Woman's Hour and the cautious cyclist
July 8, 2009 by ian
Woman's Hour today had an item on cycling and the dangers to women. You can listen again for the next week or so here.
Unfortunately, the concentration was very much on the dangers of cycling, and although the opening "taster" comments were from enthusiastic cyclists, the studio discussion was very negative. Cynthia Barlow from RoadPeace made very worthwhile points about the need for HGVs to fit safety devices, but Jo Oakley from the Met Police seemed very mealy-mouthed, and at some points seemed to imply that cyclists who get killed have only themselves to blame.
It's difficult to know how these things should be pitched. Certainly, Jenni Murray's attitude in this piece seemed gratuitously sensationalist - she seemed to think women would be mad to cycle in town, and kept up her incredulous tone throughout the interview. There was little mention of the health benefits of cycling, and no ideas about how to make the cycling environment safer, except with regard to HGVs. On the whole I think this item will put more people off than it encourages. Of course, that makes the roads less safe for the rest of us.
The problem is, there are dangers if you cycle. When we meet up with other cyclists, we all have a store of incidents that we recount about doors opening in front of us, drivers on mobile phones, cars speeding up behind us to turn left at junctions and the danger of bendy buses. It would be silly for us to tell everybody that cycling in London traffic is without its perils, and the statistic about cyclists being as healthy as non-cyclists ten years younger is likely to be met by a questioning of whether the cyclist will live to enjoy those extra ten years.
How do we get to the position where motorists really take account of the needs of cyclists? A change in the physical layout of our roads is obviously needed, but so is a change in attitudes. In Ghent last week, I noticed that all the buses and trams were long and bendy, and I asked my friend if this was a problem for cyclists. He seemed confused by the question. Why should they be? Well, I asked, did the buses take account of the cyclists? In London, people think the bendy buses are too big to notice people on bikes. I was told, quite firmly that in Ghent, all other vehicles take account of cyclists. The idea of "blind spots" for bus or lorry drivers is unknown. They just have big enough mirrors to see wherever they need to - though sometimes the big mirrors themselves can be a bit of a hazard for passing bikes.
How can we get drivers in London to behave a bit more like drivers in Ghent? I don't know, but I'm sure Woman's Hour hasn't helped much.
- ian's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Tweet this page or follow us on Twitter:
Links that have the following symbol attached 
refer to external sites, and will be opened in a new window
Comments
Women's Hour
July 9, 2009 by David Arditti, 2 years 30 weeks ago
Comment: 15
I think it is something that such an item featured at all. It is probably not a subject they have previously discussed in living memory, and that is an indication of the increased prominence now of urban cyclists of both sexes. Jenni Murray is a veteran broadcaster, and, to generalise horribly, women of her generation and class (middle) generally are very negative about cycling, in my experience. The women who cycle in London are mostly young. I would hope that such an item makes legislators and law-enforcers more aware that "something must be done". It is wrong to pretend that there are not major safety issues around cycling in the UK which absolutely must be addressed if we are to achieve the type of cycling culture and cross-society uptake (both sexes and all ages, communities and abilities) that one sees in Belgium, The Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark so strikingly.
I can concur with the observation about bendy vehicles (and also trams), having also seen that these are commonplace in many continental cities with very high cycling levels and cause few problems to the cyclists there. The hostility to bendy buses amongst some London cyclists and from Boris Johnson is mistaken. They are not intrinsically a problem, and there is no clear statistical evidence they are more dangerous to cyclists than other vehicles.
How can attitudes to cycling be changed in Britain? Only very slowly. Attitudes take decades to change, but they can be pushed more rapidly by changes in the law and in policing practice. In the case of cycling they are also changed by the provision of physical facilities which leads to greater uptake and a change in attitude through that. Attitudes to smoking have changed rapidly since the law banned smoking in public places and workplaces. Attitudes to drink driving were turned around totally by then Transport Secretary Barbara Castle, who, bravely and single-mindedly, at a time when everyone else accepted it, decided drink driving was wrong and should be cracked down upon by the law. The law changed first, then police practice, then people knew they would get caught and punished, and then attitudes changed. We need more political leadership like that. The obvious need now is to make speeding, which many or most motorists think is OK, similarly unacceptable.
Having been promoting cycling at the Respect Festival last week, I am struck that attitudes to cycling are changing. Ten years and more ago at such events you always got lots of anti-cycling comments. These are much rarer now (at this Respect only one lady who spoke to us thought cyclists were a danger to cars!!). So we are doing some of the right things, but not enough of them.