The HWcode today in parliament.

http://www.publications.parliament.u...05.htm#hddr_17

TRANSPORT
Revised Highway Code

The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Dr. Stephen Ladyman): In February 2006 we issued a draft of proposed revisions to the Highway Code for public consultation, which closed on 15 May 2006. Over 4,000 people offered a total of almost 27,000 comments.

Taking account of these comments, a new draft version of the Highway Code was laid before Parliament on 28 March 2007. A large number of responses to the consultation concerned the rules on cycling and more than 40 amendments were made to these and other rules to take account of comments from cyclists. However, since the code was laid before Parliament, further representations have been made by cyclists who remain concerned that the revised text of rules 61 and 63 on cycle facilities and cycle lanes is insufficiently clear.

Following informal discussions with the CTC, an organisation representing cyclists, we are proposing changes to draft rules 61 and 63 to make clearer the position regarding the advice in the code on the use of cycle facilities and cycle lanes. On 31 May the Department for Transport wrote to key road safety interests, including members of the Road Safety Advisory Panel, as well as cycling and walking representative bodies, concerning further changes to the Highway Code. A copy of the Department’s letter has been placed in the Library of both Houses.

We have asked stakeholders to let us have their views by the end of Tuesday 12 June. The reason for this short timescale is so as not to unduly delay the publication of the new edition of the Highway Code. Any proposed changes have to be laid in Parliament for 40 days before they can come into effect, so will need to be laid by 15 June if the 40-day period is to be completed before summer recess. Views are requested by 12 June to allow time for them to be considered before laying the changes in Parliament. We would then expect to publish the revised edition of the Highway Code in September.

And CTC's petition to endorse the changes.
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4855

I welcome the Government’s decision to amend the cycling section of the Highway Code.

I welcome their recognition that use of cycle facilities and cycle lanes is "not compulsory" and will "depend on your skills and experience”.

I support CTC’s response to the consultation.

Martin.

On Jun 5, 5:46 pm, Martin Dann wrote:

The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Dr. Stephen
Ladyman):

A large number of responses to the consultation concerned the
rules on cycling and more than 40 amendments were made to these
and other rules to take account of comments from cyclists.

Except that they seemed to ignore the comments from cyclists
altogether.

However, since the code was laid before Parliament, further
representations have been made by cyclists who remain concerned
that the revised text of rules 61 and 63 on cycle facilities and cycle
lanes is insufficiently clear.

Lack of clarity was hardly the issue. I suppose that's the straightest
talk we're likely to get from him.

--
Dave...

Martin Dann wrote:


http://www.publications.parliament.u.../archive/07060
5.htm#hddr_17

TRANSPORT
Revised Highway Code

The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Dr. Stephen Ladyman):
In February 2006 we issued a draft of proposed revisions to the Highway
Code for public consultation, which closed on 15 May 2006. Over 4,000
people offered a total of almost 27,000 comments.

snip

Following informal discussions with the CTC, an organisation
representing cyclists, we are proposing changes to draft rules 61 and 63
to make clearer the position regarding the advice in the code on the use
of cycle facilities and cycle lanes.

It's a pity that Dr. Ladyman does not mention the representations to MPs
and Lords made by cyclists who may not be members of the CTC.

And CTC's petition to endorse the changes.
http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4855

I welcome the Government's decision to amend the cycling section of the
Highway Code.

I welcome their recognition that use of cycle facilities and cycle lanes
is "not compulsory" and will "depend on your skills and experience".

I support CTC's response to the consultation.

I will not be signing the CTC's petition. I was planning to join them
until last month. Right now, they need to do rather a lot to demonstrate
to me that they mean business.

Cheers,
Luke

--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire http://www.shrimper.org.uk

On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 16:46:57 GMT someone who may be Martin Dann
wrote this:-

http://www.publications.parliament.u...05.htm#hddr_17

A copy of the Department’s letter has been placed in the Library of both Houses.

Not much use to any of us plebs. A quick look at the Westminster web
site didn't reveal a way of us plebs reading what is in that
library.

I'll ask my MP what it says.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

On Wed, 06 Jun 2007, David Hansen wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 16:46:57 GMT someone who may be Martin Dann
wrote this:-

A copy of the Department’s letter has been placed in the Library of both Houses.

Not much use to any of us plebs. A quick look at the Westminster web
site didn't reveal a way of us plebs reading what is in that
library.

I don't think plebes can see what's in the library. I think it's
deliberate - putting something in the library avoids its appearance in
the public record. Answers are periodically provided which basically
say "an answer to question blaah has been put in the library".

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

On 06 Jun 2007 12:46:01 GMT someone who may be Ian Smith
wrote this:-

Not much use to any of us plebs. A quick look at the Westminster web
site didn't reveal a way of us plebs reading what is in that
library.

I don't think plebes can see what's in the library. I think it's
deliberate - putting something in the library avoids its appearance in
the public record.

I think you are right. That sounds just like the sort of thing the
Westminster rogues gallery would do.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

Ian Smith wrote:


I don't think plebes can see what's in the library. I think it's
deliberate - putting something in the library avoids its appearance in
the public record. Answers are periodically provided which basically
say "an answer to question blaah has been put in the library".

regards, Ian SMith

Dr. Ladyman you have let the motoring public down. There is a bottle of
whisky and a revolver in the library :-)

(I'm just pleased that we (the community of cyclists, not just the CTC)
made /some/ difference. The new rules could be improved but they are a
million times better than "whenever possible" versions.

Peter

--
www.amey.org.uk

Ian Smith wrote:

I don't think plebes can see what's in the library. I think it's
deliberate - putting something in the library avoids its appearance in
the public record. Answers are periodically provided which basically
say "an answer to question blaah has been put in the library".
According to the House of Commons factsheet on deposited papers
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/P15.pdf

"Members of the public do not have access to the House of Commons
Library. The first port of call for a member of the public who wants
access to a Deposited Paper would normally be the Parliamentary Clerk of
the depositing Government Department. In most cases, the Parliamentary
Clerk is obliged to arrange for access to be given to it under the
provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, though there may be a
charge for this."

I don't think you are going to see a copy of this by the 15th June
deadline using this route though.
Adam

David Hansen wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 16:46:57 GMT someone who may be Martin Dann
wrote this:-
A copy of the Department’s letter has been placed in the Library of both Houses.

Not much use to any of us plebs. A quick look at the Westminster web
site didn't reveal a way of us plebs reading what is in that
library.

I'll ask my MP what it says.

I received a copy from my MP this morning. The content is much the same
as the written statement at
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wms/?id=2007-06-05a.14WS.3&s=cycling#g14WS.4

I might find time to type it in tomorrow, if no-one else does it first.

--
Danny Colyer URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"Daddy, put that down. Daddy, put that down. Daddy, put that down.
Daddy, why did you put that down?" - Charlie Colyer, age 2

Danny Colyer wrote:

David Hansen wrote:
On Tue, 05 Jun 2007 16:46:57 GMT someone who may be Martin Dann
wrote this:-
A copy of the Department's letter has been placed in the Library of both
Houses.

Not much use to any of us plebs. A quick look at the Westminster web
site didn't reveal a way of us plebs reading what is in that
library.

I'll ask my MP what it says.

I received a copy from my MP this morning. The content is much the same
as the written statement at
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wms/?i...=cycling#g14WS.
4

Mark Hendrick MP (Lab, Preston) still hasn't found the time to reply,
even though the Government has now made life quite easy for him.

Cheers,
Luke

--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire http://www.shrimper.org.uk