Last week someone I am very fond of and have a lot of respect for in my life, in response to the recent spate of cyclist deaths, tried to tell me to stop cycling in London.
I said No. Very calmly and very clearly.
No. I will not stop.
I asked the person if they knew the statistics for pedestrians/ drivers killed in accidents in the capital this year. I admitted that I don't have them to hand either (though I could probably lay my hands on them pretty quickly). Every single death on the roads is a tragedy (I know that first hand because I've lived through the aftermath of losing a good friend in a hit and run). I patiently explained that I am exceptionally lucky to live in a place where the main route I take every day takes me largely along traffic calmed residential streets and cycle paths. I do have to cross some major trunk roads but I do so carefully and at junctions with traffic lights. I obey the rules of the road. I wear a high vis jacket, a helmet and I have lights. When the person complained about cyclists going through red lights I countered that there were a percentage of idiots in all groups of road users.
But I think this was the wrong response. I focused on reassuring the person of my own personal safety and lack of idiocy.
I think it was the wrong response because I failed to mention that I absolutely WILL NOT get off the road that I have paid to be on (I'll explain that in a minute). Because if I do that, and all the other cyclists do that - the polluting, corporate, oil industry dominated, motor vehicle culture will win, by default, unchallenged. And that, I firmly believe, would not be an acceptable state of affairs.
In part I cycle because it's convenient, cheap and a frankly joyful experience to be out and about in the fresh air seeing London's many and beautiful trees and buildings changing with the seasons. I also cycle because it is, for me, a moral choice, a little piece of daily activism. It is low pollution, low emissions - a small thing I can incorporate into the daily practice of being an imperfectly responsible human. It doesn't cause too much noise pollution unless I happen to be singing on my bike (I do, I'm sorry). It takes less stuff to make a bike than a car. It frees up a seat on the bus for someone who isn't as physically able as I am. It keeps me fit and keeps me away from the inevitable lurgies I pick up when getting the tube regularly (it was mumps last time). I hope that if I continue it will reduce the burden I place on health services as I age. I want to live in a London that puts people at its heart - a London that is a nice place to walk and cycle around. I want that, selfishly, for me. I want it, altruistically, for you. If you want to, I want you to feel safe cycling in the glory of the mornings, evenings and middays.
There are some inevitable arguments that are often thrown at cyclists.
But what about....
All those cyclists who go through red lights?
Uhm...I'm going to approach this a different way. You might not like it. Have you seen the way pedestrians behave at pelican crossings? If not - hie thee to Ludgate Circus, or the junction between Tavistock Place and Southampton row, the truly evil junction by King's Cross - and watch. Every day I see far more pedestrians going through red lights - frequently without looking in all the directions traffic might be coming from than I do cyclists. Which isn't to say cyclists don't do it - but I would suggest that cyclists tendency to run red lights is largely a logical follow on from our very widespread practice as pedestrians rather than from the callous devil may care disregard for others to which it is commonly ascribed. I'm not condoning running red lights. Walking trumps cycling in the carbon emissions & vulnerability stakes and going through red lights is both risky and wrong. I'm just pointing out a different view of why some people might do it and think it's OK.
Safety on the roads relies on ALL road users (pedestrians, cyclists and motorists) putting safety and common decency before the illusory convenience of a few saved seconds. There are more restrictions, more responsibility placed on motor vehicles because a ton+ of metal going at 20+ mph does more damage than 100 kg or so of cyclist + bike going at 0-20 mph or a 70 kg or so pedestrian going at 0 - 5 mph. Not that physics absolves ANYONE of their responsibility not to be a dickhead on the roads.
Road tax?
There is no such thing. Churchill abolished it in 1928. There is Vehicle Excise Duty which is a tax on emissions. Even if VED were hypothecated (it's not - it is a form of general taxation) it would contribute only a third of the costs of building and maintaining the roads. The rest is met from general and local taxation. Since I pay Income Tax via PAYE, I pay council tax and I pay VAT, insurance tax and on occasion alcohol duty - I HAVE BLOODY WELL PAID TO BE ON THE ROADS. I do feel entitled to use them not only as a sometimes bus passenger and as a consumer of goods/services delivered by motor vehicles but also, if I want, as a cyclist. It's not illegal. Since the emissions (a little methane aside) are pretty low and the wear and tear on the tarmac is (bike+me < 100 kg) low I'm not sure quite why people think I should contribute more than I already do or exactly what their argument is that I shouldn't be safe.
All those cyclists who cycle wearing black and with no lights wearing headphones?
A certain percentage of road users of all types are idiots. I try hard not to be one of those cyclists. You should try hard not to be one of those road users too.
As I said above, I lost a dear friend on the roads. He was a pedestrian crossing the road. He was also the kind of friend who was a top bloke, a mostly ethical, caring, immensely creative, ordinary and extraordinary, somewhat faulty human. I still miss him. Four weeks before his death I was knocked off my bike and my leg was so badly bruised it took six months before I could walk properly. None of that put me off cycling. I am far more scared of driving than I am of cycling. The last time I got behind the wheel I was a shaking mess by the end of a very short journey. Why? In a car I am far more likely to damage or kill someone else. The person most likely to be injured if I have a bike accident is me.
Safety on the roads relies on ALL road users (pedestrians, cyclists and motorists) putting safety and common decency before the illusory convenience of a few saved seconds. It also relies on governments building roads that are fit not only for the purpose of whizzing around - but also fit for the purpose of keeping ALL road users safe. I do not take the matter of cycle safety lying down. Which is precisely why - at 5:30 pm today I plan to be lying down, my trusty metal steed, besdie me, playing dead outside TFL's HQ on Blackfriars road.
As an aside, given that this week has seen the International Day Against Violence Against Women, I wish I'd asked the person this. There have been 13 tragic cyclist deaths on London's roads this year. Every week 2 UK women are killed by a male partner or ex partner. Every single one of those deaths is also a tragedy. Would anyone extend the logic of telling me to stop cycling to telling me to not get a boyfriend? Or would you assume that I am perfectly capable of making a character judgement about a potential mate or that this couldn't, for some magic reason, happen to me. That "not all men are like that" (not all cyclists, not all drivers are, either, incidentally). Personally I find road safety judgments much easier to make than character judgments.
No comments:
Post a Comment