2022 Highway Code Changes: Making Roads Safer?

On 29th January 2022, a number of changes to the UK Highway Code come into force. According to the UK government, these changes are aimed at making our roads safer for vulnerable users. But will they? And does anyone know what the changes actually are?

 

The Highway Code Changes

There are three major changes to the Highway Code: H1, H2 and H3 along with other changes and a few new rules. If you are so inclined, you can read the full details of the changes and a comparison with the older wording here. I have tried to summarise them below.

 

Rule H1: Hierarchy of road users

The Hierarchy of road users places those most at risk in the event of a collision at the top, and those least at risk at the bottom. It states that those in charge of vehicles which can cause the greatest harm bear the greatest responsibility to reduce the danger they pose to others.

So, drivers have a responsibility to reduce their potential to harm to cyclists, horse risers and pedestrians. Likewise, cyclists have a responsibility to reduce their potential to harm pedestrians.

 

Rule H2: Junctions and crossings – rule for drivers, motorcyclists, horse-drawn vehicles, horse riders and cyclists

This rule in the main addresses the responsibilities of all other road users towards pedestrians. It specifies that all other road users (including cyclists) should give way to pedestrians who are crossing or are waiting to cross a road into which the other road user is turning. It also states that other road users should give way to pedestrians who are waiting to cross at a zebra crossing or parallel crossing.

This is a change as previously a pedestrian had to have already stepped out in order for other road users to be required to give way. However, it is worth noting the use of should. In the Highway Code, only those rules which include must or must not are legally binding. Should is advisory and not a legal requirement.

Rule H2 also states that cyclists should give way to pedestrians on shared use paths, and to horse riders on bridleways.

This rule change does also stress the importance of personal responsibility. Clearly, nobody is suggesting that pedestrians should run, inches from a driver, into the road to cross yelling about their rights. Obviously, you still need to look. But no pedestrian should be left standing waiting for a gap in the traffic for ages, then sprinting across as drivers continue to assert their right to drive on the road.

 

Rule H3: Junctions – rule for drivers and motorcyclists

This rule is best explained by a quote and the illustration below:

You should not cut across cyclists, horse riders or horse drawn vehicles going ahead when you are turning into or out of a junction or changing direction or lane, just as you would not turn across the path of another motor vehicle. This applies whether they are using a cycle lane, a cycle track, or riding ahead on the road and you should give way to them.

Table of changes to the Highway Code.

 

The Three Biggest Changes Illustrated.

The illustration below is useful in understanding H1, H2 and H3. My apologies that I can’t find who to credit it to. I pinched it from an Auto Express article.

Other Changes

There are more changes, and they are well worth knowing about. I’ve picked out the parts which I feel are most important to cyclists. After all, this is Mummy’s Gone a Cycle. (Although, I do walk too…and drive)

• Rule 13. On paths shared between pedestrians and cyclists, cyclists should respect the safety of the pedestrians. Pedestrians should take care not to obstruct such paths or endanger cyclists.
• Rule 63. When sharing space with pedestrians, horse riders, or horse-drawn vehicles, cyclists should slow down when necessary and let others know you are there by ringing a bell or calling out politely. Particular care should be taken when passing children, older people or disabled people. Cyclists should not pass closely or at high speed.
• Rule 66. Regarding cycling two-abreast, the changes to the Highway Code have this to say: be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in groups. You can ride two abreast and it can be safer to do so,
  particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders. Be aware of drivers behind you and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when you feel it is safe to let them do so. (The bold is mine, because I think it’s really important).
• Rule 73. This is an entirely new rule, as opposed to an amended or reworded rule, and it’s a significant one. Again, the bold is my own. Ride in the centre of your lane, to make yourself as clearly visible as possible, in the following situations: (a) on quiet roads or streets – if a faster vehicle comes up behind you, move to the left to enable them to overtake, if you can do so safely, (b) in slower-moving traffic – when the traffic around you starts to flow more freely, move over to the left if you can do so safely so that faster vehicles behind you can overtake (c) at the approach to junctions or road narrowings where it would be unsafe for drivers to overtake you. This rule also specifies that, when not positioned in the middle of a lane, cyclists should keep at least 0.5m from the kerb edge. With this change, no cyclist should be riding in the gutter.
• Rule 73. Again, this is a new rule. This encourages cyclists to position themselves in the middle of the lane at junctions which do not have separate cyclist facilities.
• Rule 163. When overtaking cyclists, motorists should leave at least 1.5m when driving at speeds up to 30mph, and give more space than this when overtaking at speeds greater than 30mph. It explicitly states that drivers should wait behind cyclists if it is not possible to allow this clearance. This rule also states that cyclists may pass slow moving or stationary traffic on either the left or the right.
• Rule 239. This rule suggests motorists should use the Dutch reach method when opening the door after parking on the roadside.

 

The Good News

On the surface, I for one welcome the changes to the Highway Code. The establishment of a Hierarchy of Users in particular is the start of a culture change from roads for drivers to roads for all. It formally acknowledges that those with the potential to cause the most harm have a responsibility to reduce that harm.

Cycling, walking and horse riding do of course have inherent risks. You can fall off a bike or horse, you can trip over when walking. But these are not the risks which we are talking about when we talk of vulnerable road users. Pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders are vulnerable on our roads because of drivers. Falling off a bike may cause cuts and bruises, but being hit by a car is another matter entirely.

Drivers must acknowledge that they are the cause of the vulnerability of other road users. Many already do…but many don’t.

Incidentally, I also welcome the reinforcement of the fact that pedestrians are more vulnerable than cyclists. Just as drivers must recognise their impact on others, so must all cyclists. Many already so…but many don’t.

For far too long road users have focused on their rights. It is high time that focus was shifted to responsibilities.

 

Awareness of the Highway Code Changes

As I write, there is just a week before these changes come into force. Where is the public awareness campaign? Where are the government-supported adverts?

Remember Clunk, Click Every Trip? Remember The Green Cross Man? I know I’m showing my age, but the point is that I do remember these campaigns because they were so widely shown that they are ingrained into my being. This was back when there were just a handful of TV channels and no such thing as social media – if it could be done then, surely it can’t be that hard now?

The cynical side of me want to say that no, it’s not that hard…but it does cost money and the safety of vulnerable road users is not something the UK government prioritises when it comes to spending. Perhaps I should try to be less cynical.

There is a campaign out there to make people aware of the changes to the Highway Code. I have personally seen lots of Twitter and Facebook posts highlighting them…but they’re all from cycling organisations and individual cyclists. Perhaps this bias is simply because that is who I follow. I will freely admit that I don’t follow motorist-led social media accounts. However, assuming my impression is right and it really is only those who use bikes who are promoting awareness of the changes, this is a massive problem. Just as I do not follow motorist accounts, motorists on the whole do not follow cyclist’s accounts.

Even motoring organisations have expressed concern about the lack of awareness of the changes. In December 2021, the AA polled over 13,000 members and found that only one-third were aware of the changes. One fifth actually believed the plans were false.

The government needs to up the ante on getting the message out to drivers about these changes.

AA President, Edmund King

Cyclists do all need to be aware of these changes, not least because of the responsibilities they hold towards more vulnerable users such as pedestrians. But that is not enough. Motorists need to know. If motorists are not aware of the changes, there are going to be more, not less, cases of vulnerable road users being injured or killed by drivers.

So what does the Department for Transport have to say about awareness?

The department has established a working group of key organisations to ensure that messages about the changes are as widespread as possible, and our well-established Think! campaign will continue to ensure all road users are aware both when these changes come into effect and beyond.

Department for Transport spokesperson (quoted in The Guardian, 30th December 2021)

So how come so many road users are not aware with just one week before the changes come into effect?

 

Making Roads Safer for Vulnerable Users?

Let’s assume for a moment that a massive public awareness campaign miraculously appears and all road users become aware of these changes to the Highway Code in the next seven days. Do the changes achieve what the government claims they will? Will they make roads safer for vulnerable road users?

No.

Perhaps I am being overly pessimistic. I would like to be proved wrong. But there are so many reasons why I do not think these changes will make anyone safer.

 

Hierarchy Without Presumed Liability

There are only five countries in Europe who do not have some form of presumed liability law – the UK is one of them. In the UK now, if a vulnerable road user is injured on the roads, the injured person has to prove the other person was at fault.

With presumed liability, if a cyclist is injured by a driver, it is presumed that the driver is at fault and they have to prove that it was the actions of the cyclist which caused the injury. Likewise, if a pedestrian is injured by a cyclist, it is presumed that the cyclist is at fault and they have to prove it was the actions of the pedestrian which caused the injury.

Without presumed liability, the hierarchy of road users frankly has no teeth.

 

The Most Vulnerable are the Least Confident

When it comes to cyclists – as with motorists, pedestrians, horse riders and any other arbitrary group you can think of – there is no one profile of what ‘a cyclist’ is. Many people who ride bikes do not even think of themselves as ‘cyclists’ as they feel this conjures images of lycra and drop handlebars.

However, when it comes to how people on bikes ride on the roads, I think it is possible to make a distinction between those who are confident and those who are not.

I have been riding bikes regularly for over thirty years. I am a qualified cycle coach and ride leader. I cycle for transport, for leisure, for fitness and for the sheer joy of it, and I am on a bike at some point most days of the week. I would definitely class myself as a confident cyclist. I ride assertively on the roads, particularly when it comes to road position. I always take primary position (ride in the middle of the lane) when I need to communicate to drivers that it is not safe to pass me. For example, passing parked cars, when I am going straight on past a left turn, approaching junctions, and when cycling with a child. This should ring a bell since these are the situations where the changes to the Highway Code now advise cyclists to ride in the middle of the lane.

Incidentally, I am also very much aware of my responsibilities to pedestrians and believe I am courteous to other road and path users and do not endanger those more vulnerable than me.

I also lead Breeze cycle rides for women. Often the women who join these rides are new or less experienced cyclists, or they are coming back to cycling on a bike which has been gathering dust in a shed or garage for many years. This has really highlighted to me, the differences in cycling – and especially road positioning – for less confident people on bikes.

Those who are less confident in riding their bikes on the roads tend to ride as close to the curb as possible…and they stay there in all circumstances. They are frequently terrified to move any further out into the lane, because they fear aggression by drivers, whether that be the physical aggression of close passes or deliberate driving at people on bikes, or verbal abuse from drivers.

Depressingly, they aren’t wrong to be afraid. Close passes, deliberately driving at people on bikes, and verbal abuse from drivers are daily occurrences in my cycling life. Even more depressingly, this happens the most during our fifteen minute school run where I have a seven year old on the cargo bike with me and a nine year old on his own bike.

They aren’t wrong to be afraid, but they are wrong to ride so close to the curb. Riding in the gutter like this makes you more vulnerable because (a) it leaves you nowhere to go, and (b) it communicates to drivers that it is fine for them to pass. In several circumstances – as described by the changes to the Highway Code – people on bikes should ride in the middle of the lane.

The trouble is, it takes confidence to do this, and less confident cyclists – and in my experience this is overwhelmingly women – by definition, lack confidence.

The other trouble is, the times when I (as a confident cyclist) ride in the middle of the lane exactly like the changes to the Highway Code specifies, are the times when I am on the receiving end of the vast majority of the daily aggression I experience.

So, the changes to the Highway Code regarding road positioning may formalise what confident cyclists already do, but they do little for less confident cyclists… who are the most vulnerable. I Hope that the changes will encourage all those on bikes to feel more secure in riding in the middle of the lane when circumstances dictate, but again much more publicity is needed before this is likely to happen.

 

Lack of Enforcement and Enforceability

As mentioned above, the Highway Code lacks teeth. Much of it is advisory and not law. This may make it useful for proving liability after somebody has been killed or injured on our roads, but that should not be the priority here. Deaths and injuries of the most vulnerable on our roads need to be prevented.

We also need a massive shift in the will to prosecute those whose behaviour endangers those more vulnerable than themselves. Right now this is just not happening.

Justification For Infrastructure Failures

Again, perhaps this is my cynical side ringing alarm bells, but I have already seen comments on social media stating there is no need for cycling infrastructure if people are to be encouraged to ride their bikes in the middle of the lane.

This is wrong.

There is no substitute for high quality, fit-for-purpose, segregated cycling infrastructure. Not painted lanes on roads. Properly segregated, properly way from other road users, properly safe for a child to ride their own bike on. This is the only way to support more women and children (and men, but mainly women and children) to cycle for transport.

 

‘Cyclists’ vs Drivers

Yet again, some folk are ranting along the lines of cyclists vs motorists. In a TV panel discussion the other evening, it was put to me (as a cyclist) that the Highway Code changes are all part of demonising motorists.

This is wrong.

Nothing in these changes demonises motorists. There is no demonising about it. It merely acknowledges that motorists have a greater potential to cause harm that cyclists, just as cyclists have a greater potential to cause harm than pedestrians.

Comments like this (from a motoring journalist) indicate a complete failure to understand the changes. This is not about cyclists – it is about all road users.

I have seen claims by motoring groups that the consultation these changes was hijacked by cycling organisations such as Cycling UK, and that this is unfair. But this doesn’t make sense. If you are aiming to make vulnerable road users safer, who do you need to ask about exactly what could make them safer? Erm, vulnerable road users….like those represented by cycling groups. Motoring organisations are not the groups to ask about road safety for cyclists any more than cycling groups would be the right groups to ask about safety for pedestrians.

I find the sheer extremity of negative, aggressive attitudes directed at cyclists right now terrifying. I really do not understand how such hostility can be directed at me just for getting my kids to school. This is frequently not helped by media who like to stir this war on motorists nonsense with sensationalist headlines and articles bordering on hate speech. This needs to stop.

 

Roads Are For Road Users

Change is coming, and the changes to the Highway Code are a step in the right direction, albeit a small step. The next generation of drivers who learn the revised Highway Code will hopefully lead the way in this change.

We need to wave a final farewell to the I pay my road tax attitude and accept that roads are for road users. ALL road users.

Enough with the rights, let’s focus on responsibilities.

And yes, I do mean responsibilities for ALL road users.