Grant Shapps panders to The Mail

[simonhill]

Another important point is people have brought up how few pedestrian deaths there are; I suspect the stats aren't actually pedestrian deaths, but deaths in collisions between pedestrian and cyclist; I.e. I expect those numbers include where it was the cyclist not the pedestrian who died.

Good point (if correct).


.......but what about dogs. Similar number of deaths per year. Licence them and make them wear an identity waistcoat. Maybe a new policy for Ms Truss.

Where will this trivial populism end? The current problems facing the country, poverty, huge energy bills, failing NHS, shortage of housing etc will make many people's lives miserable and cause more far deaths than the topic being discussed. Cyclists killing pedestrians is such a rare event it's irrelevant. Shapps comments are merely an attempt to distract from the things I've mentioned.

I (and others) agree.

A post of mine from page 1:

"I wasn't questioning the need for the law, just whether it warranted a full front page, plus all the other stuff.

Oh, there's a national crisis looming, PM and Chancellor on their hols, Govt is rudderless so let's talk about a very very few cyclists."

[Cugel]

Another important point is people have brought up how few pedestrian deaths there are; I suspect the stats aren't actually pedestrian deaths, but deaths in collisions between pedestrian and cyclist; I.e. I expect those numbers include where it was the cyclist not the pedestrian who died.

Good point (if correct).


.......but what about dogs. Similar number of deaths per year. Licence them and make them wear an identity waistcoat. Maybe a new policy for Ms Truss.

Where will this trivial populism end? The current problems facing the country, poverty, huge energy bills, failing NHS, shortage of housing etc will make many people's lives miserable and cause more far deaths than the topic being discussed. Cyclists killing pedestrians is such a rare event it's irrelevant. Shapps comments are merely an attempt to distract from the things I've mentioned.

Indeed. And even here, many are so-distracted.

The mass media is ever so good at redirecting people's angsts to meaningless trivia, even as they gloss over the truly immense issues that degrade the lives of all, even those of the gharks & hoos grubbing after money-at-any-cost, who are often the root-cause of many of these immense issues. 'Twas ever thus and always will be - or so it seems.

Cugel

[Dan79]

DVLA can't even cope with current driving licences and the other stuff they are responsible for. Let's add a whole new tranche of stuff on them.

Then tell The Mail reader that their licence is delayed due to cyclists.

Win, win.

I thought that was a brilliant idea, until I recalled the example of Brexit.

[Stevek76]

Another important point is people have brought up how few pedestrian deaths there are; I suspect the stats aren't actually pedestrian deaths, but deaths in collisions between pedestrian and cyclist; I.e. I expect those numbers include where it was the cyclist not the pedestrian who died.

Good point (if correct).

Published stats are fairly clear on who died in multi party collisions and the numbers used do not include cases where the cyclist died - in the standard tables for these cases I'm not sure if the pedestrian is bundled into the 'other vehicle' section or if they are simply counted as cycle only collisions. What is the case is that there is no allocation of 'fault' in these figures though the hierarchy of responsibility should be kept in mind.

One thing that is somewhat unfortunate is that the figure of 5 pedestrian deaths in collisions with cyclists that features due to the PACTs report on the matter is from 2019 and was quite an outlier, in most of the years before 1 or 2 was more common with 3 quite rare.

[mattheus]

We're falling into a pretty simple trap here.

This is an absurd way to analyse the "threat" from cyclists. Cleary car users are far more dangerous. They damage property, the air, other cars; they kill pedestrians, other drivers, and passengers. Even people waiting for buses.

This is like showing cats are more dangerous than cars because they kill more rodents.

[mattheus]

I'd also recommend researching the numbers for people killed/seriously injured by drivers who are not insured, or choose to simply drive away. (That's a lot easier with a car than when you've been knocked off your bike in collision with a pedestrian!)

It's a sobering number.

[Tangled Metal]

I'm dropping in and out of this thread but I read a thread from a 360 bloke on here that of I read it right cyclists found guilty of an offence should get a maximum sentence no higher than the minimum a motorist could get. I find this a dangerous concept. If a cyclist causes a pedestrians death is that less of a crime than when a motorist causes a pedestrians death?

I can see how offence without physical harm to any parties such as speeding or something like careless cycling/driving might make sense due to the potential for harm being lower with cyclists. However a sweeping statement that implies all motoring equivalent cycling offences should get potentially considerably lower sentences seems less about blind justice and completely about sentencing the person not the crime. That is not how I understood the system was supposed to work. Tantamount to justice nudging up her blindfold to check for cyclists or motorists.

[Sweep]

Grant schapps is only suffering from one thing. The loss of a ministerial job once the new tory leader gets in. For all his faults boris hasn't been a bad for cycling as you'd expect from the tory party.

How on earth was Boris decent for cyclists, given that cyclists are people/Brits of whatever background?
Cycling was a supposedly cute tag for Boris. Nothing more. Nothing mattered to Boris but Boris.
You may as well say that Boris was good for floppy haired people.
On schnapps, he's quite clearly no sort of transport minister whatsoever - see his duplicitous out of touch comments on the recent strikes.
Transport means bugger all to him - seems remarkably relaxed about the severing of contracted links between Manchester and London.
"Levelling up" my buttock.
I wonder what job, if any, schnapps has his eye on next.

[mjr]

More disturbingly, from the above article

This media coverage matters. Some studies have linked anti-cycling media coverage to drivers being more aggressive towards cyclists on the roads. So while it’s tempting to write off Shapps’ comments – given how unlikely his ideas are to be implemented – the consequences for cyclists on roads could be much more serious.

I got honked at for cycling across a side road entrance today by a motorist who had lto wait to turn, for the first time since the clarified HC was published. Thanks Shapps!

[MikeF]

I got honked at ...

First rule of motoring. If anything holds you up blast the horn. It's not just cyclists who get blasted, but anyone, pedestrian, another car, traffic jam

[Steady rider]

https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/trans ... iv-EpgIQRU
Some good points.
Some of Shapps suggestions are not helping in promoting cycling and therefore not in line with government policy.

[mjr]

And this morning, near the end of the news bulletin, the other shoe falls: no prosecution of P&O Ferries, despite all the hard talk from Shapps and Johnson. Maybe we should all share this news in return for Shapps's little distraction attempt bike-bashing?

[awavey]

Another important point is people have brought up how few pedestrian deaths there are; I suspect the stats aren't actually pedestrian deaths, but deaths in collisions between pedestrian and cyclist; I.e. I expect those numbers include where it was the cyclist not the pedestrian who died.

Good point (if correct).


.......but what about dogs. Similar number of deaths per year. Licence them and make them wear an identity waistcoat. Maybe a new policy for Ms Truss.

Where will this trivial populism end? The current problems facing the country, poverty, huge energy bills, failing NHS, shortage of housing etc will make many people's lives miserable and cause more far deaths than the topic being discussed. Cyclists killing pedestrians is such a rare event it's irrelevant. Shapps comments are merely an attempt to distract from the things I've mentioned.

Indeed. And even here, many are so-distracted.

The mass media is ever so good at redirecting people's angsts to meaningless trivia, even as they gloss over the truly immense issues that degrade the lives of all, even those of the gharks & hoos grubbing after money-at-any-cost, who are often the root-cause of many of these immense issues. 'Twas ever thus and always will be - or so it seems.

Cugel

except bar the initial front page on the Mail, how is the mass media covering this now ? they dropped it before most even bothered to go full on it because they dont see it as important, we'll see if any of the Sundays pick it up again, but for an attempt at distracting the nation at large, Id say its then spectacularly failed, watch the news see which items crop up, Shapps bit of spitballing isnt featuring at all, its still all the doom & gloom you want them to focus on.

and I do think people need to understand sometimes politicians just use the press to communicate with other politicians, not directly with the public.

[thirdcrank]

Grant Shapps may have largely failed to attract the attention of much of the media but two out of the three cUK commentators seem to have inadvertently helped spread his nonsense.

[Bonefishblues]

Grant Shapps may have largely failed to attract the attention of much of the media but two out of the three cUK commentators seem to have inadvertently helped spread his nonsense.

I've often said that Mr Pavolv could have saved himself a lot of dog food