The ThunderDragon

“Spy-in-the-sky” road pricing is wrong. Not because we should have to pay for what we use, but because it gives the government unprecedented access to where we have gone.

There is no way around this. Spy-in-the-sky just opens so many possibilities for governmental intrusion into our lives.

The ASI supports road pricing, but they’re wrong to do so. Whilst the idea of road pricing is not one to which I object, there is currently no practical way that it can be accomplished without causing massive civil liberties issues.

Until this has been resolved, there is no way that I can support road pricing itself.

Is cycling a left-wing or right-wing activity?

Tory MP Ed Vaizey:

Some people like to pretend its a left-wing pastime because they conjure up these images of miners cycling to work.

But actually it’s both a Conservative and a right-wing pastime, if I can draw that distinction.

Remember John Major’s famous speech about ‘old maids cycling to church’? And I think that brings up the point about the heritage of cycling - it’s very much woven into the British character.

It’s a Conservative issue in terms of nostalgia, but it’s also a right-wing issue because its about the freedom of the individual. It’s about taking ones own action against an over-bearing stage.

Labour MP Gwyn Prosser, chairman of the Commons all-party cycling group:

I think it is more of a left-wing tradition - it’s more egalitarian. A bike is a bike…

Bikes have two wheels and they spell out equality and inclusiveness and egalitarianism.

Seriously? It’s a mode of transport!

[Though if it is political, it's a right-wing activity, as it is about individualism and equality of opportunity ;-)]

Liam Donaldson, chief medical officer, is proposing a new authoritarian policy - cutting the legal blood alcohol limit for drivers aged 17-20 to zero.

That is a stupid idea for various reasons:

1. Young/new drivers are rarely the ones who drink and drive. They tend to have far more respect for the road and other drivers than older people who are arrogantly confident in their own driving abilities and their ability to consume alcohol.
2. It wouldn’t reduce the number of accidents due to drink-driving unless a far greater amount of policing was put into enforcing it.
3. This law could be broken by something as simple as having had a couple of drinks the night before - thus no longer being impaired by it - or by using outhwash that contains alcohol or by using alcohol in cooking.
4. The police would be encouraged to stop young drivers to an even gerater extent than currently, because of the likelihood of catching them and making an arrest to meet their targets. This would thus mean that theo se whoa re more likely to be drinking and driving would get away without being stopped.

Liam Donaldsons claim that

Young people have enough difficulty when they first start driving learning the skills on the road, they don’t need the complication of drink as well.

is true. But they don’t need the threat of being accused of drink-driving for having an amount of alcohol that doesn’t impair their driving ability either.

How is a driver that has turned 20 two days ago implicitly any more safe on the roads than one that will turn 20 in two days time? They’re not at all. And what about a driver who passes their test after the age of 20…? The issue of having two different levels just complicates things. If they want to reduce the legal blood alcohol limit, it must be done to all equally, not picking on one small demographic.

Besides, isn’t this what is called ageism?

Cyclists are killing, being killed, and having sex problems according to the media.

Two of them could very easily be prevented in the future through the clever application of a very simple thing called cycle lanes - alongside both pedestrians and motorists waking up and paying attention. And not parking in them, as I have seen so many people do.

Too many pedestrians pay absolutely no attention to cyclists and put themselves in danger by walking out right in front of them. And most motorists pay no attention to cyclists and are more more bothered with being right up behind the car in front and saving themselves about five seconds. All with absolutely no thought about the cyclist.

There’s also the idiocy that is “traffic calming”. Speed bumps - especially those ones in the middle of the road - and chicanes put cyclists in often mortal danger because motorists are too busy avoiding/dealing with them to pay attention to other road users. This is a known fact - but because of the obsession with “traffic calming”, cyclists are injured and killed.

Until cycle lanes are compulsory on all roads, cyclists will kill and be killed.

Oh, and as for the sex thing? Absolutely no problems here.

As the “rumble of hauliers’ discontent gets louder with warning of strikes ” I thought I’d take a quick look at what makes petrol so expensive:

When we pay for petrol and other oil products, we look at the price and then blame the garage for making it so expensive. But where does the money we pay for this actually go? How is it actually divided? We only pay our money at the pump, but they’re certainly not the only ones who get money from our purchase.

The graph below, courtesy of OPEC , shows who gets what from each sale of a litre of oil:

When you look at it, one very obvious fact jumps out at you: most of the cost for us in the UK is pure tax!

When the price of oil is high, the government takes more money away from us. The government are the only ones who could very easily cut our costs - by cutting tax. High taxes on fuel are just making the credit crunch even harder to bear. If we can’t afford to travel, the entire economy suffers.

Bristol is Britain’s first “cycling city“, according to Ruth Kelly. The project, across Bristol and eleven other towns, is to cost £94 million and aims to get an extra 2.5 million cycling. Ruth Kelly said that

A quarter of journeys made every day by car are less than two miles…

Cycling is an alternative that could bring real health benefits to millions of adults and children, as well as helping them save money and beat congestion.

The first step in persuading people to leave their cars at home is to offer them a real choice.

Providing a step change in cycling facilities, dedicated cycle lanes, more training and information will have a big impact on how people choose to travel.

I can’t really disagree with a word of that. It would massively benefit individuals and the environment to cycle more.

There is one very simple, pretty cheap, and effective way to get people to cycle more - make is safer, by increasing the number of cycle lanes. Frankly, all new roads and all repaired roads should have cycle lanes included as a matter of course.

The problem with current cycle lanes is that they are invariably not in the right place - along my route to work, so little of it has cycle lanes, and the bits that do are the bits that are wide enough for it to make no difference.

This iniative is a good idea. I just hope it works.

Summer is well and truly here. It is official. We have had a couple of days of sun and no rain. And the bike rack at work is now overflowing with bikes.

Summer cyclists are the worst cyclists. Unlike people like myself who cycle every day - rain or shine, or even snow - these cyclists only emerge when the sun is shining. They are usually relatively unfit and/or have absolutely no understanding of how the road rules of cycling differs in practiality from that of driving. And so you get idiots who do things like cycle down the middle of the road for no reason.

There are two extremes of summer cyclist:

Type A: They have a brand spanking new bike, obviously barely a couple of weeks old. They wear every piece of safety equipment known to man, from helmet and hi-vis jacket to knee-pads, elbow pads, plastic goggles and masks to “protect them from the fumes”. And they wear huge amounts of lycra.

Type B: They use a rusty old bike, which is only removed from the garage a couple of months in the year. They have no safety equipment whatsoever and blithely ignore the traffic.

The problem is the same with both of these types. They’re not experienced on the roads. They don’t know the rules, or how to break them safely. They will drive past red lights without looking, assuming that cars will just break for them. They ride in the middle of the road because they want to or are just oblivious to the queue of traffic behind them. And they are just so slow!

Now, I’d be lying if I said I never ever did either of them - but I know when and how to do them. And I do them only when absolutely essential for my safety, which isn’t very often.

Another issue I have with them is that the sheer number of them always fill up the bike rack at the office, taking mine and the other regular’s places. Which is really annoying.

The problem is that these summer cyclists give the rest of us - actual cyclists - a bad name. We hate them as much as motorists do. If not more.

Well, lost luggage isn’t exactly a new thing at airports, especially if they’re Terminal 5, but this is taking it several steps further…

Vietnamese authorities say they are mystified as to who owns a Boeing 727 which has been abandoned at Hanoi’s Noi Bai airport.

The plane was flown in from Siem Reap in neighbouring Cambodia in late 2007 and has been unclaimed ever since. (BBC)

What a thing to lose! Sometimes I can’t find my keys, but how on earth do you lose a big planelike that?!

Iain Dale is doing an article on politicians and their cars, and I came across this online quiz - so I’m asking bloggers: which car are you?

The results say that:

I’m a Ford Mustang!

You’re an American classic — fast, strong, and bold. You’re not snobby or pretentious, but you have what it takes to give anyone a run for their money.

“Take the Which Sports Car Are You? quiz.

via Sally in Norfolk

David Cameron has been caught jumping a red light at a pedestrian crossing whilst cycling. Dizzy uses this a way into a diatribe against all cyclists. Whilst he has some point, he goes way too far with it all. Jonathan Sheppard also comments on this story, but in a less aggressive manner. But I agree most with Samuel Coates.

As a cyclist, I jump red lights occasionally. But only when it is absolutely clear and I know that no traffic or pedestrians will come across my path. If there are pedestrians waiting to cross, I stop. If they are already clear of my path, I will continue. This is simple common sense, and the only way that cyclists can use the roads in an efficient manner. However, pedestrians also need to be aware of cyclists, and treat them as they would a car, rather than ignoring the approach a cyclist at a crossing when the red light is showing to them.

I also, even, use pavements! Every day, in fact. Because the way I cycle to work, it is not possible for me not to without putting myself in great danger on a specific roundabout. There are also cycle lanes that use the pavement - which makes no sense. Either bikes should be allowed to be ridden on pavements, or cycle lanes should not be put there - because that endangers pedestrians when cyclists are using them because pedestrians always walk in the cycle lane bit, and it endangers cyclists as it is always hazardous to try and rejoin the road from such a cycle lane. Not to mention the fact that is is utterly hypocritical.

The problem is less cyclists and more idiot motorists and the complete failure to provide enough cycle lanes. Barely a day goes by when a car, bus, van or lorry does not cut me up or try and force me off the road, either on purpose or through sheer incompetence. The buses are, in fact, the worst. One bus very nearly drove me off the road twice in the space of two minutes.

What needs to be done is for motorists to actually understand the cyclists have the same rights to sue the road as they do. That means not pushing in front of me or pushing me off the road. Especially since you will not lose any time behind a cyclist during rush hour. Also, cycle lanes should be provided on all main roads. Most of the cycle lanes that are available for me to use on my way to work are either in the wrong place or literally just a couple of meters long. What’s the point of them? Bugger all. Cycle lanes should all lead somewhere. And motorists should actually realise that they are not allowed to stop or park in them.

Cyclists also need to take care of themselves. I have lights and wear a hi-vis jacket whilst cycling. You can’t miss me. Yet idiot motorists always seem to. And they get what they deserve - a mouthful of abuse and usually a hand gesture as well. What they deserve.

UPDATE: Mike Rouse adds his thoughts on the matter.