- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Tubeless valves
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Nigel Havers and Laura Laker (via Jeremy Vine on Twitter)“No cars go through a red light – every cyclist does,” claims Nigel Havers
Actor Nigel Havers has claimed that “no cars go through a red light,” while “every cyclist does,” during a discussion with cycling writer Laura Laker hosted by Jeremy Vine on his BBC Radio 2 TV show.
The exchange took place during Vine’s afternoon programme on the station yesterday, with footage subsequently shared on his social media channels by the host.
Absolutely fascinating today @BBCRadio2 — @NigelHaversUK in the studio to complain about the behaviour of cyclists, along with @laura_laker who has written #PotholesAndPavements disagreeing that they offend more than any other road user.
Really worth hearing this exchange — pic.twitter.com/ebUPmDjxUT— Jeremy Vine (@theJeremyVine) May 10, 2024
“All road users break the law in equal amount,” Laker pointed out. “I’m not saying that that’s right.
“We know that roads policing got decimated a decade ago, we lost 20,000 police officers, and so all of road user behaviour has got worse, drivers have become more aggressive, perhaps cyclists have become more aggressive too.”
Interjecting, Havers said: “I don’t break the law, I don’t break the rules” before claiming that “motor cars aren’t going through red lights.”
Havers invited Laker, whose book on the National Cycle Network Potholes & Pavements was published just last week and who is a contributor to road.cc, to join him “at a crossroads where no cars go through a red light, every cyclist does.”
“That’s not true,” Laker countered. “Definitely people break the law in their cars, with mobile phone use, we know that’s illegal and it’s as bad as drink-driving, even driving hands-free.”
“I don’t know what planet you’re on,” said Havers, who is reported to have been fined £500 and banned for driving for 12 months after being convicted of drink-driving in 1991.
“Come and stand on the crossroads with me and you’ll see every single cyclist go through the red light.”
While it’s true that some cyclists do go through red lights, so too do many motorists, and Laker highlighted that it is the latter who are involved in, on average, five deaths a day on Britain’s roads as well as crashes that leave thousands more people seriously injured.
Undeterred, Havers, who in 2020 called for the removal of the temporary cycle lane briefly installed on Kensington High Street, insisted: “I have not seen a car go through a red light in London in years.”
“I know, but because you haven’t seen it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist,” replied Laker.
“So you think cars go through red lights just as much as cyclists?” asked Havers, incredulously.
“It’s not cars, it’s drivers,” clarified Laker, who in 2021 worked alongside Westminster University’s Active Travel Academy in developing guidelines for the language the media should use when reporting on road traffic collisions, which are still all too often deemed to be chance ‘accidents’ or in which vehicles crash without a driver seemingly being present.
“If car drivers are not breaking the law, how come vehicles are killing 1,700 people a year,” asked Vine, whose regularly posts videos of law-breaking drivers to his social media channels.
“Well, I mean …” responded Havers, before pausing, eventually breaking the silence by spluttering the word, “cyclists.”
The issue of cyclists and the law has been a high-profile one in the media this week after a coroner’s inquest into the death of a retired teacher who was struck by a cyclist riding in group in London’s Regent’s Park heard that the rider would face no charges in connection with the crash.
A Metropolitan Police officer told the inquest into the death of 81-year-old Hilda Griffiths that there was “insufficient evidence for a real prospect of conviction” of the cyclist concerned, Brian Fitzgerald, with the officer also confirming unlike motorists, cyclists are not required to adhere to posted speed limits.
Thankfully, road traffic collisions in which a pedestrian is killed following a crash with a cyclist are very rare, with Cycling UK citing official statistics that reveal there are on average around three such fatalities each year.
And it is the very fact that they happen so rarely that sees such incidents and, in their aftermath, wider cyclist behaviour, become the focus of intense media attention in a way that the vast majority of road traffic fatalities in which a motorist is involved do not.
Often, such media coverage takes the form of newspaper columns from celebrities – one example this weekend being found in the Express, with broadcaster Richard Madely calling for cyclists to be registered, and forced to carry insurance – something the government has rejected time and again.
Latest Comments
- Rendel Harris 25 min 4 sec ago
The UK population is currently a whisker over 69 million. The UK population in the 1901 census was 41 million. When exactly did you start cycling?
- hawkinspeter 26 min 28 sec ago
I think black boxes are great for early detection of cognitive decline and/or sight problems. Someone's driving is going to become much less smooth...
- Bigtwin 43 min 4 sec ago
Taxis doing what they want where they want when they want: unusual...
- Bigtwin 1 hour 2 min ago
It's a fashion. https://guildford-dragon.com/shalford-driver-who-smashed-shalford-war-me...
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 9 min ago
Care to back that statement up? As far as I'm aware this is the only incident he has had that he or anyone else has described as life threatening,...
- MTL Biker 1 hour 22 min ago
Robin Phans .....
- mdavidford 1 hour 28 min ago
It's a swan uprising. (As opposed to a swan upping, which is a different thing altogether.)
- Rendel Harris 1 hour 31 min ago
"Complainer" in Scottish law is simply the legal term for the person who alleges that a criminal offence has been committed against them, the...
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 3 min ago
Well it would be irresponsible enough if there were only cars and buses, if there are going to be "cars, buses and traffic" that's just suicidal...
Add new comment
128 comments
I've cycled many many thousands of miles and I don't recall ever going through a red light.
I have occasionally hopped off my bike and walked it as a pedestrian on the pavement before, for example at road works with horrendous queues of cars, but that is perfectly legal.
But perhaps I am a minority, I've definitely seen cyclists do it, I've also seen tons of cars do it, probably in equal numbers.
I would say the greatest offenders of red light jumping are mopeds, more specially the ones most people refer to as cycles but given they are using throttles and assist over 15mph on their electrically modified bikes these are now unlicensed, uninsured mopeds not ebikes or bicycles.
Nope you ain't the minority mate, I never ride through any red lights or ignore people waiting to cross on zebra crossings. More cyclists are seriously injured and killed each year from motor vehicles than pedestrians being hit by cyclists, and even then not by jumping lights. So according to Nigel Havers the reason 1700 cyclists are killed a year by motor vehicles is cyclists? Who's using his family brain cell today? Because it isn't his!
I'm in Bristol and the worst offenders by far are the riders of e-scooters (rental ones and the illegal privately owned ones). I appreciate that some element of confirmation bias probably apply, but it's bad enough that it really stands out if I see an e-scooter stopping at a red light.
I've posted on other topics the reasons behind why I sometimes jump red lights and some of the reasons also apply to e-scooters. However, I'm not sure whether the loss of momentum is as big a deal for e-scooter riders , but it's possible that starting off is more awkward as they have to gain their balance on them.
I do agree that I've seen e-scooters go through reds that I've stopped at, but then I'm quite selective about the conditions in which I RLJ. I think ultimately that when you see lots of riders (bikes and e-scooters) RLJ that it's a good indication that the junction isn't working for all road users. It's like when you see a "desire path" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desire_path) - it's not worthwhile trying to change people's behaviour, but better to understand why they're doing what they're doing.
Then again, it could well be that traffic understands how poorly the roads are policed and when there's rampant speeding and phone use by drivers, it's difficult to have any respect for some laws.
Also perhaps when using a scooter it feels more like being a pedestrian? (This would apply to "mass cycling" too). When walking I don't always wait at red lights at signallised crossings, nor only cross at marked points.
The problem is we've also fixed it so that some of that feeling of "casual, relaxed, free mobility" is experienced by drivers. Not that I think that people would drive better if more nervous, tense or uncertain! However "careless, distracted, DGAF" certainly applies to some. I'd suggest it's not just a few wrong'uns either (though they exist) - "many of the people, some of the time".
That's my theory too - not in a car, possibly not cyclists either, so just behave as "fast pedestrians" rather than as motorised road users. Many cyclists feel the same, I suspect.
Full disclosure: I have never knowingly jumped a red light while riding a bike or driving a car, and I've never ridden an e-scooter.
I make a point of always stopping for red lights. Yes I've seen some cyclists ignore them, certainly not all.
but I can guarantee from the six sets of lights on my commute, when the lights are green for our direction of travel, there is always still at least 1 if not 2 drivers coming through on red at every set of traffic lights.
And its just as bad if I walk into town, in fact so bad the pedestrian crossings are delayed turning green for about 15-20secs, simply to cater for red light jumping drivers to clear before it's safe to cross
This is wonderful news. No drivers ever jump red lights. We don't need laws against something that nobody ever does so that's one law we can take off the statute book.
We have way too many laws in this country so getting rid of one of them must be a good thing, right? Right?
Or maybe all the drivers I see jumping red lights are actually cyclists in disguise. Yeah, that's probably it.
I've never actually heard anyone as their argument say "yeah but cyclists" before
It's like talking to a brexthicker.
And you sound like a remoaner. (See, two can play the name calling game.)
We had a vote, you lost, get over it. it was EIGHT YEARS AGO, FFS.
We had a vote in 1975, Brexiters lost and continued to whine and attempt to undermine the elected governments of the day in order to get their way for the next forty-one years, so we've got a way to go to catch up with you.
to be fair what we had a vote about joining was very different from what we ended up leaving.
In the same way we have a vote in 2016 about being like Norway, but it turned out we would be like Moldova.
Just because Remain lost that vote, doesn't mean that we have to change our opinion about the self defeating stupidity of Leave. Especially as time passes and the so-called Project Fear is proven correct again and again...
Doesn't stop it from being a sore spot for some. I've just lost my second job in five years over it, and now I'm starting from scratch because the industry I have all of my skills and experince in, is now basically gone from the UK post Brexit. It had a very similar result for other members of my family too.
It's hard to just "get over it" when it's essentially undone the last ten years of your life and put you back at square one.
We all lost. Unless of course you can explain how you won.
Unless of course you can explain how you won
I think there were lucrative trade agreements with Rockall, Tristan da Cunha, St Helena and the Pitcairn Islands
Didn't we also sign an export agreement with China or somewhere, which raised GDP by 0.00000000005%?
(edit) Just googled it and that was before Brexit so it doesn't count
I think you may have missed a few zeros. 23 to be precise.
It's always 23…
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/23-fascinating-facts-about-the-number-twentythree-6262624.html
Blue passports.
Snark aside - I think the argument goes "the point is we could win at any point (where something bad hits the EU / they bring in a rule we don't like). After all this is a massive change and it's too early to say yet".
Unfortunately this argument will not resolve anything as there is no agreement on the point where we judge the results. Of course it could also be judged a win on "freedom" even if it delivers relative economic woe.
It's clear is that lots of people in the UK never felt particularly European. This is the case in other countries in Europe of course, it varies - but I believe much smaller percentages.
What surprises me is that despite the wilder Brexiteers (and some not-very-cuddly folks in high office in government keen to "tear up the rule books") what has been delivered thus far is rather middle-of-the-road. No-one has blown up the Channel Tunnel or proscribed French, German or Spanish lessons. Albeit there has been much cost, mess and confusion.
I would say most of us lost, and the loss is still being felt by most of us today.
Regarding the 2016 referendum, it is telling that brexiters (assuming that is what you are and your comment wasn't just a send-up) have yet to find a better justification for the damage that has been done than the twisting of a consultative poll into something that produced "winners" and "losers", which lies at the heart of the perversion that is "brexit".
I didn't think it would be long before some idiot claims it's Brexits fault. Go back and crawl under your EU rock you emerged from.
He can't because we're not in the Schengen area any more.
Were we ever? The problem isn't so much the border controls as the fact that UK citizens no longer have the right to live and work in the EU that they used to.
Othering: I (and the group I belong to) am right, they (and the group they belong to) are wrong.
You can follow his train of thought, which is common to many reactionaries like him, on many topics:
With logic that circular, of course they don't believe any statistics that refute their beliefs, which must therefore be the product of "woke" organisations like the ONS, the OBR, the police, or the Department for Transport.
This!
4A or in a few instances where a silent majority member has been caught red-handed (NB the words in parenthesis in para 1) this is unfair and arbitrary and they should go and catch real criminals and there needs to be a review of whether the method used was fair
Pages