Less green, more safe?
Today’s Independent has an article in its Green Pages (its regular section on environmentally-friendly living) by someone who has decided to stop cycling in London and start driving instead (page 41, John Miller, Two Wheels Deadly). First it was that Alsatian dog which was tethered next to his bike, which urinated on his panniers and damaged his wheels. Then it was the exposure to dangerous drivers, and finally the deterioration of the cycling infrastructure in his supposedly cycle-friendly home borough of Waltham Forest (in east London).
I feel somewhat qualified to address some of the points in this article, since I’m a regular cyclist and a professional driver. In my current job, which is in a distant part of London (Wealdstone), I have to cycle to New Malden station before getting two trains (or more usually three, because I get off at Wimbledon, get a coffee and get back on the train to Clapham Junction), and the actual job is mostly van driving. As I wrote here before, I had a very lucky escape at a roundabout on the main route to New Malden when I was hit by an old man who either did not notice me or thought he had priority because he had a more powerful vehicle. (He didn’t – on a roundabout, you give way to the vehicle already on the roundabout unless road markings and signs suggest otherwise).
Where I disagree with this writer is his enthusiasm for the speed cameras which he says are being replaced by reminding devices, in which drivers are reminded of their present speed and to slow down rather than being “flashed” and fined:
One innovation on my local main roads is solar-powered advisory speed signs. If a driver’s doing more than 30mph, they light up. Very pretty they are. But they don’t deter speeding. Why should they? No camera, no fine. All it asks is that drivers be nice and respect the speed limit. And if they hit a cyclist, so what? The chances are that all they’ll get is a charge of driving without due care and atteniton. … Motoring law largely deals with the hypothetical circumstances, not its consequences.
I can’t see how someone who is speeding and kills a cyclist can get off on a petty charge like that. That comes under causing death by dangerous driving, which routinely attracts prison sentences. But my real objection is that there are so many dangers for cyclists than mere speeding. The problem is reckless and dangerous driving.
For example, I’ve worked for numerous companies and had the dubious privelege of being driven around London (and other places) by their drivers. I was once sent out by a vehicle-hire company to deliver vans to companies, and the driver drove like a maniac and cut corners, by which I mean taking a corner wide by driving over the lines in the middle of the road. This is in fact more dangerous than speeding, as it could cause a head-on crash, or run down the cyclist who is in the middle of the road because he is going right or straight on. People are more tempted to do this on back roads, which have a lot of right-angle junctions and less traffic, which leads drivers to imagine that they can cut corners and speed safely. On another occasion I had to swerve to avoid a driver who turned right across my path in Tooting. Some people just don’t look.
Speed cameras, on the other hand, often appear on main roads rather than these back streets. They smack not only of a money-making scheme, but also of the state getting its pound of flesh out of pettily disobedient subjects. They are often used to enforce too-low speed limits, like the 30mph speed limits in the Limehouse Tunnel in east London. In that tunnel, you have to concentrate if you want to keep the speed limit, which means you are likely to be watching the speedometer rather than the road. The last time I drove through it, nobody was keeping the speed limit (some were doing well over 40mph). And it’s not an accident black-spot – I have heard of one serious accident which was caused by a young driver driving recklessly.
Speed cameras are used because they are an easy way of “solving the problem” of dangerous driving, but anyone who works in my profession will know that they are ineffective. They need to sort out the blatantly dangerous driving – the corner-cutting and rapid acceleration and braking, for example. They also need to stop drug driving. On one occasion I went out in a 16-tonne Volvo truck to deliver furniture to Essex, and the driver pulled over and rolled himself a joint as we headed up the main road past Chelmsford. Alhamdu lillah we got back in one piece, but his driving was noticeably impaired.
I’m not surprised that John Miller no longer feels able to cycle in London. Since my crash I cycle less than I used to, and am more apprehensive. I’ve never cycled in Waltham Forest, but the provision for cyclists south of the river isn’t up to much either – in particular, crossing the six-lane A3 is particularly hazardous, particularly if you just want to go straight out of New Malden to Raynes Park. And yes, there is the problem of foliage growing over cycle routes and not being cut back. But I really don’t see the benefits of speed cameras, as they don’t tackle bad driving practices other than speeding.
