Realism needed in cycling debate

From: Russell Cutts

Fairbank Road, Sheffield S5

In response to Mark Khan’s letter, I feel it is important that we are realistic in our approach to cycling.

I am glad to see that he realises there are as many bad drivers as bad cyclists but the thing he has missed with that statement is that a bad driver is more likely to kill people than a bad cyclist.

He also feels cyclists should undergo a compulsory proficiency test and carry insurance. I am sure he will be happy to have his taxes increased to pay for this and how does he propose we enforce it?

All those people who believe bicycles should pay road tax? Well, as a zero emission vehicle it would be in the £0 band, so where would all the money come from?

Cycle proficiency is very important but should not be compulsory.

I completely agree with his points about being seen and adhering to the highway code but drivers have a legal responsibilities to ALL other vulnerable road users this includes cyclists, pedestrians and horse riders.

It is clear in my riding around the city that drivers need to be made more aware of these legal responsibilities and then everyone can use the highways (this includes the pavement) in a safe and respectful way.

I would recommend that all users of the highway read the Highway Code, available at your library, to refresh themselves on their responsibilities. In my belief the bus driver in Bristol should have been charged with attempted murder for such a blatant attack, regardless of the reasons leading up to it.