Highway Code

I don't understand the objection to the proposed amendments to the highway code - the amended Rule 58 says 'Use cycle routes where practicable and cycle facilities such as advance stop lines, cycle boxes and toucan crossings where they are provided as they can make your journeys safer'. This is not enforcing use of cycle lanes, which would be impossible in any case until severe penalties are imposed for drivers who block them etc. But maybe I have misunderstood this?

Update:

My concern with this is that something that looks perfectly reasonable on paper could be twisted against us in court - ending up with the "it was the cyclist's fault for being on the road and not on the cyclepath" as a defence for a motorist who had no excuse for going through a cyclist rather than round them. Also the bit about cyclists having to single out around bends: it seems perfectly reasonable (and sensible) at first glance, but then how do you define a "bend"? Is it a sharp one with all those arrows for motorists, or is it the gentle curve of an otherwise straight road. This wording could effectively ban cyclists from riding two-abreast on anything other than roman roads - if taken to an ultimate (stupid) conclusion.

Lisa

Andy has asked me to put up two links -

The CTC response

and a discussion on the Cycling Plus message board


neither of which I have had the time to look at myself - yet!

Also the "CTT" message board thread where I first heard about this.