Who’s cracked the road code?

So how are the Highway Code changes going for you? What do you mean you don’t know about them? If you don’t you’re not alone as according to the AA up to a third of people aren’t aware of the changes - some of which are pretty significant.

I had some experience of them driving into Peterborough city centre at the weekend.

As I went to turn left a woman was waiting to cross the road. As per the new rules I stopped and waved her across.

She looked perplexed and motioned me to continue. It was a recipe for disaster what if I moved forward and then she started to cross.

Thankfully, I drove on slowly and she stayed where she was.

A few hundred yards up the road there were a pair of cyclists riding two abreast.

They were travelling less than 15 mph and given the nature of the road – parked cars, bends and, of course, oncoming vehicles – there was no safe place to pass for a considerable distance.

It was frustrating and although the rule is designed to make it safer for cyclists it’s not hard to imagine with the attitude of some drivers how it might lead to the opposite.

One of the key changes – and the Government has been criticised for not communicating this better – is that the hierarchy of road users has been changed.

That means pedestrians have priority , then cyclists down through cars and others and finally to lorries and buses.

Now clearly this will come as a shock to some car drivers who literally think ( and act like) they own the road.

The new hierarchy seems sensible to me –in fact I assumed it was always what it has now been changed to! Confused?

The Highway Code is not law – but many of its rules are backed up by laws. Confused?

In doing some research for this column I learned that where the codes states you ‘must’ or ‘must not’ do something that is a law.

However, where it says ‘should’ or ‘should not’ it isn’t.

Which brings me back to my two abreast cycling friends.

The new code says people cycling in groups “should be considerate of the needs of other road users when riding in groups; can ride two abreast - and it can be safer to do so, particularly in larger groups or when accompanying children or less experienced riders.’’

It adds: “People cycling are asked to be aware of people driving behind them and allow them to overtake (for example, by moving into single file or stopping) when it’s safe to do so.’’

All of which my lycra-clad cycling pals ignored.

The problem is that car drivers, cyclists, pedestrians ( and I’m looking at you dog walkers) all have their fair share of selfish militants.

A bit of common sense, compromise and courtesy would make it much safer and pleasant for us all whether we have four wheels, two wheels or none.

My post lockdown life mirrors the new hierarchy – I am a pedestrian, a cyclist and a car driver in that order.

But in this city the car is king.

During the lockdown the city council was given shedloads of Government (our) cash to encourage cycling. The only tangible result was some half-hearted cycle lanes that the council couldn’t get rid of quick enough.Did the lanes lead to more cycling? – no, of course, they didn’t. They weren’t there long enough and doing one small section on a dangerous route was unlikely to change anything. Joined up cyclepaths = joined up thinking.

Ironically, the new rules allied to the sheer bloody mindedness of some two wheelers and a consequent slowing of traffic might make the city council, and car drivers, realise that cycle lanes are a good thing.