a highway code for cyclists

spen666

unCivilServant wrote:

Something missing from this discussion: much cycling--particularly by beginners--isn't done on the highway. Any advice should cover ALL areas where the novice is likely to ride (or want to): bridleways/other rights of way, parks, etc..

I was out running in the country a couple of months back and got chatting to a bloke who was thinking of "taking his son out for a ride on the footpaths", obviously ignorant of what's allowed on which RoW. I've also occasionally been running/walking on bridleways and had cyclists totally failing to give way. Some of this is probably due to ignorance rather than wilfulness.

Rather than try to reprise all the applicable rules, recommendations etc., it's probably better to put up a few principles and then signpost people where to find out more. Whether Cyclecraft or similar private publication could be referenced surely depends on who was doing the guidance, ie it would be fine for Halfords or similar but not a public sector organisation.
I'd start from an assumption of very low levels of knowledge, because a) people ARE often frighteningly ignorant about apparently basic stuff (certainly round my way, not helped by the number of people coming from cultures with different laws/traffic conditions) and b) cycling in particular is seen as a 'just do it' activity (after all, even young children can ride bikes). Start with "Congratulations on buying this bike...cycling is great and you'll get the most out of it if you bear in mind that you'll have responsibilities to yourself and others". Then point to the existence of road laws and the Highway Code, and how to get hold of the latter; and a few words on non-highway situations. On the question of how to address wider 'cyclecraft' [note lowercase] safety issues, it could refer to asking your LBS shop about books, local council whether it runs/knows of training sessions etc.. Giving people information about how to find stuff out can be as useful as trying to lay out all the 'stuff' for them.

i'm not quite sure I understand why Halfords can reference, but not a public sector organisation?

unCivilServant

spen666 wrote:

unCivilServant wrote:

Rather than try to reprise all the applicable rules, recommendations etc., it's probably better to put up a few principles and then signpost people where to find out more. Whether Cyclecraft or similar private publication could be referenced surely depends on who was doing the guidance, ie it would be fine for Halfords or similar but not a public sector organisation.
.

i'm not quite sure I understand why Halfords can reference, but not a public sector organisation?

Simple: probity. Public sector (and yes, I'm using the wide definition but thinking mostly of govt. in some form or another) is supposed to be impartial. Start 'bigging up' one product and 1) you'll get other private entities saying "What about us?" 2) It raises the question of whether the org is getting backhanders from the author for the recommendation (ie corruption) 3) Can the org then be taken as 'endorsing' the product (ie are all parts of it official govt. policy).

Halfords is not beholden to the above and can do what it likes in terms of promoting particular products--indeed, if it sells Cyclecraft it would make very good sense for it to promote it.

(In practice of course even govt. is not entirely rigid. In a previous job my section would often get members of the public ringing up to ask "Can you recommend a provider of XXX?". While we obviously couldn't give names, we did suggest search engine terms that would be likely to turn up companies we'd found to be knowledgeable and efficient.

spen666

unCivilServant wrote:

spen666 wrote:

unCivilServant wrote:

Rather than try to reprise all the applicable rules, recommendations etc., it's probably better to put up a few principles and then signpost people where to find out more. Whether Cyclecraft or similar private publication could be referenced surely depends on who was doing the guidance, ie it would be fine for Halfords or similar but not a public sector organisation.
.

i'm not quite sure I understand why Halfords can reference, but not a public sector organisation?

Simple: probity. Public sector (and yes, I'm using the wide definition but thinking mostly of govt. in some form or another) is supposed to be impartial. Start 'bigging up' one product and 1) you'll get other private entities saying "What about us?" 2) It raises the question of whether the org is getting backhanders from the author for the recommendation (ie corruption) 3) Can the org then be taken as 'endorsing' the product (ie are all parts of it official govt. policy).

Halfords is not beholden to the above and can do what it likes in terms of promoting particular products--indeed, if it sells Cyclecraft it would make very good sense for it to promote it.

(In practice of course even govt. is not entirely rigid. In a previous job my section would often get members of the public ringing up to ask "Can you recommend a provider of XXX?". While we obviously couldn't give names, we did suggest search engine terms that would be likely to turn up companies we'd found to be knowledgeable and efficient.

Cyclecraft and the Highway code are HMSO publications though

unCivilServant

spen666 wrote:

unCivilServant wrote:

spen666 wrote:

unCivilServant wrote:

Simple: probity. Public sector (and yes, I'm using the wide definition but thinking mostly of govt. in some form or another) is supposed to be impartial. Start 'bigging up' one product and 1) you'll get other private entities saying "What about us?" 2) It raises the question of whether the org is getting backhanders from the author for the recommendation (ie corruption) 3) Can the org then be taken as 'endorsing' the product (ie are all parts of it official govt. policy).

Halfords is not beholden to the above and can do what it likes in terms of promoting particular products--indeed, if it sells Cyclecraft it would make very good sense for it to promote it.

(In practice of course even govt. is not entirely rigid. In a previous job my section would often get members of the public ringing up to ask "Can you recommend a provider of XXX?". While we obviously couldn't give names, we did suggest search engine terms that would be likely to turn up companies we'd found to be knowledgeable and efficient.

Cyclecraft and the Highway code are HMSO publications though

Hmm, I'd not realised that of Cyclecraft (as opposed to HC).

I suppose the question still comes down, though, to are there other authors (real or potential) of documents that are of the same ilk whereby the 'official' promotion of one is unfair (or could be perceived as such) against the rest?

The answer for HC is clearly no, as it's the DfT wot is the named author and it's doubtful anyone would try to push equal validity for an alternative publication by Joe Bloggs. John Franklin is a private person, and looking at the Amazon entry for the book there are a couple of titles for books by other authors that may well cover much the same ground (I have a passing knowledge of only a couple of them so can't say to what extent this is so). Presumably if govt. wanted to put Cyclecraft on the same footing as the HC it would make an agreement with him to issue it under its own cover.

Having said that, it appears there are schemes set up in conjunction with DfT that apparently have Cyclecraft on the recommended reading list, so it seems things really aren't that rigid (ie chuck in a bit of arms-length-ing and all should be well).