[urlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23587916[/url

Have a read of the link above first, its a lesson on how to approach the cycling issue in a sensible way that involves everyone, and as a result ends up involving everyone in participation.

It raised its head today on a Radio 2 phone-in about a parliamentary group advising that a new rule of thumb should apply when applying blame on road accidents, namely that might is not right but the opposite - if you are in the bigger form of transport then you expected to show a higher level of care towards other road users - this has been interpreted to mean that cyclists involved in road traffic accidents will have to be proved to have been reckless before they can be financially (and them legally) blamed by insurers/plod/prosecutors.

Likewise HGV and PSV drivers would also be expected to demonstrate a greater level of care towards car drivers, and indeed cyclists towards pedestrians (just for you Mintball).

I've ridden in Holland and Denmark and its an eye-opener to be the road user who has absolute right of way over motorised traffic, as someone said today its like the law of the sea where powered boats have to give way to sail - in Holland especially I didn't see any main roads that didn't have a cycle lane (separated from the road by a kerb) and the cycle lanes that go between towns and villages would often veer away from the roads and take a more direct route, tarmaced, kerbed, and with street lighting, but the best thing was finding that as you rode along a cycle route and approached a junction shared with motorised traffic you'd find a large red button mounted on a post 100 yards before the junction which you could get quite adept at hitting with the palm of a hand as you rode past - this would then change the sequence of the traffic lights in the same way that a Pelican crossing does and if you timed it right you wouldn't even have to stop at the lights as they'd be green for you when you got there.

Just simple joined up thinking by planners and a recognition that if you make it a more pleasant experience for cyclists, then more people will cycle, fewer will drive (how many daily journeys are less than 10 miles), and less public transport will be required.

I've also commuted on my bike to work in Leeds down one of the arterial routes into the city, its not always pleasant and you need a rear view handlebar mirror and watch it constantly, the only good thing being that I could do the journey into work quicker on the bike than I could in my car (coming back home uphill was a bit different though).

Also in the news this week is the fact that Leeds City Council will be spending a considerable sum of money on resurfacing work in the city over the next twelve months in readiness for the start of The Tour de France next year - it would be nice to think that the money wasn't just spent on throwing some more tar in potholes and instead was spent on proper cycle routes into the city (there is an official one, but its absolutely ridiculous in its diversions through housing estates to avoid major roads), but somehow I just don't think that will happen anytime soon.

As someone who walks along one of London's cycling superhighways twice a day, in my experience cyclists do not help themselves. Every day I see them doing things like:

1. Ignoring traffic lights.
2. Crossing junctions when pedestrians have right of way.
3. Undertaking other road vehicles - including HGVs at junctions. It is simply impossible for a lorry driver to see a cyclists on his inside. IMO, any accident involving a left-turning lorry hitting a cyclist on his inside when the lorry driver has been shown to indicate in a timely fashion should be down to the cyclist, who if they survive should be prosecuted.
4. I even still see them riding in dark clothes at night without rear lights!

I think people should be able to cycle safely but currently a large section of them (known as the "lycra mafia"icon_wink.gif totally diregard other road users, others safety and their own safety.

You know me so well, Jerry.

If you read the linked to article you'll see some pretty hefty fines levied by the Dutch cycle police not just for not having lights on your bike but not having the correct number of reflectors on your bike, responsibility has to cut both ways.

All very nice, but apart from VAT on the initial bike purchase what do cyclists contribute to justify all that infrastructure?

Why do pedestrians get footpaths?

I'd guess most bicyclists also own a motor vehicle. I love my bike for getting to work and small local trips but wouldn't fancy pedalling for the weekly shop or with my dog slung across my shoulders to get to the beach. Or any longer distance journey that needs to be made quickly. My car tax is fairly hefty to boot. Not forgetting, of course, that many small cars are tax free as well as bikes.

This is a big argument raging currently in Hull following a spate of deaths of bike riders in the local rag. One reader pointed out that road infrastructure as funded by all taxes, and not by taxes raised by Vehicle Excise Duty. There's no such thing as 'road tax' - if you pay income tax, Vat, whatever, you are paying for road infrastructure and maintenance. This means, of course, that bicyclists pay in the same way as car drivers anyway, and many (most?) pay Vehicle Excise Duty (car tax) as well as they are also car owners.

What I do think is essential is some sort of compulsory Cycling Proficiency Test for all road users on a bicycle.

Mainly because they were around before the bike...

Poor response to the two very good replies you received to your rather predictable question.

An observation: I've walked around in a number of Continental cities where there is a large amount of cycling. I've never seen the kind of aggressive cycling that I see in London, on a regular basis. I've had no comparable incident with cyclists on the Continent. Indeed, two specific do remain in my mind, precisely because of the contrast.

In France one year, an elderly man on an old-fashioned bike, cycling toward a crossing that we were nearing. We waited for him to go through and he thanked us as he passed.

Similarly, in Collioure one morning, I waited for a cyclist dressed in full racing gear to go past on one road before I crossed: he acknowledged as he went by.

In London, it's like a war.

And I do wonder how much of it is 'encouraged' (for want of a better word) by so many cyclists riding racing bikes instead of sit-up-and-beg bikes, which you see a great deal more on the Continent.

Have you heard of public transport? Or Shanks's Pony? Or even cabs?

That, at its most simplistic, is my personal transport system – and has been, even when I lived in semi-rural environments (see – this isn't just a London-centric post!

).

As it happens, I'm off on me jollies ("to the beach"!) later today – by train. I'll get there tomorrow morning. It's actually probably the easiest and most hassle-free way to go.

I do the shopping on foot – and that means both the weekly shop, while anything in midweek can be picked up via my usual routes to and from work. Bulky stuff (bog roll, cat food and litter etc) I get delivered.

I do think that we have a wider problem of too many vehicles on roads that simply cannot handle them – it's most certainly the case in London, where even a small incident can cause the most massive snarl-ups. And – across the country – bad traffic problems are a negative for the economy, losing it money.

But some of that is down to the culture that's grown up that sees car-ownership as a right (how many teenagers now expect one?), even where that can mean a single household having two, three or even more cars.

My parents live on a fairly small road outside Croydon, and there's frequently a big car parked outside their house that's then left there for weeks at a time by a two-car household further up the road that do not need to use both cars every week, never mind every day.

The destruction of local shopping areas and the advent of edge-of-town tin-box supermarkets has increased the cult of the car, because it encourages the entire idea of the pile-it-in single shop for which you need a car.

In the UK, we don't have the highest rate of car ownership per 1,000 people in Europe, but we're not far behind the likes of Germany and France. The point is, though, that those countries are one hell of a lot bigger, and we actually have a population, in our much smaller country, that's close to theirs in their much bigger ones.

We need politicians of any and all parties to think about this seriously and be prepared to grasp some nettles. Whether they will, with so much vested interest and so much of a cult of the car, remains to be seen.

Successive London mayors, for instance, have merely tinkered around the edges of the problem, and it isn't getting any better.

The added issue of pollution from motorised vehicles really does mean that we should be acting.

So where do you propose the money comes from to create all this infrastructure?