[ad_1]
Transport Secretary, Grant Shapps has announced plans to bring in a new offence of ‘causing death by dangerous cycling’. But if government is to go ahead with this law, it must address the bigger picture. We’re calling for a wider review of road traffic offences and penalties. pic.twitter.com/dwwrPVQWzk
— Cycling UK (@WeAreCyclingUK) August 10, 2022
Over the weekend, we were greeted with the news – via the Daily Mail’s typically bombastic front page – that Transport Secretary Grant Shapps plans to introduce a new ‘causing death by dangerous cycling’ law, as part of his Transport Bill which will begin its passage through Parliament later this year.
The new law would see bike riders who are found guilty of the offence face the same punishment as drivers convicted of causing death by dangerous driving, which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
Currently, cyclists involved in crashes in which a pedestrian is killed or injured can face prosecution, under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, for causing bodily harm through wanton or furious driving, which carries a maximum penalty of two years’ imprisonment, a legal situation Shapps described as “archaic” and a “relic of the horse-drawn era”.
> Government to crack down on “reckless” riders with causing death by dangerous cycling law
Of course, the campaign for a new law concerning dangerous cycling is not new. In 2016, 44-year-old mother Kim Briggs was killed after being hit by London cycle courier Charlie Alliston, who was riding a fixed wheel track bike with no front brake at the time of the fatal collision.
After being prosecuted for manslaughter and wanton and furious driving (and being found guilty of the latter), Alliston was sentenced to 18 months in a young offenders institution out of a possible maximum two-year sentence.
Since the cyclist’s conviction, Briggs’ husband Matthew has campaigned for new legislation and told the Today programme this week: “It’s never been about the degree of punishment… it’s been about the complication, the chaos and the hurt and the confusion that comes along with the fact that there are no (specific) laws which apply to cyclists.
“It is rare, but it keeps happening. And it needs to be sorted. It is a very simple clarification, a tidying up of the law.”
However, charity Cycling UK has said this week that, while parity between motoring and cycling offences can be achieved, it must be done through a much wider review of road traffic offences and penalties, and that “you cannot have the former without the latter”.
“We made it clear that we have no objection in principle to seeking greater parity between cycling and motoring offences,” says Cycling UK’s Policy director Roger Geffen.
“But the Government’s proposed solution – namely to copy-and-paste the existing offence of ‘causing death by dangerous driving’ to create an equivalent cycling offence – was the wrong solution to a problem that only arises a couple or so times per decade.
“The right solution, by contrast, would involve tackling a much wider problem which causes terrible distress to hundreds of seriously injured or bereaved road crash victims every year.”
He continued: “Specifically, Cycling UK has long argued for new laws to clarify or revise the distinction between ‘dangerous’ and ‘careless’ road traffic offences, including their variants involving causing death, causing serious injury, driving under the influence, driving without a licence or insurance, or driving while disqualified.
“Road crash victims still regularly face the double injustice of absurdly lenient sentencing – try Googling ‘driver spared jail’, and you’ll see what I mean.
“This is often because the driving which caused their injuries or death has been dismissed by prosecutors or the courts as being merely ‘careless’, despite having caused ‘danger’ that surely ought to have been ‘obvious to a competent and careful driver’.
“Cycling UK has always been clear though that its desire to clarify the distinction between ‘careless’ and dangerous’ driving is NOT because we want to see more drivers locked up for causing death or serious injury – even though that is evidently what Shapps wants to happen to cyclists.
“On the contrary, we have long argued for less reliance on custodial sentences, and greater use of driving bans. Most (though not all) drivers who kill or maim through ‘dangerous’ driving are not dangerous people, who need to be locked up for public protection. A much fairer and more effective remedy is to ban them from driving for a suitable time-period, and only allow them to resume driving once they have passed an extended re-test.
“Long prison sentences, by contrast, should be reserved for those who have driven so obviously recklessly, or who have already flouted past driving bans, so that imposing (or re-imposing) a ban would NOT provide sufficient public protection.”
Cycling UK’s full statement can be read here.
[ad_2]
Source link
