Can you judge risk? Do you know when your actions put you in danger’s way?

‘Of course!’, you reply. You know better than to jump out in front of a car. You’re hardly likely to leave a chip-pan on the hob while you nip to the loo. And you’re the last person to leave the kids on their own while you go to the pub for a swift pint.

So why is our modern society so hopeless at assessing risk? Why do we create greater risks by trying to minimise inconsequential ones?

This is why the proposed changes to the Highway Code must be opposed.  The new wording will tell  cyclists to “use cycle cycle facilities … where they are provided” (Rule 58).  If confirmed, this would open the way for driver’s insurance companies to seek to reduce the damages for any cyclists injured by their clients, on the basis that the cyclist’s failure to use a nearby cycle facility (in accordance with the Highway Code) represented "contributory negligence".

This rule change will further marginalise cycling. One of our local roads, the A404 from Amersham to Little Chalfont, has a cyclepath on the pavement. Cyclists using the path have to give way to every side road. By contrast, cyclists on the main road have a clear passage. If the new Highway Code ruling comes into effect, cyclists who make the very sensible decision to use the main road could be be held partially responsible if a driver hits them, even if the driver is totally at fault. 

This is a blatant breach of natural justice. Far worse, it favours obese coach potatoes at the expense of those who try to keep healthy. (In much the same way that the move towards compulsory cycle helmets is likely to cost thousands of lives.) Small wonder that the next generation is likely to reverse the trend to greater life expectancy.

Our local MP. Cheryl Gillan, has reported that she has written to the transport minister to pass on our protests. Let’s hope that common sense prevails.

See the CTC website for more information. www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=4303