"Write an essay about why cyclists think they own the road, & don't pay road tax

Carlton Reid (the bloke behind http://ipayroadtax.com/%5B/url%5D, the book ‘Roads were not Built for Cars’ and all sorts of other positive things cycle related) just tweeted that his daughter was asked to write this essay by a teacher.

His daughter took the teacher to task, obvs.

More generally, how would you feel and react if your, possibly less well informed, kid came home with an essay of that title to write?

I’d be torn between going to talk to the teacher, writing the essay myself and submitting it and complaining to the head of department/school. All of which would no doubt embarrass my daughter so might be vetoed.

I think most of all I’d be disappointed that someone in a position of trust and influence is asking children to write about this sort of stuff when there’s such a biased outlook assumed.

WtheactualF

I suppose it’s just possible that the teacher is going to collect in all the essays and then tell them something appropriate and explain that they should challenge idiocy when they encounter it

alternatively, he/she may be a tosser

What are the chances of such a silly essay cropping up for the daughter of Mr Reid?

I’d probably write a bonkers, existentialist article about how cycling originated on the moon in 1305ad, bikes are the work of both Hitler and Buddha, and that road tax is a con by the Illuminati in order to infiltrate the fluride in our water system.
I’d probably spend hours and hours making the most confusing, headache inducing plot of espionage against the petroleum industry, and go way over word count.

Then i’d stick a post it note on it saying “is this the sort of crap you were after”?

DrP

I’m surprised teachers are allowed so much freedom to choose subjects.

Anyway, I’d bet money that it was chosen, no doubt in the knowledge about what Ms. Reid’s Dad does to provoke a response and create debate.

I was once asked to write why Christianity was the best religion for exactly the same reason.

I think I’d tell my child to write an essay about outgroups, ignorance and sweeping generalisations and I’d deal with any consequences from the teacher.

If scaredypants’ first suggestion is right then presumably teacher would be cool about it.

It’ll be a deliberately challenging topic chosen to force a pupil into thinking about something and forming a reasoned argument. The title gives plenty of opportunity for both militant drivers and cyclists to get their points justified/shot down and middle ground conclusion reached.

I suppose it might be what it is said to be, at face value, but it does sound like there’s more to it than meets the eye – it’s a very, very weird thing to set as an essay, and just say there’s a rogue teacher out there who would do something as ridiculous as that – what are the chances that it just happens to have been the teacher of the daughter of a well known campaigner who appears on national television talking about exactly these topics?

I’d like to think that this task has been more likely set by a teacher looking to encourage critical thinking and / or a lesson in challenging received wisdom / authority / prejudice.

johnnystorm – Member

…militant…cyclists …middle ground conclusion reached.

No Surrender!

Possibly the teacher is on ‘our’ side and as above is challenging the received beliefs of (possibly) other parents. Or is somehow annoyed and getting back at family Reid..

What are the chances of such a silly essay cropping up for the daughter of Mr Reid?

Seems a touch fortunate/coincidental/should buy lottery ticket.

Tell them no road tax has been paid for years so who exactly does own the roads.

Hmmm, context?
What subject was the topic actually raised in, and what was the actual essay question? because that title was almost certainly not what the teacher said I reckon… personal spin on your kids homework? highbrow “citizen journalism” I’m sure…

Ultimately was the teacher’s aim to pick an issue the kids might have some knowledge and understanding of, or be able to research and come to their own conclusions on, spark some debate and amongst the kids, and ultimately get them to write a balanced essay considering multiple view points and sources?
Or just a deliberate attempt to rile one known gobby parent?

Twitter fluff innit…

School debating teams often have to try to advance an plausible argument for a position which they have no sympathy for whatsoever.

Still a bit of a shitly worded question though.

Two choices:

1) Hand in an essay talking about the benefits of cycling and why we have as much right to use the road as anyone else and why no road tax makes sense for bikes versus cars which cause far more damage/wear and tear on the road. Also comment that many (most ?) cyclists actually own a car and so pay road tax and every day they use their bike instead the government is making extra money.

If she gets a bad mark then challenge the teacher and the head.

2) Write a piece answering the question which is clearly ridiculous and bigoted. Perhaps form the perspective of a lorry driver who finds cyclists slow him down and who believes he should pay the same road tax as a car. Perhaps with a case study on the emotional stress caused to him when he ran over and killed a cyclist who was using “his road” without paying road tax.

just say there’s a rogue teacher out there

Some kind of lone wolf of the staff room?

Sounds like the teacher had a run in with a cyclist on the way to work that day.

I can see the reason a teacher might set this to be thought provoking but its a charged argument and I find its odd that its culturally acceptable to have such ignorant views towards cyclists. Could you imagine if the teacher had set a question on another negative stereotype like “why are people on benefits lazy and why do they feel entitled?” or “Why do all Jews collect coins like super mario?”

maybe the teacher is a cyclist and whats make sure their students are informed on the matter?

School debating teams often have to try to advance an plausible argument for a position which they have no sympathy for whatsoever.

I’d like to think it’s this. And that the boy in her class who’s madly into cars and F1 and the like has been asked to write the counterargument.

But I suspect not.

Yet again the black and white world of the internet struggles to cope with what may or may not be a sensationalist headline with no indication as to context.

I can give you several different views on the issue, just tell me which context applies?

Sounds like a teacher with a sense of humour

MoreCashThanDash – Member
Yet again the black and white world of the internet struggles to cope with what may or may not be a sensationalist headline with no indication as to context.

I can give you several different views on the issue, just tell me which context applies?

Spot on, third hand/anecdotal, incredulous accounts of “what our children are being taught these days” is drifting towards the DM method for illustrating biased view points…

Worse yet when 90% of context and detail is omitted in favour of the banner headline quote…

While I actually agree with much of what Carlton Reid has to say on the topic of cyclists/drivers sharing the roads and the application of VED, I can’t help thinking he sometimes has a net negative impact on the whole “Debate” He’s a bit superior and tends towards a tone that seems like he’s preaching…
Plus He likes re-posting other people’s helmet cam captured exchanges, not something I think actually helps much TBH…

If He’s going to set himself up as an expert on the subject, publish a book and generally spout when cyclists/cycling safety hit the news, I’d rather he adopted more of a conciliatory tone to try and make non-cyclists a bit more sympathetic, I don’t think he manages this TBH…

I think anyone wanting to look into how he’s approached this particular essay issue should read his twitter timeline.

He does say he’s had one view of the context from his daughter but ‘she might be biased’ and was wanting to talk to some other kids about it.

cookeaa – Member

He’s a bit superior and tends towards a tone that seems like he’s preaching…

it’s hard not to sound superior when your opponents are fact-less morons.

Not sure what more context you need.

Well the teacher is completely correct, cyclists don’t pay road tax. No one else does either, so that’s not quite so helpful.
I just think that what should interest everyone much more is that the teacher is way past retirement, or has been kidnapped by aliens, or invented a time machine before World War two as road tax was abolished in 1937.

it’s hard not to sound superior when your opponents are fact-less morons.

indeed.

We’ve got Chris Boardman to be the “balanced one”.

We need someone more extreme and opinionated to counteract all the lycra-lout bullshit bingo “some of my best friends are cyclists, but…” type articles.

Sounds like the teacher knows who young Ms Reid’s father is.

Cyclist are a perfect example of why people with a lot of money are just plain better than everyone else.

With the Rapha glad thighs and Team Sky branded jerseys, the road cyclist has to assert his projected financial prowess on other road users by ensuring they are taking up what’s known within the cycling community as “the prime position”

This is the position that’s just far out enough to enrage the hard working transit van driver, but close enough to the side of the road to not be considered a legal obstruction. It’s a fine balancing act, and takes many years of dedicated 0% finance to perfect. In fact, if you are patient and watch closely, you can sometimes see road cyclist practicing their “prime position” with others, in lines of 3, 4 or more. They swap who leads the line as to critique the logo placement of the rider in fronts jersey.

There you go, there’s my entry.

/massive sarcasm tag, obvs.

I’d mention that cyclists’ vehicle emissions are below the limit for paying. But I wish I’d thought of DrP’s brilliant post.

I would probably have got my kids to incorporate that assignment into their maths homework, detailing just exactly how much less ‘road tax’ their teacher would be paying compared to a cyclist that they knew. Say, me, for instance. 😈

Did he say how old his daugter is? Somehow I don’t think we’re getting the full picture here.

Sounds like the teacher knows who young Ms Reid’s father is.

I thought that too.

15 he says

What a disgusting thing for a school teacher to suggest!! I agree with most long term cyclists here, who say this is yet more typically innaccurate pro-car establishment propaganda! Well done for bringing this to our attention, though I think you should also notify the CTC who are hot on this matter.

Putting all self serving pro-motorist fairy tales to one side, Mr Ried’s writing is correct, to suggest that there is actually no such thing as “Road Tax”. Indeed, actual “Road Tax” was abolished by Winston Churchill about 60 years ago!! Motor vehicle owners today pay a Duty, called Vehicle Excise Duty, which is very rightfully charged and rated proportional to the maximum quantity of air pollution and toxins any one vehicle emits. Therefore cyclists, who pollute zero diddly squat, should never be charged such a duty.

As for the issue of ‘road ownership/upkeep/maintainance/priority users’ blah blah, that issue is very simple too, though motorists find it hard to accept the truth! Since all public highways and roads are maintained from REGULAR TAXES, and not one specific tax pot or fund (a common myth!), all legit british taxpayers equally contribute, and therefore there is NO motorist priority on our roads! The Highway Code (only) is the law that decides who has priority over what, and not who pays VED, or is travelling faster or in larger volumes on roads!

The simple truths of these issues seem to irritate motorists year in year out, but the fact is that many of them simply do not get their technical and legal facts correct. Indeed, if anything, The Highway Code states that cyclists are in general terms, higher priority road users that others must give way to (except for even higher priority users such as horses, emergancy blue light vehicles, or pedestrians).

Contact the cTC about all this, they will be very interested in what this teacher is trying to suggest. Even IF it is designed to provoke challenging questions from the pupils, it is still badly suggestive in the first place, that cyclists ‘dont matter’ on roads.

GBR.

I pointed out to a colleague that VAT I paid on my bike was higher than the VED I paid on either car.

“But you don’t buy a new bike every year, do you?” he sneered. Then he remembered that actually, I do! 😉

What a disgusting thing for a school teacher to suggest!!

I very much doubt the teacher suggested any such thing, or that the essay existed in anything other than Mr Reid’s mind.

or that the essay existed in anything other than Mr Reid’s mind

I very much doubt he simply made it up, it would be far to easy to check and expose such a lie, which wouldn’t do him much good at all.

Far more likely as some have suggested that there is a bit more to it than it first appears and either miscommunication/translation, or a bending of the words.

“why cyclists think they own the road, and don’t pay road tax”

Cyclists think that they own the road, because, just like everyone else in this country, they do. We all do, unless the road is private, and then none of us do except the owners.

Cyclists don’t pay road tax, because, like everyone else in this country, there is no road tax to pay, except on toll roads, which you often aren’t allow to cycle on anyway.

Come on kid… get researching and writing… like your dad… never moan about an essay title… answer it on your own way. Tell your dad not to moan about it either.

I don’t disagree with what he says merely the way he says it, for the most part Reid is now just preaching to the choir, cyclists are pretty well drilled when it comes to Road tax/VED and our rights on the road.

His whole thing seems to hang on pointing out how stupid and ignorant some people in cars are, and then talking down/berating/mocking the unthinking masses… That’s going to simply deepen the perceived division and won’t endear cyclists to motorists as they add a whole list of negative character traits to their image of the “average cyclist”…

I find it a bit sad that many cycling are as bad as DM readers when they spot a quote or headline that backs up their world views and perhaps forget to really question the details behind it, or the intent of the author…