Feb 092022
 

The Highway Code changes that went into effect on the 29th January seems to have caused a bit of a palava amongst drivers. Except this is probably a noisy minority as most are either :-

The majority are either completely oblivious to the changes or assume that nothing significant is changing (and they’re not entirely wrong).

And the majority of the remainder are probably accepting of the changes.

When you come down to the changes, they’re mostly fairly minor. The biggest change is making explicit a hierarchy of priorities based on the vulnerability of road users – pedestrians are the most vulnerable so have the highest priority, etc. Funnily enough very little protest against that has been heard, although some of the other objections do indicate an unconscious bias in favour of driver priority; perhaps assisted by the widespread myth that motorists pay for roads. Interestingly whilst there a number of changes for cyclists, these have attracted very little attention – it seems that Highway Code changes are only controversial when they might inconvenience car drivers.

The most noise has been about the change requiring motorists to allow pedestrians to proceed when waiting to cross at a junction – for example when turning from a major road into a minor road, the motorist should wait to allow the pedestrian crossing that minor road. This is not as big a change as it seems as motorists were already required to wait when pedestrians were already crossing. What happens when a pedestrian doesn’t choose to cross? Presumably because they were wool-gathering, or their assistance dog is trained to wait until the road is clear. Will this result in permanently stuck motorists causing city-wide traffic chaos? Well, “giving priority” doesn’t mean “wait forever” – you would stop, wait for 10s or so, and then proceed slowly.

Those protesting make a big fuss about how stopping before turning may result in them being rear-ended by other motorists who aren’t expecting traffic to stop. There’s two problems with this – motorists already stop at turnings to allow pedestrians to cross, and motorists should already be prepared for vehicles in front of them to stop unexpectedly. Fact is, in every accident where a car is rear-ended, the motorist behind is the one at fault.

Lastly there is the new rules regarding cyclists – specifically the rule allowing cyclists to ride in the centre of the lane. Funnily enough this isn’t really new although it wasn’t explicitly stated before – there was never a rule that cyclists had to segregate themselves into the gutter risking life and limb risking the gutter pot-holes. But you would imagine from the reaction of some drivers that this new rule was allowing cyclists to use shotguns against car drivers they’ve been so up in arms about it. It is not as if they are supposed to do it all the time – just on slower roads and to increase safety.

But no, these drivers imagine roads are there for car drivers exclusively and anything that inconveniences them must be prohibited. There are special roads like that – motoreways.

It’s Round
Sep 202021
 

In the UK there is something known as “vehicle excise duty” which the owners of some motorised vehicles have to pay. Before 1937, this was paid into a road fund used exclusively to pay for the creation of the road network. But from that date, roads are funded out of general taxation and local council taxes.

Which means that everyone (or just about everyone) is paying for the roads and that is no bad thing – we all benefit to some extent (although the pollution is a bit of a drag).

Filthy Roaring Beasts Rushing Along The Scar

The interesting thing is that because local roads are locally funded (to an extent), there is a good chance that a pedestrian is paying more for the roads within a city than the car driver – the driver is more likely to be a visitor to the city and thus pays considerably less. So by the argument that whoever pays should have priority, it should be the pedestrian who does!

Jun 152012
 

Today somebody finally woke up and realised that the amount of time that pedestrians get to cross the road at a crossing is ludicrously short. They concentrate on the problem that the elderly have in crossing a road in the short time that the little man shows green.

But they are not the only ones who can have trouble. And it is not just about the trouble in crossing in time.

Why should pedestrians huddle at the edge of the road waiting until they get the chance to rush across the road tugging at their forelocks ? Car drivers may protest that giving pedestrians more priority will slow them down, but come on – it isn’t as if you don’t get there quicker than pedestrians anyway. What is a few extra minutes ?

Car drivers might argue that because they pay so much in motoring taxes that they deserve extra priority on the roads. Well, it’s an interesting argument, but is really totally irrelevant. Taxes of any kind are raised in all sorts of different ways and put into a common pool from which government spending is taken – both central government and local government. And the government decides how much will be spent on roads in competition with all the other demands on government funds.

And roads are not the only costs that motoring causes – there is also dealing with the health issues related to motoring such as accidents and respiratory issues.

Besides which, the way that local roads are funded – and all pedestrian crossings are on local roads – means that a relatively small proportion of the costs is made up of motoring taxes. No council funds come directly from motoring taxes, but from council taxes instead. Which means that pedestrian waiting to cross the road may actually be paying more towards the roads than you think.

Besides which it is not simply about the money, but about simple fairness and safety. In terms of safety, the lights need to be green not just long enough to allow slower pedestrians to cross the road, but also to allow pedestrians who are reasonably close to the crossing to cross the road. And even long enough at cross-roads to allow pedestrians to cross both roads – to do the equivalent of a left or right turn.