High-visibility clothing for cyclists a must – coroner

This is the moment I feared would come. Why does NZ officialdom come up with so many crackpot ideas? Why do they think it is more effective to have ambulances at the bottom of the cliff than erecting fences at the top?

The man is saying “OK, the mandatory helmet law has clearly failed so what can we do to re-victimize the victims again? Oh I know, let’s force the bike riding underclass wear a hi-vis.”

He would have served society better by calling for stronger penalties for the people who kill and injure people on bikes and foot due to their carelessness.

Just as night follows day we will now get some opportunist politician looking to make a name for him or herself and bingo – another barrier to riding a bike. And no politician will dare to oppose making our roads safer.

From Radionz… http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/128086/high-visibility-clothing-for-cyclists-a-must-coroner

A Coroner’s report into the road death of New Zealand’s top roading policeman has recommended it be made compulsory for cyclists to wear hi-visibility clothing on the roads.

Stephen Fitzgerald, 57, died after being clipped by a truck at a roundabout at Petone, near Wellington, in June 2008.

The driver, Desmond Wilson, was found guilty of careless driving in 2009.

Coroner Ian Smith is recommending high visibility clothing be made as compulsory as bike helmets.

He says the high visibility clothing may not stop an accident, but it is common sense for the safety of cyclists.

Mr Smith is also reminding motorists to leave a one-metre gap when passing cyclists and for cycle lane rules to be made more clear.

He acknowledges the efforts of Hutt City Council in creating a cycle lane at the Petone roundabout following the crash, but says the intersection needs to be reviewed.

Copyright © 2013, Radio New Zealand



Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply


  • Jim Holmes
    15 February 2013, 2:32 pm

    Absolute madness!

  • Cyclomaniac
    15 February 2013, 6:16 pm

    What’s next? A mandatory police escort? Airbag? Fluorescent frame? Front and rear bumper? Training wheels? Speed limiter? Seat belt? Or a Sumo wrestling suit???

    • TheBoxer@Cyclomaniac
      22 April 2013, 11:49 am

      They are a lot of people driving who should NOT be let out of the house let alone be in charge of a vehicle..!! They are absolute muppets..!!! High viz clothing is NOT there to save your life, it’s there to alert the MUPPETS who should not be let of the house that there are people including children smaller than their car to Slow Down… You Can Kill Someone.!!
      I’am absolutely astounded at just how backward some of these comments have been, and I would be even more astounded if they have even been on a bicycle in the the 20 years let alone this century..!!

      This is the 21st Century & there is No Posible way anyone would .cycle on the roads of the UK at any time of the day without High Viz Clothing… It’s Widley excepted in the civerlised world & has become the Norn to do this…
      Police, Trafic workers, Builders, Engineers, Concil workers anyone… It’s the Law in the uk that anyone working where they are vehicles Must wear a high viz vest..!! THE NORM..!!
      But then again, we Are a 21st Century Country.

  • Richard
    18 February 2013, 12:23 pm

    Interesting that in the same week there was a report on the court case for Celia Wade-Brown getting knocked off her bike last year. The police summary of facts says she was wearing high vis jacket.


    Do we need a bill board. “Wearing high vis will protect cyclists. Yeah, Right!”

  • Solar Sailer
    19 February 2013, 11:17 am

    It would seem the research on the effectiveness of high vis is inconclusive. There is some suggestion that when high vis becomes common place its effectiveness is nullified due to a ‘blending in’ effect.

  • Tom
    19 February 2013, 6:48 pm

    I read the coroner’s report this morning. I’ve heard others comment on the report that it should get a ‘D’ at best, because there is quite a disconnect between the coronial inquiry, and the conclusion that the coroner draws from it. Anyway, what really amused me is this bit of the ‘Coroner’s comments’:

    “Turning to the issue of high-vis clothing it is my view a no-brainer.”

    That is really what he did write. Apart from this statement not forming a proper sentence, I think I know what he means. But you could also understand it as him saying that he didn’t use his brain. That would explain quite a few things.



Featured Post

Latest Comments

Coming Events/Activities

Newsletter Signup