Comments on: Would the Draft Cycle Safety Panel Recommendations make a Difference?

By: LennyBoy

LennyBoy — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 09:11:25 +0000

In reply to Alastair Brown. I'd suggest that numbers 7,9, and 11 could all contribute to improved driver behaviour, either directly or through greater awareness of the issues raised. For example, the suggested 1.0-1.5m metre passing rule is generating all sorts of discussion about its practicality, but it's also an opportunity to point out that sometimes it's not appropriate to pass straight away.

By: CP

CP — Tue, 07 Oct 2014 00:03:22 +0000

Both sides equally need educating. That’s the major fix if the educated people then respect each other & obey the rules. Peace on earth ? LOL. From what I see on my daily commutes (cycle commuted 10+yrs averaging 19 weekdays per month) , purely based on numbers, a higher proportion of cyclists disobey basic road rules than drivers. So cyclists need more enforcing than drivers do as seems risk isn’t something that controls rider behaviour? The risk to Chch cyclists is particularly high at moment but seems high consequence is not being thought about by the non law abiding riders. Cyclist behaviour appears to be worse than a few years ago.

By: Alastair Brown

Alastair Brown — Sun, 05 Oct 2014 22:21:58 +0000

It worries me that there is little here to to improve general driving skills. Number 10 is good, but it should be extended to all motorists. In fatal cycle accidents, there’s a fairly consistent rate of 70-80% of them being the fault of the motorist. It always annoys me that in spite, of this there always seems to be call for better education on BOTH sides, when it appears to me that that it’s the motorists that need educating much, much more than cyclists.

By: Cyclomaniac

Cyclomaniac — Sun, 05 Oct 2014 07:31:20 +0000

Although maybe less sexy than new infrastructure I do think think these recommendations can make a real difference on the roads. It will come down to translating these recommendations into clear milestones so that progress can be measured. I can not believe that anybody would want object he proposal to give a cyclists 1.5 meter gap, that seems to be common sense but clearly it is not.. And did the truck lobby really say that they would worry about burned out clutches if they had to slow down for cyclists on narrow roads? That says it all does it not?

By: Robert

Robert — Sat, 04 Oct 2014 20:49:23 +0000

At primary school in the 1960’s safety education was all about road safety, particularly about how to ride a bike and be a safe pedestrian (very little else i.e. no stranger danger stuff , bullying prevention, health and safety rules , unfortunately ) . As a teenager in the 1970’s it was all about defensive driving and road courtesy. This was a time when our road death rate per head of population and car numbers was considerably higher than now. Have we become complacent as the numbers have actually improved since then? . Those safety messages have been with me all my life, so if the panel recommendations can put a heavy emphasis on early safety education, the medium to long term effects can only be positive. I am encouraged by the comprehensiveness of this report, the recommendations that it makes and look forward to implementation.

By: Nick

Nick — Sat, 04 Oct 2014 17:50:15 +0000

Looks good. Safer cycling is also about education. For the cyclist as much as for motorists. I ride a bike, motorcycle and drive a car and there are different skill sets for each. To get my motorcycle license I had to do several training courses and a big component of this was keeping safe around hazards esp cars and other vehicles (positioning yourself safely on the road, anticipating hazards). This was stuff I had been doing as a cyclist for years. How do we provide this education for the young cyclist or someone new to cycling. I know schools run a “cycling safety” course aimed at primary children but this is only a week long and maybe not long enough?

By: Dave

Dave — Sat, 04 Oct 2014 11:20:33 +0000

I still think the key thing is to build proper (safe) cycle infrastructure. It’s such a shame that this wasn’t done when many of the roads around Christchurch were being rebuilt post-earthquake.

Hopefully this unfortunate death helps to motivate those in power to address these issues. Unfortunately, New Zealand is backwards in many respects.