Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Number of cyclists killed on British roads up 40% in 2020

DfT claims rise reflects greater aggregate distance travelled by bike – but Cycling UK believes poor driving is behind the increase

The number of cyclists killed on Great Britain’s roads rose by 40 per cent during 2020, according to figures released today by the Department for Transport (DfT). It attributes the rise to greater distances being cycled – but the charity Cycling UK believes poor driving is behind the increase.

Publishing Reported Road casualties Great Britain, provisional results: 2020, the department revealed that 140 cyclists lost their lives last year, compared to 100 in 2019.

Cycling UK believes that the increase is in line with a rise in reported poor behaviour by motorists – despite a reduction in total motor traffic during lockdown, a number of police forces highlighted an increase in ‘extreme speeding’ and other types of bad driving – and is urging the government to address that issue through the Police, Crime and Sentencing Bill which is currently going through Parliament.

From the end of March onwards, after the first national lockdowns came into effect in England, Scotland and Wales, there was a huge rise in cycling, whether for permitted daily exercise or key workers switching from public transport to two wheels for their commute.

The DfT says there was a 46 per cent increase in the aggregate distance travelled by cyclists on Britain’s roads last year, meaning that “despite an increase in pedal cycle fatalities, there was a slight (4 per cent) reduction in fatality rates for pedal cyclists and a much larger reduction in the pedal cycle casualty rate of 34 per cent between 2019 and 2020 – as casualties did not increase by as much as cycle traffic.”

Total cycling casualties, including slight and serious injuries, fell slightly from 16,884 in 2019 to 16,380 during 2020, resulting in a 34 per cent reduction in casualty frates per billion kilometres cycled.

Cyclists were the only category of road user to see an increase in fatalities during 2020, which the DfT attributed to lower levels of motor traffic during lockdown.

RRC 03.PNG

In a separate release today examining the impact of lockdown on reported road casualties, the DfT said: “Pedal cyclist casualties of all severities fell by 8 per cent in 2020 compared to three-year average for 2017 to 2019. However, this reduction varied by severity. Serious and slight injuries fell by 1 per cent and 10 per cent, respectively. However, the percentage of fatalities rose by 40 per cent.

“The change in pedal cyclist casualties also varied throughout the year. In August, September and December, there was an increase in casualties compared to the three-year average for 2017 to 2019.”

RRCGB 01.PNG

 

RRC 02.PNG

 

The DfT added: “This may be related to the travel restrictions imposed. For example, ‘people should aim to reduce the number of journeys they make where possible. If they need to travel, they should walk or cycle where possible, or plan ahead and avoid busy times and routes on public transport’.”

Duncan Dollimore, Cycling UK’s head of campaigns said: “Tragically, quieter roads during lockdown were taken advantage of by some drivers, with many police forces reporting an increase in speeding and dangerous driving.

“This has to be dealt with better by our legal system, which is why Cycling UK is calling on MPs to support amendments to the Police Crime and Sentencing Bill to fix the fatal flaws in our road traffic laws, including longer driving bans for those who put other road users at risk.”

The national cycling charity highlighted that it has produced a short report identifying what it terms “five fatal flaws which we want to see closed, which we believe the bill should address.” Those are:

  • The underuse of driving disqualifications to protect the public from bad drivers.
  • The ‘exceptional hardship’ loophole that keeps letting bad drivers who should be disqualified back on the road.
  • ‘Hit and run’ sanctions that aren’t tough enough to stop drivers fleeing the scene of a collision when they know, or ought to know, that they’ve seriously hurt or killed someone.
  • A belittling penalty for ‘car-dooring’, an offence that can leave victims dead or seriously injured.
  • The confusing definitions of ‘careless’ and ‘dangerous’ driving.

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

38 comments

Avatar
Rich_cb | 3 years ago
2 likes

Does anyone know if the stats are available for the types of collision?

For example 'single cyclist', 'cyclist and one vehicle' etc.

I've seen them for previous years but can't find them in the latest release.

Avatar
Awavey replied to Rich_cb | 3 years ago
0 likes

I think they come out later, theres an update in September as some of these figures are currently only estimated.

I do think without understanding the context of each fatality its very difficult to have any conclusion that says what the causes for the rise were.

Cycling UK would do better IMO to try and present the picture differently, yes fatalities have gone up, which is obviously bad, but we dont know why that is yet, and overall injuries are down, whilst the numbers of people cycling and miles theyve covered went up greatly.

Because I guarantee the message youll read loud and clear in the MSM presentation of this is, cycling is dangerous & that more cyclists died because our roads are dangerous to ride on, which will obviously undermine any chance those first time cyclists on the roads last year will carry on cycling again, if it was that dangerous when the roads were quiet, what chance do they have now the roads are arguably busier than normal.

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to Awavey | 3 years ago
3 likes

Thanks, will keep an eye out for them. My gut feeling is that we'll see a rise in single bicycle accidents but will have to wait and see what the facts are.

I agree that risk is poorly reported by the press in general. You see the same thing in health stories about 'doubling risk of x' with no context of the actual baseline rate of x.

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to Rich_cb | 3 years ago
0 likes

Rich_cb wrote:

Thanks, will keep an eye out for them. My gut feeling is that we'll see a rise in single bicycle accidents but will have to wait and see what the facts are.

Single vehicle cycle incidents very rarely result in death, so it is unlikely that the increase in cyclist deaths is due to them.  Almost all cyclist deaths are due to collision with a motor vehicle.

Avatar
AlsoSomniloquism replied to eburtthebike | 3 years ago
1 like

Depending on the reporting period, there could be the odd one or two on Sportives or on serious declines like Hardknott.  Then there was the one reported last year where the very experienced cyclist apparently threw himself off the road for not apparrent reason in front of the transit van that had nothing to do with it, no sirree bob.

Avatar
Rich_cb replied to eburtthebike | 3 years ago
0 likes

16% of cycling fatalities don't involve a motor vehicle.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to Rich_cb | 3 years ago
0 likes

Rich_cb wrote:

16% of cycling fatalities don't involve a motor vehicle.

...which suggests to me what our priority should be - if we want to do something about this! (And also if we want to tackle the 31,000 excess deaths from cardiac / circulatory issues related to obesity...)

But yes, it's interesting and we should find out more. We could do something about those 98 - when we've a moment when we're not addressing those other more significant issues.

Of course the normal way to fix this would be by reducing the number of cyclists on the roads. The best part is you don't need to do anything - indeed that's the way! Just encourage the drivers of cars. (You can even put in ASLs and other "optional cycling facilities"...) I would agree to the separation - for the high-speed roads and those with a high motor-vehicle numbers. And only if the cyclists have got a better space to travel through.

Avatar
Tom_77 | 3 years ago
8 likes

Speeding during the first lockdowns was crazy.

Avatar
eburtthebike | 3 years ago
10 likes

Without detailed analysis of the causes of these deaths, it is difficult to be prescriptive about measures to be taken to reduce the risk, but from many reports, CUK is right and there are many drivers who have taken the reduction in motor traffic as an invitation to speed and take risks, when all too often, it is cyclists who pay the price.

Without that information, there are still things that can be done which we know will make cycling safer; segregation being the main one, with better law enforcement also necessary, but less effective, and publicity programmes to inform the misinformed, aggressive drivers.  Also needed are radical changes to the law, so that justice is served, and the vulnerable protected, but the review of road laws seems to have sunk without trace.

As I'm sure everyone on this site is aware, the potential for cycling will never be achieved while so many people have the perception that riding a bike is a death sentence, but with a media intent on portraying just that and ignoring the benefits, this will remain a dream.

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to Lance ꜱtrongarm | 3 years ago
8 likes

Nigel Garrage wrote:

I dont think

Enough said.

Avatar
Eton Rifle replied to Lance ꜱtrongarm | 3 years ago
4 likes

Unusually, you are partially correct.
More traffic does at least slow the loonies down.

Avatar
wycombewheeler replied to Eton Rifle | 3 years ago
0 likes

I'm not sure I agree

In busy urban areas - more traffic results in more distraction, more passes and higher stress levels of drivers - all things likely to make things worse for cyclists

In quiet rural areas yes drivers will drive faster with fewer cars in their way to slow them down, but also with fewer cars o the road, a proper overtake is easier to achieve so there is no need for the squeeze past.

I think the increased risks from more traffic under these conditions outweighs the relatively rare occasion where someone drives round a blind bend to fast and hits a cyclist from behind.

Never mind the toal number of casualties - what is the rate per million miles cycled? has this gone up or down? we keep hearing that more cyclists are on the roads, is there a 40% uplift (seems unlikely)

Or is the rate 40% up on last year, but with last year being a relatively safe year? 

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to Eton Rifle | 3 years ago
0 likes

Eton Rifle wrote:

Unusually, you are partially correct. More traffic does at least slow the loonies down.

I'm with wycomewheeler on this one. More people driving simply means more people to hit things. Ergo more things hit. Distraction / cognitive overload dealing with all the other traffic will likely be a factor. Also even in heavy traffic the nature of motor vehicle movements is often being static, then being able to accellerate to enough speed to injure and kill before having to brake again (to join the next queue).

Yes, if everywhere was at inner city traffic density this might mean drivers hit things at a lower average speed. But hit things they will.

Avatar
Jenova20 | 3 years ago
8 likes

Been a cyclist around 10 years now. Saw the standard of driving suddenly get so bad last year that for the first time i need a camera on to even go out for 5 minutes, and i'll still have stuff i can put on the youtube channel, or report to the police later. It's that bad.

Avatar
iandusud | 3 years ago
6 likes

"The number of cyclists killed on Great Britain’s roads rose by 40 per cent during 2020, according to figures released today by the Department for Transport (DfT). It attributes the rise to greater distances being cycled" 

Oh well that's all right then. For a moment I thought there was something to worry about 

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to iandusud | 3 years ago
8 likes

iandusud wrote:

"The number of cyclists killed on Great Britain’s roads rose by 40 per cent during 2020, according to figures released today by the Department for Transport (DfT). It attributes the rise to greater distances being cycled" 

Oh well that's all right then. For a moment I thought there was something to worry about 

Also "Cyclists were the only category of road user to see an increase in fatalities during 2020, which the DfT attributed to lower levels of motor traffic during lockdown." 

Surely if fewer cars are on the road and more cyclists, cycling ought to get safer, not more dangerous?  Unless those vehicles still on the road are being driven faster and more dangerously.

Avatar
Eton Rifle replied to eburtthebike | 3 years ago
11 likes

When lockdown hit and people were supposed to be driving for essential purposes only, all the selfish cunts who routinely speed and drive like arseholes just carried on as usual. Without the moderating influence of traffic congestion, they were even more of a pain in the arse.

Avatar
Bungle_52 replied to Eton Rifle | 3 years ago
2 likes

In my experience, cycling during the first lockdown was an absolute joy with the vast majority of motorists driving slowly and giving plenty of room around me. Other cyclists and beginners I know had the same experience. I attribute this to the fear of having to justify their journey if anything happened. It was when the first lockdown easing up started that I noticed a huge reduction in driving standards around me. I put this down to still relatively empty roads and motorists able, and therefore feeling entitled, to drive faster than they could on the relatively congested roads that existed before lockdown. A cyclist would seriously impact on this new found freedom and were to be treated accordingly. The fear of having to justify their journey was gone.

There may have been a sense of getting their own back on the cyclists who had had it "their own way" during lockdown and could virtually carry on as normal with their cycling.

I fitted a camera and have not cycled without one since.

Avatar
Dnnnnnn replied to eburtthebike | 3 years ago
2 likes

eburtthebike wrote:

Surely if fewer cars are on the road and more cyclists, cycling ought to get safer, not more dangerous?  Unless those vehicles still on the road are being driven faster and more dangerously.

You answered your own question in large part. It may also be that there were more inexperienced cyclists on the road. But there's not enough analysis of the data to draw very firm conclusions - beyond the tragedy behind each statistic.

Avatar
qwerty360 replied to eburtthebike | 3 years ago
1 like

eburtthebike wrote:

Surely if fewer cars are on the road and more cyclists, cycling ought to get safer, not more dangerous?  Unless those vehicles still on the road are being driven faster and more dangerously.

 

Supported by incident rates... Fewer injuries but more fatalities. So the incidents that did happen were more dangerous, suggesting higher speeds etc...

Significant increase in cycling including more inexperienced cyclists, but I would expect them to also have more minor incidents as well... (greater likelihood of mistakes resulting in falls and less practiced in correcting errors/impacts (potholes)/etc and travel slower so cyclist only incidents less severe)

Avatar
Awavey replied to qwerty360 | 3 years ago
2 likes

It's a shame no one has carried on Bez Beyondthekerbs work at documenting the fatalities and likely causes each year, because that data gave you that missing piece of understanding we are struggling to piece together for this number and cuts down alot on the speculation.

this 140 cyclists will include medical episodes, crashes or falls due to terrain like potholes, rocks etc,failed equipment, gang violence, doorings, even drownings. Even when they are recorded as the more familiar road traffic collision that we are expecting, remember we had that heartbreaking article only a couple of weeks back of the 12 year old kid out riding with their Dad who collided with a van and tragically died, theyll be counted as one of those 140 recorded deaths.

The thing I'm struggling getting my head around if we settle on a cause that it's just because motorists were driving more recklessly in lockdowns,is why the collisions/deaths for pedestrians or other vehicles didnt similarly rise as it did with cyclists.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to Awavey | 3 years ago
0 likes

Awavey wrote:

It's a shame no one has carried on Bez Beyondthekerbs work at documenting the fatalities and likely causes each year, because that data gave you that missing piece of understanding we are struggling to piece together for this number and cuts down alot on the speculation.

+1 but I imagine it was serious labour to correlate all that information.

Avatar
brooksby replied to chrisonabike | 3 years ago
0 likes

What does Bez do nowadays?  I used to read their blog (remember blogs, in typed out words that you had to read?) but that's been unmaintained for many a year...

Avatar
Fishpastesarnie | 3 years ago
5 likes

Going by the news stories it would appear that there has been a marked increase in vehicles carrying out 'hit and runs'. 

I would love to see some figures on this as the numbers seem to be going up and the penalty, if caught, seems to be decreasing. 

Avatar
Tom_77 replied to Fishpastesarnie | 3 years ago
2 likes

Fishpastesarnie wrote:

Going by the news stories it would appear that there has been a marked increase in vehicles carrying out 'hit and runs'. 

I would love to see some figures on this as the numbers seem to be going up and the penalty, if caught, seems to be decreasing. 

Hit-and-run crashes rise by 45% in four years

"Recorded hit-and-run incidents increased from 19,239 in 2013 to 28,010 in 2017, according to Freedom of Information responses from 27 of the 44 police forces in England and Wales."

I haven't been able to find more recent figures.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Tom_77 | 3 years ago
1 like

Tom_77 wrote:

Fishpastesarnie wrote:

Going by the news stories it would appear that there has been a marked increase in vehicles carrying out 'hit and runs'. 

I would love to see some figures on this as the numbers seem to be going up and the penalty, if caught, seems to be decreasing. 

Hit-and-run crashes rise by 45% in four years

"Recorded hit-and-run incidents increased from 19,239 in 2013 to 28,010 in 2017, according to Freedom of Information responses from 27 of the 44 police forces in England and Wales."

I haven't been able to find more recent figures.

That's awful.

I think part of being allowed to drive on the roads should be acting responsibly when something goes wrong. What we need is for the penalties for hit-and-runs to be drastically harsher than e.g. drunk driving or not having insurance which would probably mean more-or-less guaranteed prison time for leaving the scene.

This means that whenever a driver hears a loud bump, they need to stop and investigate to see if it was a person, deer or squirrel otherwise they risk prison time. In return, there should be some extra leniency for drivers that do stop and render assistance.

Avatar
the little onion replied to Lance ꜱtrongarm | 3 years ago
8 likes

Yes, BUT.... I always found the casualties-per-mile-cycled stat a bit misleading. After all, almost all cycling casualities (KSIs) involve another vehicle, rather than just involving the cyclist. So there needs to be an adjustment to take into account the relative volumes of other traffic. Until I see that, I reserve judgment on whether these are positive figures or not, or ones which are likely to be sustained. 

Avatar
kil0ran replied to Lance ꜱtrongarm | 3 years ago
9 likes

Yeah, I'm sure the relatives of the extra 40 dead cyclists are delighted

Avatar
OldRidgeback | 3 years ago
14 likes

The UK needs to do more to tackle poor driving.

Avatar
Captain Badger | 3 years ago
12 likes

The anger bigotry and hate that has increased towards cyclists over the past year would likely have an effect.

As i posted a while back this experience is lived on the road with incidences of direct bullying happening every other ride. The bullying attitude of a significant number of drivers is bound to increase risk, and increased risk = increased injury and death when viewed over a population.

Pages

Latest Comments