PAVEMENTS ARE FOR PEDESTRIANS – 8
The transcript of BBC Radio 4 PM’s interview with Tony Armstrong Chief Executive of Living Streets and Roger Geffen of the National Cyclist Touring Charity (CTC) on 17th January 17.30:http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03pmkb3 31.56 mins - 37.20 minsPresenter: Eddie MairMAIR: The UK’s minister for cycling wants cyclists to use the pavements. Well, to be precise, Robert Goodwill says cyclists should not be fined for mounting the pavement if they are escaping a dangerous section of road. In an e-mail to a cycling campaigner the minister said that discretion should be exercised QUOTE “When a cyclist is using the pavement alongside a dangerous section of road by the speed of the traffic.” He said enforcement was up to the police but he reiterated guidance from 1999 when fixed penalties for cycling on pavements were introduced. It states that the goal was not to penalise responsible cyclists. Robert Goodwill said “Cyclists must be mindful not to put pedestrians at risk.”Tony Armstrong Chief Executive of the Living Streets a charity that represents pedestrians. Roger Geffen Policy Director of the cycling charity CTCEDDIE MAIR: Tony Armstrong, what do you think of what the cycling minister has said?TONY ARMSTRONG: Well we’re disappointed in this. We were opposed to the original guidance when it came out because we don’t believe there is a happy compromise were a cyclist can responsibly cycle on the pavement. Many pedestrians value that safe haven status the pavements give them, particularly older people and people with disabilities. So saying that because we have failed to make the roads safe for cyclists we should create another problem by creating intimidation for pedestrians, we think that is not the right solution.EDDIE MAIR: Have you ever cycled?TONY ARMSTRONG: I cycle every day. I cycle in London every day and I know exactly how unsafe and fearful it can be.EDDIE MAIR: Have you ever felt on a stretch of road where you feel in danger that if you could just get on the pavement for a moment that would be a good thing?TONY ARMSTRONG: Yeah absolutely. And what we’re saying is that if someone is in immediate danger of being in a collision or in immediate threat then get on the pavement. All the pedestrians that are on that pavement would absolutely be fine with that. We are not talking about where people are in immediate danger. The problem is when lots of people feel nervous, and who’s to define what a dangerous road is, because if you feel nervous and if you feel fearful about cycling then you just think ‘Oh, the minister has put this guidance out – I’ll just cycle on the pavements’; and many people are already using the pavements because they don’t feel particularly safe on our streets. Cycling has increased hugely since the original guidance came out and it‘s not an adequate solution if you want to make our streets more sustainable and safer for those more vulnerable people, both pedestrians and cyclists.EDDIE MAIR: Roger Geffen what do you think of what the minister said?ROGER GEFFEN: Firstly let me agree with one point Tony just made which is that the main solution should be to create safe conditions for people of all ages and backgrounds to be able to cycle safely and law abidingly on the roads. People should not feel they have to make the choice between what is safe and what is legal. On the other hand I do think that the guidance does make sense. I think anyone would accept that there is a distinction to be made between cycling in a way that endangers or intimidates pedestrians, in which case they should feel the full force of the law, and where people are actually cycling on the pavement to avoid danger and are not causing it. At that point I think one would accept that it is not police priority to be enforcing the law. What we do believe though is in that situation one of the options available to the police should be to send the cyclist on a cycle training course. We send drivers who’ve offended on driver training and speed awareness courses. Surely it is even more justified to do that for cyclists, given that is effectively a punishment that not only fits the crime but fixes it too, by giving cyclists the confidence and skills to ride safely and correctly and according to the law on the roads.EDDIE MAIR: Tony Armstrong?TONY ARMSTRONG: There are sanctions that are reasonable as Roger said, but it doesn’t solve the central point. We are saying there is no reasonable behaviour that doesn’t intimidate pedestrians. You can’t behave in a way that respects pedestrians even if you are feeling respectful and try to do your best to avoid cycling on the pavement.EDDIE MAIR: I’m looking at a tweet from Paul ……. to this programme ……….. he says that this works fine in Japan where people cycle on the pavement. Is that true?ROGER GEFFEN: That is correct. It is not a solution we would advocate. I do think that Tony has an entirely fair point that cyclists and pedestrians should not be put in conflict because we can’t work out how to create fair conditions whereby people are given their own space on the road. That is the right answer, along with lower speed limits; 20mph should be the norm in urban streets. We should be creating safe conditions so that people are not faced with the choice between what is safe and what is legal. I would agree with Tony on that. I do think though that there are some situations where you have got a busy main road and an empty pavement where if you were to then take enforcement action against that cyclist, particularly if you were talking about a pensioner in the situation, then I do think it would be reasonable for the police to exercise some discretion and I think on that basis we would agree with the minister’s position.EDDIE MAIR: Thank you both. Tony Armstrong from Living Streets and Roger Geffen from CTC.===================================================================FOOTNOTE: Extracts from Community Forum Code of Conduct“Avoid disruptive activity online, such as persistent off-topic comments and postings or statements that incite others to ……………… participate in illegal activities. “This is not a chat-site.
Tony Purton ● 4480d4 Comments