My letter to Standard re CSH and the Mayor's victim blaming

This is the version of my letter I approved this morning:

THE angle the Mayor took on the radio yesterday, talking about cyclist risk-taking in relation to the recent terrible incidents is very unfortunate.  Either he has inside information before it is released to the public or as his own spokeswoman said it is too early to say. It is highly improbable that all the victims were being reckless for their own safety, and highway engineers can and should allow for human error.

Cycle superhighways are designed by people who have not been required to undergo cycle training and do not understand the importance of cyclists positioning themselves where they can best survive mistakes by others.  The paint encourages both cyclists and motorists to believe that cyclists should be alongside the kerb. I avoid the superhighways and would recommend other cyclists do the same.

Martin Porter QC

I am told that an editor has used the term 'accidents' and that by the time I was informed of this the print deadline had passed.  I very much regret the understandable distress this will cause (and indeed the perplexity amongst my followers.)

Cycle Super Highways - My personal views

I write this in  a purely personal capacity as a London bike commuter, though naturally I could not fail to be profoundly moved by my experience in representing the family of Brian Dorling who died so tragically and unnecessarily at the Bow Roundabout shortly after the blue paint of CSH 2 was laid in 2011 and furthermore, in following the recent inquest into the death of Philippine De Gerin-Ricard at Aldgate last July.

I agree with the Mayor that Cycle Super Highways have a future.  However this is with the important proviso that their designers have a good understanding of how cyclists safely integrate with traffic where segregation is not achievable (or rather not achieved).  Current design, typified by a 1.5 m strip of paint of no legal significance, encourages cyclists towards an unsafe position too far to the left.  This both conflicts with the ‘Bikeability’ training that TfL itself rightly seeks to encourage and reinforces the mistaken views held by some motorists as to where cyclists should be.

It is telling, and confirms what I have long suspected, that cycle infrastructure designers, and even those at the top at TfL pushing cycle training for others, do not see the need for Bikeability training for themselves.  Their designs demonstrate that they do not understand, for example, that approaching a roundabout to go straight ahead the cyclist is best advised to position herself well to the right of the leftmost lane (especially of course if there is a high volume of left turning traffic). When given advice by a very knowledgeable police officer who understands safe cycle positioning, it is all too easy for the untrained designer to consider this is a matter on which their opinion is as good as anybody else's.

Personally I do not buy the argument that putting down paint is a useful indication to motor traffic that cyclists may be present.  Any driver, especially in London but also elsewhere, is criminally negligent if he does not  consider the likely presence of cyclists on any highway.  Are we implying that where there is no blue paint drivers are not obliged to consider the likely presence of cyclists?

For the encouragement of the broadest possible mix of people the focus has to be on (optional) segregated routes of the highest quality, as recognised in the Mayor’s ‘Vision for Cycling’ published in March.  Using paint to lead cyclists directly towards segregated areas without regard to how they integrate most safely with traffic on their way there must be avoided.  Indeed there is a very great deal to be said for not marking the road at all where cyclists need to integrate with motorists.  Many (indeed the majority) of cyclists crossing the Bow junction do so on the elevated flyover where there is no cycle infrastructure, recognising that it is not only faster but safer than the provision below.  It is so easy to make matters worse and the Mayor needs to be held to his word to do cycling infrastructure properly or not at all.

I do not doubt the Mayor and TfL’s sincerity in wishing to make London safer and more attractive for cycling.  I applaud them for some good progress towards HGV safety (sadly too often neglected by others).  I trust that by the end of the Mayor’s second term we will be able to look back and see that he really did take valid criticisms of his project to heart.

Why am I hopeful?

I am hopeful because the risk, in absolute terms, of my getting killed or seriously injured on my bicycle is low (705 KSI per billion km or once every 1.4 million km).  At my current mileage I can reasonably expect to get to 85 without serious incident.
I am hopeful because my chances of getting to 85 without stroke, heart attack, diabetes and other ailments connected to inactivity are substantially increased by my riding.
I am hopeful because a Judge recently said when sentencing a man for dangerous driving,  "If he [cyclist] could bang on the side of your van, you were too close".
I am hopeful because the ACPO lead officer for traffic policing rides a bicycle and has bowed to pressure to change police guidelines relating to the enforcement of 20 mph speed limits.
I am hopeful because for the past nearly two years, an influential national newspaper that previously could not have cared much less has been interested in cyclists' safety.
I am hopeful because CTC (of which I am proud to be a member and 'ambassador') together with British Cycling (which I am proud to be a member of and an informal legal adviser to) are working tirelessly on campaigns to improve the safety of cyclists.
I am hopeful because Chris Boardman, Rebecca Romero and Chris Hoy (among other sporting heroes) say such sensible things in support of the safety of cyclists.
I am hopeful because there are many more charities and organisations with a positive view of cycling (I can single out Roadpeace, See Me Save Me, RDRF, CDF)  than there are those with negative views.
I am hopeful because there are Parliamentarians across all major political parties with real enthusiasm for cycling.  I would be very happy to have Julian Huppert, Ian Austin, Sarah Wollaston, Ben Bradshaw or Steve Brine among others as my constituency MP or, even better, in government.  Last month's debate indicated that the proportion of MPs interested in cycling is higher than that of the general population which elects them.
I am hopeful because the Mayor of London has said of cycling infrastructure that it will be done properly or not at all.
I am hopeful because the level of interest in my cycling club has risen steadily in recent years which I take to be a good leading indicator of the growing popularity of cycling.
I am hopeful because many youngsters are taught Cyclecraft at school before they learn how to drive.
I am hopeful that I can continue to do my bit through my profession to assist both individual cyclists and the interests of cyclists collectively.
Above all, I hope to continue to enjoy riding my bicycle for many years to come

Why am I angry?

I have been quiet on here in recent months.  I find it is hard to write about cycling without getting angry.  Anger is not generally a constructive or attractive emotion so I have just kept it to myself, until now.
I am angry that I am eleven times more likely to get killed cycling to work as driving to work.
I am angry that were I to get killed on my way to work, the criminal justice system would probably fail those I leave behind by applying 'momentary inattention' to virtually every piece of potentially lethal driving.
I am angry that those who endanger me go unpunished and free to do so again.
I am angry that a senior CPS official asserts (absurdly) that my video evidence does not support my complaint of dangerous driving against an HGV driver who nearly crushed me.
I am angry that the Met Police have no ambitions for 'Roadsafe' beyond a public relations exercise to pacify angry cyclists and will not find the resources to prosecute bad drivers.
I am angry that no police force will 'act' on intelligence of bad driving unless it comes to them in their predetermined bureaucratic format.
I am angry that those who attack cyclists (like me) avoid conviction whereas cyclists who lash out at motorists who endanger them get prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
I am angry that when police are eventually compelled to enforce ASLs, they put at least as much effort into prosecuting cyclists who stop ahead of the stop line to get ahead of traffic.
I am angry that two of my sporting heroes have gone in for victim blaming.
I am angry that a leading charity with close links to otherwise commendable law firms goes in for extreme victim blaming fronted by an ex Olympic oarsman.
I am angry at the cynicism of government ministers voting for the APPCG report which they have no intention of implementing.
I am angry that when tailgated by an HGV driver, I get told I am putting myself in danger by riding on the road ahead of him.
I am angry that, whereas Olympic lanes can be built overnight, there has been no spade into the ground to implement the London Mayor's cycling vision, whilst in the meantime more people on bicycles are being killed and injured.
I am angry that by the time action is consulted over and eventually taken, more people on bicycles will have been killed or injured by unsafe HGVs.
I am angry that nobody educates motorists that the way I ride is recommended and not provocative.
I am angry at sloppy, lazy, journalism which incites malevolence towards those of us on bicycles.
I am angry that civil litigation funding changes will make it harder for cyclists who are killed/injured to get the representation they need.
I am angry on behalf of my clients who often struggle to get that to which they are entitled.
I am angry at Eric Pickles.
That, dear reader, is why you have not been hearing much from me lately.

Another bad idea from Pickles.

I have commented upon Eric Pickles before when this Government was only 8 months old and I compared him unfavourably with Julian Huppert, a new MP who had caught my attention by delivering a stunningly good speech in Parliament.  Mr Huppert has gone on to do great work co-Chairing the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group.  Mr Pickles has gone on to suggest that "over agressive parking enforcement" is killing off the High Street and this is presumably his excuse for elbowing in on what would seem to be the natural area of responsibility of the DfT and, more specifically, the Roads Minister.  The idea is that motorists have a 'period of grace' to ignore parking restrictions for 15 minutes with impunity provided they are not guilty of 'dangerous parking'.  (Yeah right, given the difficulties we have with the enforcement of laws against dangerous driving, I cannot see that being effective.)

As a lawyer I find this kind of mucking with the law distasteful.  People talk about 'decriminalising' parking and other motoring offences but we should not lose sight of the fact that this is a rather inaccurate reference to the manner of enforcement, not to any principle.  You pay a fixed penalty if you break the law and are caught and if you wish to dispute a fixed penaltyyou do so in a criminal court.  This is definitely crime not contract.  The suggestion seems to me to be, we shall let you break the law provided that you do not park dangerously and if you park dangerously we shall do you for parking on a double yellow line (not parking dangerously).  Alice in Wonderland stuff given that it is perfectly possible to permit parking for up to 15 minutes if that is what was thought desirable.  Doing it the Pickles way means that no double yellow lines need be respected and local authorities will be powerless to prevent short term parking.

Marie Vesco Memorial Ride 4th - 5th June 2013

Marie Vesco died 4th June 2008

 I have been asked by Marie's parents to publicise the ride that is being held in Sussex and France to mark the fifth anniversary of Marie's death when she was struck by two cars on the A23 dual carriageway whilst she was taking part in a cycle ride from London to Brighton.

The details of the ride can be found on facebook here. and further details are here.

As I mentioned 3 years ago, Marie's tragic death had a profound effect on me personally.  I had been to Leigh Day, solicitors, to talk to them about cycle helmets etc and was shortly thereafter asked by them and Roadpeace to represent Marie's family at the forthcoming inquest.   It was at that hearing that the scales from my eyes were truly lifted and I experienced the intense discomfort that every lawyer ought to feel when they see just how inadequate the administration of justice can be.

5 years on, we still have a long way to go.  I do wish Marie's family and friends and all other participants well.

The Frustrations of Eurostar

'scuse finger

For the past 6 years I have traveled with my bicycle by Eurostar and SNCF to various parts of France to do the Etape du Tour.  This year I booked the TGV to Annecy and then set about booking the Eurostar tickets.  Quite by chance I came across a 'tweet' indicating that the Eurostar policy on packed bicycles had changed and I saw this confirmed when I searched the Eurostar site.  I had a long conversation with Eurostar  None of their suggestions were any use to me.  I could not take the bicycle unpacked as it needed to be packed for the TGV.  I could not turn up with it packed as there was no guarantee it would appear in Paris for up to 24 hours after I did, when I had a train connection in Paris.  The only thing I might have done is sent it ahead but that would have required a special trip from Berkshire to St Pancras ahead of travel and a special trip back to St Pancras to collect it after my return.  Extra charges were of course involved for all these options.  In frustration and against every instinct in my fibre I gave up and booked a flight from Heathrow to Paris (packed bike conveyed at no extra cost).  I did look at the possibility of train/ferry but ruled it out on grounds of time and cost.

It is interesting that when I first used Eurostar they used to cheerfully place my packed bike in the baggage carriage.  More recently it appeared to be too much trouble for some train guards to open the baggage carriage and more recently still I had been told to dump it in the buffet car.  I believe there are two baggage cars on each train which no doubt go at least half empty.

Throughout France on very similar trains there is no problem turning up and taking a boxed bike at no additional charge or hassle.  Eurostar are not (quite) alone.  I had planned to take my bicycle this year to Venice for the Grand Fondo Sportful.  However in response to my enquiries I was informed curtly that the sleeper from Paris to Venice does not take bicycles.  Again I had to pass my custom rather reluctantly to British Airways.