Highway code review consultation - deadline 27th October 2020

[Wowbagger]

I suspect that once the consultation period has expired, we will never hear of this legislation again. Tory governments don't introduce progressive legislation. I think there have been 3 examples in the past 100 years in which they have.

[nuttycyclist]

UK Zebra Crossings confer no rights until you step off the pavement according to the Highway Code. I know in practice most drivers will identify people wanting to cross, but that's not what the book says.

It is however down to "sharing the roads" and considering the needs for others at the point of priority.  Main roads have priority, but in general UK drivers will stop to allow a pedestrian to cross at the zebra crossing.

In Europe I have noticed a significantly higher number of zebra crossings in built up areas, but drivers ignore them and pedestrians cannot cross.  Thereby making the point of lights and road markings irrelevant as they do not change driver behaviour. 

This goes back to my point re it not being a matter of what a paper document states, but it should be a case of us all as road users just being excellent to one another.

In the past as a driver I have stopped on a main road to allow people to cross.  As a pedestrian I have danced between moving traffic.  As a cyclist I have passed queues, stopped for others, and been knocked off.  As a driver I've slowed and flashed to allow somebody to turn when I could have carried on with priority, and at other times I have ploughed on with priority as had I slowed and flashed it could have caused confusion and a potential accident due to two vehicles moving off (and I know that by flashing I am simply "alerting another vehicle to my presence" or whatever the wording is, even though the general use in the world is "after you because I'm polite")

[Croft]

I suspect that once the consultation period has expired, we will never hear of this legislation again. Tory governments don't introduce progressive legislation. I think there have been 3 examples in the past 100 years in which they have.

The consultation period has ended (in October last year, hence the title of this thread). And we have heard of it since (hence this thread). Now due to go be presented in Parliament. Of course your cynicism might prove to be correct and it is rejected by Parliament. But that seems unlikely to me.

Despite a poor track record, this is one of three pieces of relatively good news today on environment/travel. The others being the rejection of the A303 tunnel and Shapps announcing that premature termination of LTNs and other active travel pilots by local councils will result in withdrawal of funding.

[giropaul]

I like some of the work by the Dutch Cycling Embassy. I’ve tried, and failed, to copy some stuff onto here.
One thing that they have done is to identify different types of cyclists - but noting that many of us can be different types at different times.
I’ve always thought that the “ one size fits all” approach to cycling is unhelpful.
I recommend a look at their Facebook or website

[MattH]

Response to the consultation results - generally good, I think.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/review-of-the-highway-code-to-improve-road-safety-for-cyclists-pedestrians-and-horse-riders/outcome/government-response-to-the-review-of-the-highway-code

[Jaded]

It is fascinating that the Disagree comments get so much weight.

[MattH]

I think that's reasonable. If there is some sort of consensus in the disagrees it bears looking in to. And they do state that they dismissed irrelevant comments around insurance, helmets etc.

[Jaded]

It could give the impression of weakening the very strong agree numbers.

[Croft]

I agree that overall a reasonably fair response and good outcome. But disappointed they regarded comments about helmets and hiviz out of scope. The HC advice on cyclists wearing PPE seems out of line with their new road user hierarchy emphasis and acts to undermine it. Couldn’t be more clearly illustrated by today’s comments from Nick “The Mr Arsehole” Freeman - https://twitter.com/TheMrLoophole/status/1466111083257733120 (and some great responses from Surrey RPU)

[quixoticgeek]

I agree that overall a reasonably fair response and good outcome. But disappointed they regarded comments about helmets and hiviz out of scope. The HC advice on cyclists wearing PPE seems out of line with their new road user hierarchy emphasis and acts to undermine it. Couldn’t be more clearly illustrated by today’s comments from Nick “The Mr Arsehole” Freeman - https://twitter.com/TheMrLoophole/status/1466111083257733120 (and some great responses from Surrey RPU)

That survey closes on Tuesday and hasn't even got enough responses to get a written reply from the government.

That's actually kinda reassuring.

J

[hatler]

Here's the summary of changes, together with the new wording (though the full revised version of the HC isn't available yet).

I have to say that this is way better than I was expecting. It's almost like the team putting it together actually listened to input.

Hard to highlight any one particular change that I applaud, but this would be up there : -

Rule 163 on overtaking to advise that cyclists may pass slower moving or stationary traffic on the right or left, including at the approach to junctions. It will also include new text which reads:
Start quote:

give motorcyclists, cyclists, horse riders and horse drawn vehicles at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car (see Rules 211 to 215). As a guide:

─ leave a minimum distance of 1.5 metres at speeds under 30 mph

─ leave a minimum distance of 2.0 metres at speeds over 30 mph

There's no quibble room there. If I can touch your car, you're too fucking close.

[drossall]

I think the explicit recognition that pedestrians may use any part of the road is a bit of a game changer in terms of the HC being clear about what the law says.

[arabella]

Rule 140 includes "Bear in mind that cyclists are not obliged to use cycle lanes or cycle tracks."   

not so convinced about rule 66 change though:
"[cyclists’ should] ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake and it is safe to let them do so. "
Surely the point about riding two abreast is that there is only one cyclist length to be overtaken.  Unless it's to tie in with actually being given enough room by passing motorists which means there wouldn't be enough road width to pass two cyclists abreast

[rogerzilla]

The Daily Express is running a predictably anti-cyclist piece today.  Luckily no-one reads the fascist rag.

[JellyLegs]

The Daily Express is running a predictably anti-cyclist piece today.

Doesn’t that hold true for 999 days out of 1000.  It’s the only story more common in the Express than “Snow to hit uk as mercury plummets”.

[Mr Larrington]

The Daily Express is running a predictably anti-cyclist piece today.

Doesn’t that hold true for 999 days out of 1000.  It’s the only story more common in the Express than “Snow to hit uk as mercury plummets”.

Only if they can work in a Princess Diana or Madeleine McCann angle.

[The Family Cyclist]

The Graun had a wonderful article on it which had a dig at several of the enraged hate rags. Ive seen the usual misinformed crap on Facebook as well including someone who's actually a copper using the road tax argument

Helmet cam is charged and ready to record

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/24/common-myths-about-what-uk-highway-code-changes-will-mean?fbclid=IwAR0H5OMlPUzelUWz1uuJcYQPLeoyoDnsBZL0h_dWmPqSznBtZTvwxFtkHpo

[hatler]

Blimey, even the Spectator is onside - https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/entitled-motorists-have-ruled-the-roads-for-far-too-long

[Cudzoziemiec]

"the Alliance of British Drivers, the trade union for Mr Toads,"
 

[TimC]

The Daily Express is running a predictably anti-cyclist piece today.

Doesn’t that hold true for 999 days out of 1000.  It’s the only story more common in the Express than “Snow to hit uk as mercury plummets”.

What is it about a rag that constantly predicts extreme weather events, yet doubts that Climate Change exists?

[andyoxon]

Here's the summary of changes, together with the new wording (though the full revised version of the HC isn't available yet).
...

And if useful, the pdf of Original text side by side with New version...

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1037306/table-of-change-to-the-highway-code.pdf

[hatler]

The Daily Express is running a predictably anti-cyclist piece today.

Doesn’t that hold true for 999 days out of 1000.  It’s the only story more common in the Express than “Snow to hit uk as mercury plummets”.

What is it about a rag that constantly predicts extreme weather events, yet doubts that Climate Change exists?

Very good !!