@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter Okay, I'm going to bite, but I'm sure you're a reasonable person who would want to base things on facts rather than incorrect beliefs. Let's start with Road Tax. It doesn't exist. It was abolished in (I think) 1937, by then Chancellor Winston Churchill... ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter One of the main reasons for abolishing it was a worry that it would make drivers think they had more right to use the roads than pedestrians, cyclists, and horses. Genuinely, it's recorded in Hansard. So what's paid is Vehicle Excise Duty, or VED.... ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter I pay this on two cars (including my rather lovely, old Mini, though sadly that's in the garage waiting on the engine coming out to fix). I digress. VED is based on emissions. Higher polluting = higher cost. The money isn't ring-fenced to pay for the roads. Instead.... ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter Basically general taxation pays for the roads. I think in towns and cities and villages the budget comes from Council Tax (I think, I'm a little hazy). But the giant tax pot made up of income tax, VAT, etc etc pays for the roads. As an aside... ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter A few studies have shown that cyclists, on average, are higher earners. So basically we're actually paying 'more' for the upkeep of the roads. I'm not 'highly' paid, but I'm a solicitor, so in a fortunate position of being above the average... ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter So if bikes were brought into the VED scheme they would be treated like vehicles and low emissions vehicles are zero-rated. Bikes would, 100%, be zero-rated. With at least as many bikes as cars in the UK. So the cost to the DVLA would be doubled for no additional revenue... ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter As for insurance, I can kinda see it, but to get a handle on just how much damage is caused by a cyclist compared to a driver, any homeowner, + many renters, ARE insured. The reason is, 99% of home insurance policies include a clause on personal injury outwith the home... ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter And many even go so far as explicitly saying this includes cycling. Insurance companies are giving away cover for something completely free. Insurance companies. Giving something away. Nuts right? ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter Personally I go further, as well as being insured through my home insurance (I've checked), I'm a member of British Cycling for some racing I do in winter, which also includes as a perk of membership.... insurance. As a perk. ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter Hi-viz is a bit of a bete noir for many. Honestly, in a proper cycling society (i.e. one that cares about people) it's not needed. Check out the Netherlands. Or Denmark. Not a bit of fluoro-yellow in sight. And the point of the OP was that the roads are.... ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter Currently quiet enough that it feels safe to take kids out. You'll note the child is still wearing a helmet, which again is something you don't see in civilised countries, but feels necessary here (I wear one to save my wife stress when I go out, but I know it won't save me) ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter As for the child having to ride 'behind' the adult. Oh good grief no. The whole point is the adult rides behind, and slightly further to the right. This means that drivers will have to pass slightly wider. In that sense it doesn't actually matter.... ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter If they don't see the kid they're already passing wider so that it's not an issue. If I go out with my wife I actually do this, ride behind and slightly further out. Though frankly any driver not seeing the rider in front as well, especially... ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter As they pass at a safe speed and distance (as I'm sure you do), if they don't see the second rider in front then they shouldn't be driving (remember, I say this as a driver, and quite an avid driver at that). Finally..., ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter If the child is at the back the adult has no idea what they're doing! They can't correct see any loss of balance that might have the child making a movement where it shouldn't go, don't know if the child has got into difficulty or fallen... ctd
@AllDun1 @blackfordsafer1 @EdinReporter And pretty much can't be in control of making sure sure the child does exactly what it should be doing on the bike, therefore learning to use the road properly, and overall being safe. I hope that helps. Lot of information I know, but I'm avoiding looking at work emails... END
