So, Richard Madeley, Timmy Mallett, and Howard Cox walk into a TV studio and debate whether cyclists should be forced to put registration plates on their bikes…

No, I’m not describing a live blog and warm weather-induced fever dream I had last night – that was what actually occurred this morning on Good Morning Britain, the home of sensible, breakfast-accompanying discussion in the UK.

And, you’ll perhaps be surprised to learn (though maybe not), it was even more frustrating than it sounds.

Truncated due to Michael Gove’s incessant blathering about some former MP (Boris somebody? I didn’t quite catch the name), the ‘debate’ – titled “Should cyclists have registration plates?” – was an awkward, random, and chaotic assortment of mystifying statements and anti-cycling bingo tropes.

Fair Fuel UK founder Cox – a friend of the live blog – made sure to hit all his favourite points right from the start.

“As any HGV, van, or taxi driver will tell you, cyclists are running riot, running red lights, riding on pavements,” he said.

Cox also noted that people using e-bikes are riding at “30, 35mph” in 20mph zones (a claim that made e-bike aficionado Mallett raise his eyebrows), while he – again dubiously, I must add – added that cyclists “don’t contribute anything financially to the roads”.

Hmmm…

Unfortunately, the brilliantly attired Mallett was somewhat less succinct in formulating his own argument against cycling number plates (such as the ludicrous amount of resources that would be required to implement such a measure), a debating style not helped by Richard “I ride my bike every three days” Madeley ignoring his attempts to intervene during Cox’s more questionable claims.

Of course, what passed as a debate on British breakfast TV comes just days after Italy’s transport minister pledged to introduce tougher laws for cyclists, including requiring riders to wear a helmet, take out insurance, and put number plates and indicators on their bikes – before almost immediately backpedalling in the midst of a fierce backlash by claiming that the laws were only ever intended for scooter users.

(Remind you of anyone, Grant?)

And anyway, despite all that nonsense on GMB, surely the Great British public have a much more considered take on the whole matter… or maybe not.

According to a Twitter poll carried out this morning by the programme, at the time of writing 70 percent of respondents believe that cyclists should in fact have number plates:

Oh dear… Timmy, come back!

https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-12-june-2023-301825#live-blog-item-46453

The author of this piece appears to believe that sarcasm makes good copy,
although one suspects that there are readers of the uncritical-thinking
type who are (mis)led by it.

swldx...@gmail.com <swldxer1958@gmail.com> wrote:
> So, Richard Madeley, Timmy Mallett, and Howard Cox walk into a TV studio
> and debate whether cyclists should be forced to put registration plates on their bikes…
>
> No, I’m not describing a live blog and warm weather-induced fever dream I
> had last night – that was what actually occurred this morning on Good
> Morning Britain, the home of sensible, breakfast-accompanying discussion in the UK.
>
> And, you’ll perhaps be surprised to learn (though maybe not), it was even
> more frustrating than it sounds.
>
> Truncated due to Michael Gove’s incessant blathering about some former MP
> (Boris somebody? I didn’t quite catch the name), the ‘debate’ – titled
> “Should cyclists have registration plates?” – was an awkward, random, and
> chaotic assortment of mystifying statements and anti-cycling bingo tropes.
>
> Fair Fuel UK founder Cox – a friend of the live blog – made sure to hit
> all his favourite points right from the start.
>
> “As any HGV, van, or taxi driver will tell you, cyclists are running
> riot, running red lights, riding on pavements,” he said.
>
> Cox also noted that people using e-bikes are riding at “30, 35mph” in
> 20mph zones (a claim that made e-bike aficionado Mallett raise his
> eyebrows), while he – again dubiously, I must add – added that cyclists
> “don’t contribute anything financially to the roads”.
>
> Hmmm…
>
> Unfortunately, the brilliantly attired Mallett was somewhat less succinct
> in formulating his own argument against cycling number plates (such as
> the ludicrous amount of resources that would be required to implement
> such a measure), a debating style not helped by Richard “I ride my bike
> every three days” Madeley ignoring his attempts to intervene during Cox’s
> more questionable claims.
>
> Of course, what passed as a debate on British breakfast TV comes just
> days after Italy’s transport minister pledged to introduce tougher laws
> for cyclists, including requiring riders to wear a helmet, take out
> insurance, and put number plates and indicators on their bikes – before
> almost immediately backpedalling in the midst of a fierce backlash by
> claiming that the laws were only ever intended for scooter users.
>
> (Remind you of anyone, Grant?)
>
> And anyway, despite all that nonsense on GMB, surely the Great British
> public have a much more considered take on the whole matter… or maybe not.
>
> According to a Twitter poll carried out this morning by the programme, at
> the time of writing 70 percent of respondents believe that cyclists
> should in fact have number plates:
>
> Oh dear… Timmy, come back!
>
> https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-12-june-2023-301825#live-blog-item-46453
>

--
Spike

Matthew Acton-Varian | 75 posts | 5 hours ago
1 like

And another thing. An estimated 4.5% of vehicles on the road are uninsured. The police can't even keep a lid on that.

With just under 4 million vehicles registered, that puts a figure of around 175,000 uninsured vehicles nationwide.

If they struggle to keep tabs on 175,000 cars, vans, motorcycles etc, how on earth do you expect them to keep tabs on an additional 20 million bicycles?

On 12/06/2023 04:37 pm, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
> Matthew Acton-Varian | 75 posts | 5 hours ago
> 1 like
>
> And another thing. An estimated 4.5% of vehicles on the road

What do you (think you) mean "on the road"?

Is that something you know (if so, how?), or are you just spouting off
your uneducated chav-tripe as usual?

> are uninsured. The police can't even keep a lid on that.
> With just under 4 million vehicles registered, that puts a figure of around 175,000 uninsured vehicles nationwide.

There is no law against having an uninsured car. Car-dealers have tens
of thousands of them (probably as many as 175,000 between them). But
they aren't on the road.

It also does not mean that they are not covered by a policy of insurance
when they are actually in use on the road.

It may surprise you to learn that if I were to drive your uninsured car
(with your permission), it would be insured for the period when I was
using it, even though you haven't insured it. Not, of course, that I
would risk it, because you are notoriously scofflaw about making sure
that your vehicles have serviceable brakes, tyres, lights, steering and
windscreen wipers. Too risky...

> If they struggle to keep tabs on 175,000 cars, vans, motorcycles etc, how on earth do you expect them to keep tabs on an additional 20 million bicycles?

You really don't understand much, do you?

You're assuming that they're basing their opinions on any kind of logic. Bringing in registration plates will do precisely nothing as police don't even have the time to catch motorists without registration plates. I mean, how would they even catch cyclists without plates when the whole point of bringing them in is that they can't be held responsible for their "crimes". There would be absolutely no difference in the attitudes of motorists as the sane motorists realise what an impractically stupid idea it is and the others just want to blame people for the over-crowded roads and those damn cyclists just breezing past them.

On 12/06/2023 12:02, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:

> Cox also noted that people using e-bikes are riding at “30, 35mph” in 20mph zones (a claim that made e-bike aficionado Mallett raise his eyebrows),

How are they managing that?
My(or rather my son's) E-bike is limited to helping under(or on) 15.5
MPH . IMHO they are much to heavy to get another 15 MPH out of them by
pedalling, yes it does, probably, happen occasionally but I think it
would be as rare as a rare thing.

On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 8:25:36 PM UTC+1, soup wrote:
> On 12/06/2023 12:02, swldx...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Cox also noted that people using e-bikes are riding at “30, 35mph” in 20mph zones (a claim that made e-bike aficionado Mallett raise his eyebrows),
> How are they managing that?

They're not - it was a panel of cyclist haters on a right wing TV channel talking bollocks.