Laws for cyclists need overhauling

A MOTORIST has to pass a written and practical test to show competence on the road. They have to declare medical conditions which may bar them from the road, (I have type 1 diabetes and have to renew my licence every three years).

They must have insurance not only to cover their own needs but also for other road users should they be involved in an accident. Their vehicle must be registered and carry those visible plates front and back which can be used to report a motoring offence. The vehicle where necessary must pass stringent MOT tests to ensure it is safe to be on the road. It must have working lights for poor visibility and night time driving. It should have working breaks and tyres that must be of a legal standard —need I go on?

On the other hand an un-insured cyclist with no test of competence in road skills, no health checks, can just take a piece of unregistered scrap, with no test of safety, no mirrors or lights and ride it on the road, expecting respect from all other road users.

On a personal note over the years I have had my vehicle attacked, been threatened and sworn at many times by cyclists of all ages, when I sounded my horn to warn and protect cyclists that their pathetic lane discipline and a blasé attitude could have got them seriously hurt.

However, I do not categorise all cyclists in the same way as the percentage of “ignoramuses” is probably about the same as it is for drivers. G Glasby writes in The Advertiser: “Always wear a helmet — it saved my life.” A study of 116 fatal cyclist accidents in London and rural areas found over 70pc had moderate or serious head injuries, as did 80pc of those killed in collisions on rural roads, although rule 45 of the Highway Code recommends this, there is still no legal requirement to ensure cyclists wear a helmet.

Yes we do need road markings, lanes etc for cyclists to be safe on the road, but we also need a complete overhaul of traffic law regarding cyclists and their machines.

Colin Levesley, Beechwood Road