Careless City Cyclists Rule Road In Rogue Fashion

WASHINGTON, D.C. (WUSA)-- The nation's capitol is infamously known for
having some of the worst drivers, and most congested streets in the country.
Now you can add disobedient bicyclists to the list.

9News Now decided to examine the dangerous trend. We set up in Dupont Circle
in NW D.C. and watched daredevil cyclists blow past red lights and traffic
signals over and over again.

When confronted, one cyclist said, " I don't even pay attention."

Another cyclist said, " I'm a bicycle courier so I do that all day." He
added, "I definitely know the rules, and it's miraculous, and I'm thankful
to Jesus that I haven't had an accident."

It was difficult to find those obeying the rules and stopping at red lights
as is mandated by D.C. law. However, we did see Schiva Polefka stop for a
red light.

Polefka said, "I want to be respected by motorists when they are out
driving, because they can easily harm and kill me if they don't respect me
as a cyclist."

In the District, you can be ticketed with a $25 fine for running red lights
on a bicycle. That's compared to $75 for a car that doesn't stop at the red
light, or $50 for failing to halt at a stop sign.

It is also illegal to run red lights on a bicycle in Maryland and Virginia.

A D.C. police spokeswoman told 9News Now that they will launch an initiative
in March to try and combat the problem.

http://wusa9.com/news/article/192647...-Rogue-Fashion

QUOTE:

Yesterday's parliamentary debate on cycling saw overwhelming cross-party
support expressed by the Members of Parliament present for a range of
measures aimed at improving the safety of cyclists on Britain's roads. The
backbench debate, described by several present as the best attended they had
witnessed, builds on the Cities Fit For Cyclists campaign launched by The
Times newspaper.

While it's clearly too early to say assess what impact the debate will have
on policy or whether the debate is, as some hope, a watershed moment in
cycling in the UK, it has sent out a clear message to the government that
there are steps that can be done to improve conditions for cyclists.

In all, 57 of the 76 MPs present, many wearing badges supporting the
newspaper's campaign, spoke at the debate, which had been tabled by
Cambridge MP Dr Julian Huppert, co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary
Cycling Group. A recording of the debate can be watched here, while Hansard
also has a full transcript.

To anyone whose experience of parliamentary proceedings is limited to
coverage of Prime Minister's Questions or debates on issues that divide MPs
along party political lines, yesterday's debate provided a refreshing show
of unity, irrespective of allegiance. Gone were the jeers, the cat-calls,
the adversarial points-scoring that seem to be the norm.

Indeed, in his closing comments, Dr Huppert hailed the cross-party consensus
that had been a feature of the three and a half hour debate, with member
after member rising to express their support for The Times' campaign, as
well as pointing out specific issues within their own constituencies that
also had national relevance.

All too often, MPs also spoke of constituents who had been killed on the
roads while riding their bikes, and of how the victims' families had urged
them to do something to improve conditions for cyclists.

Ian Austin, MP for Dudley North, like Dr Huppert co-chair of the All-Party
Parliamentary Cycling Group (APPCG), described The Times as having "achieved
a breakthrough" that people within cycling have been trying to make for
years and showed that "this issue will not go away."

Mr Austin, who had outlined the lenient sentences and bans handed out to
motorists found guilty of killing cyclists, citing cases including those of
Eilidh Cairns and Rob Jeffries, added that by signing up to The Times'
campaign and joining the APPCG, MPs could pay a fitting tribute to their
memory, and that of other cyclists killed on Britain's roads.

He also called for 20mph to be made the default speed limit in residential
areas and for local cycling commissioners to be put in place, two of the
proposals outlined in the eight-point manifesto put forward by The Times,
and that cycling, like swimming, should form part of the national curriculum
in schools.

Among the MPs to speak was Oliver Colville, who represents Plymouth Sutton
and Devonport, who by his own admission has not cycled for a number of
years, but whose proposals included banning HGVs from city centres during
rush hour.

A number of MPs including Nia Griffith from Llanelli pointed out that while
The Times' campaign focuses on urban areas, the speed of drivers on rural
roads also created danger for cyclists.

That point was also underlined by Dr Sarah Woollaston, MP for Totnes, who
described how she had fallen in love with cycling on a tandem 30 years ago,
and said that "the joy of cycling" should not be forgotten.

She also called for use of the word "accident" to be dropped when reporting
or discussing road traffic incidents, highlighting the human intervention
that all too often results in tragedy.

On Thursday, speaking on BBC London News, Danny Williams of the blog
Cyclists In The City, had said that the question MPs needed to ask
themselves ahead of this afternoon's debate was, "'can my child cycle to
school?' I'd argue that in the UK at the moment, they can't."

Dr Woollaston admitted that she wouldn't, pointing out that schoolchildren
in her constituency faced the daunting and dangerous prospect of being
forced to ride along a busy road if they wished to cycle to school, due to
delays in putting in place a much-needed bridge at Littlehempston that would
complete a cycle route from Exeter to Paignton.

Alison Seabeck, MP for Plymouth Moor View, highlighted the dangers facing
cyclists at junctions, describing herself as a "lapsed cyclist" and
describing how she had been knocked off her bike by a motorist who drove
off. She added that while The Times' campaign focused on cycle safety,
ultimately it would enhance the joy of cycling as well as its associated
health benefits.

There had been fears among some observers that the debate might descend into
calls for helmets and high visibility clothing to be made compulsory and for
the focus to switch to anti-social cycling, but on the whole that did not
happen.

Islington MP Julian Corbyn did highlight several times the issue of red
light jumping cyclists - where he got the statistics from that the
proportion doing so had fallen from one in two to one in four is unclear -
but he was very much in the minority.

Speaking towards the end of proceedings, Labour's Shadow Transport Minister
Maria Eagle gave a speech that was one of the highlights of the debate.
Lamenting the abolition of Cycling England, as several other speakers had
done, she said that her party would commit £100 million a year to cycling if
it came to power in the next election.

Speaking about the campaign launched by The Times, she said: "It has
recognised that collisions involving cyclists are not simply accidents, but
have a cause and therefore can be prevented. They are ultimately the
consequence of our collective failure to do enough to make our cities fit
for cyclists-the apt title of the campaign that The Times has launched as a
result."

Transport minister Norman Baker, whose responsibilities include cycling,
outlined that cycling formed part of activities for which money has been set
aside under the £560 million Local Sustainable Travel Fund, emphasising that
37 of the 38 tranche 1 projects approved had a cycling element, although it
should be added that in some cases that is minimal.

He also responded on a point by point basis to the eight pillars of The
Times' manifesto for cycling, although his replies contained nothing new.

The point that cycling is, when all is said and done, a fun activity was
underlined by Dr Huppert in his closing comments.

"This is an immediate issue, but we need to keep it going for the future,"
he said. "It is not just about them and us: it is about making roads and
cities that work for everyone.

"Safety is important. We should also remember all the great benefits of
cycling: it is cheap, healthy, efficient, sustainable and fun. We must
remember the sheer joy of cycling.

"Cycling must become a normal activity that people can engage in from eight
to 80, and beyond both those ages," he added.
"We can make a difference," he concluded.

After the debate, Roger Geffen, Campaigns & Policy Director at national
cyclists' organisation CTC, said: "Following the hugely positive show of
cross-party parliamentary support, the Government now has a clear mandate to
get on with promoting 'more as well as safer cycling'. It should seize the
moment and draw up a co-ordinated action plan to create safe conditions for
cycling, and to encourage more people to enjoy its benefits for our health,
our quality of life and our wallets."

He continued: "The wider public benefits of cycling span so many different
Government departments, but so too do the actions needed to maximise those
benefits The departments responsible for health, planning, climate change,
air quality and environment, traffic law and policing all have roles to
play, with similar 'joined-up action' needed locally. We urge the Transport
Secretary to grasp the opportunity right now to get Olympic Britain back
into the saddle."

Philip Darnton, former chairman of Cycling England and now executive
director of the Bicycle Association, was among those observing the debate
from the public gallery.

Afterwards, he told BikeBiz: "What a day! It was a tremendous turn out of
MPs and not one voice raised against any aspects of cycling. It was a
triumph of cross-party conversation about the future of cycling. What we
need now is to turn this into something concrete and long-lasting.

"We need now a strategic approach to cycling, handled like road safety,
which is cross-party, consistent and with continuity. Cycling needs a level
of funding, for ever," he added.


http://road.cc/content/news/53285-pa...government-way
--
Simon Mason