on that as well.

Positive overall though. It’s something.

I’m not altogether happy with the hierarchy and undertaking things. I’m a cyclist and I understand being a vulnerable road user as cars, lorries and busses thunder by, and I’ve sat in an Amsterdam taxi whilst it waits for the stream of cyclists to pass.

But I’ve also driven a van when cyclists and motorcycles tailgate in the blindspot and undertake through junctions. Narrowly missed a cyclist going straight on diving through the inside of the van (indicating nearside) at a roundabout last week. There’s got to be some order on the roads, it can’t be a cyclists can whiz wherever they want and motorists have to avoid them.

Flame away!

it should read ” wearing a helmet might make you feel safer”

Or “wearing a helmet might cause drivers to give you less space”?

I wouldn’t worry TJ, Cycling UK have more than got your back on the helmets issue.

In seriousness though, it does look pretty decent and I’ll give it a proper study tomorrow.

Will be commenting on this one, think it should be upgraded to MUST. Far too many people hoofing up to a junction at full chat then indicating and turning in without any observational measures at all. Plus it’s depressing the number of people who assume I won’t give way when I’m driving, so stop amazed on the pavement, or (worse) who react like I’m going to clean them out when they’re half way across.

Rule H2: Rule for drivers, motorcyclists, horse riders and cyclists
At a junction you should give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning.

Cheers for the link, will be contributing. I’ve read it quickly and like a lot of the updates here.

Have added this comment:

I would like to see more detail on changing lane discipline. Personally I have two sections on my cycling commute where a lane splits into two. At this point, despite indicating it’s extremely common for drivers to ignore my signal and overtake. I’d like to see wording reminding drivers that they must not overtake a signalling cyclist.

Really **** pisses me off that one. I’ve got traffic at 50mph wanting to go straight on but I’ve got to dick about in the middle of the lane waving my arm around waiting for a gap in overtaking drivers.

it should be upgraded to MUST

This is a highway code revision, not a change in the law.

I’ve completed it – actually surprised how good it was. Have suggested that a lot of the “shoulds” need upgrading to “musts” but that may require legislation

Now for compulsory retests so that the dickhead drivers have to learn it!

Just responded. Agree with those above that although the wording and motives are broadly good, I’m not sure how effective this can be without legislation (ie presumed liability). I’m worried that just changing the Highway Code might be the equivalent of painted ‘cycle lanes’ in that they give the illusion of action but achieve very little

I need to look at this in real detail.  The overall picture appears good, but I severely dislike the implication that cyclist should file out when it is safe for vehicles to overtake (if you file out to primary, there’s no more room) and there’s something on the CTC mailshot about cyclists having priority at roundabouts that sounds bonkers.

I also commented that “you should not turn across the path of cyclist” could be upgrade to MUST, but i understand that requires the actual laws to change rather than just the guidance.

But I’ve also driven a van when cyclists and motorcycles tailgate in the blindspot and undertake through junctions. Narrowly missed a cyclist going straight on diving through the inside of the van (indicating nearside) at a roundabout last week. There’s got to be some order on the roads, it can’t be a cyclists can whiz wherever they want and motorists have to avoid them

No flaming here. I also suggested that guidance should be stronger on cyclists undertaking large vehicles approaching junctions.

I’ve read the consultation a few times now, and I don’t know what they’re proposing. They talk about “just as you would not turn across the path of another motor vehicle” but that makes no sense. You wouldn’t turn across another motor vehicle because the roads are designed such that there’s no scenario when you have to (except bus lanes, and busses rejoin the main traffic if they’re doing something complex or have sensor traffic lights). It’s different with cycle lanes, and since they’re proposing formalised undertaking by bikes, every road now has a defacto cycle lane. And they acknowledge in the doc that drivers won’t be able to see cyclists and yet still propose that drivers somehow give way to something they can’t see.

It would work if the rule is “don’t overtake and cut in” but not as proposed.

Sadly I think Dutch style widespread undertaking by cyclists, as proposed, is going to result in lots more cyclists under HGVs if it happens on UK roads without the infrastructure that the Dutch have. Little comfort that the driver’s insurance has to pay out if you’ve lost your legs or worse.