Many of you who have followed us here at Stayin’ Alive at 1.5, will have welcomed Minister Shane Ross’s announcement of his intention to introduce a cyclist specific  minimum passing distance law (MPDL).

That was on February 28th

Here are a couple of reminders..

 

Minister Shane Ross on his new law on minimum passing distance for cyclists pic.twitter.com/GWj92WMK4n

— Christina Finn (@christinafinn8) February 28, 2018

My few words following Minister Ross’s announcement of intention to legislate. (Not available in page viewer)

 

GETTING TO THIS STAGE

It came just shy of our 5th anniversary of singularly focused lobbying for this legislative clarity of our overtaking legislation relating to bicycle riders. 

During that time many of you have signed our MPDL petition, both online or in person, at various events that we gave up our time to be at. 

Some of you will have written to three different Transport Ministers during this time. Others did pre-election lobbying in the form of a copy paste letter from our website. 

Many of you will have and are displaying our campaign sticker on your vehicle, wearing our cycling jersey/gilet with our 1.5 Metres please pass with Care message. 

Some of you will have protested at our jointly led die-in outside Leinster House. 

Others have followed our social media and provided valuable feedback and opinion, not just from Ireland but from many countries worldwide. 

Ministers, councillors and local authorities have come on board in understanding the true importance of getting a solution to a real problem of the intimidation of riders from close passing. This list is a long one, much too long for this piece to cover..

With this in mind, whatever your involvement to date, we want to thank you all; 

We simply wouldn’t be at this stage without you..

 

On that snowy day in February, I left our MPDL pre press meeting with a cheesy grin, in the understanding that as this law would be introduced as secondary legislation and that this would happen in a matter of weeks. However, it transpired that several stumbling blocks regarding introduction of MPDL were being encountered within the Attorney General’s office.

 

 

 

Last month, I, along with Ciaran Cannon, Colm Ryder and Marie Casserly attended a meeting with relevant officials at which a legal representative of the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport said that there were constitutional rights and practical problems with MPDL that could not be overcome. 

They said that MPDL was unlikely to happen in the format in which it was proposed. 

They were keen to tackle the issue of close passing of cyclists, and proposed a new dangerous overtaking of cyclists law. 

This would involve an increased penalty and extra penalty points for those found guilty. This would not include a defined minimum passing distance, which the department feels is “workable”

(This is a link to an opinion piece that I did for The Times on what exactly I feel IS workable)

 

Bear in mind though that the DTTAS are still awaiting the outcome of the legal advice from the AGO regarding proposals for the overtaking of cyclists offence, so this is not a done deal yet.

 

 

In a nutshell, they felt that MPDL in its originally proposed format would not withstand a challenge in court. 

(You can understand my frustration at hearing that and expressed in no uncertain terms that almost 50 jurisdictions worldwide have provided for this legislation already and the fact that we now couldn’t seem to follow suit despite ministerial support, may suggest that our system is truly flawed – I may even have called us out as being a ‘banana republic’ out of this frustration..)

 

However, if ministerial support cannot even bring it about in the Irish context, then I’m not so precious as to think that there are no other ways to tackle the issue. 

 

Our new reality is that we don’t seem to be able to legislate for MPDL. 

The very measurement that we have fought for would seem to be the main problem, as it’s exact measurement might need to be proven in the event of a legal challenge.

For now MPDL has come to a crossroads, the measured legislative road seems like a dead end as things stand.

Of course that may change in the future. 

 

We assume the the Attorney General’s office (AG) is non political and this being the case, then we also have to assume that this same stumbling block will be encountered, irrespective of which political party, minister, or even Kim Jong-un himself proposes this legislation in the future.  

If this is not the case, and I have no current reason to believe otherwise, then our problems may lie much deeper than implementing minimum passing distance law.

 

So, where to from here?

To use that awful phrase ‘we are where we are’

It’s been one hell of a journey but we are now at a crossroads and I would like to share my thoughts with you..

It’s a bit of a long read so grab a cuppa but do please stick with it. I don’t expect you to agree with it all of its contents but from 5 years of ‘obsessive’ interest in this topic, here goes..

 

Before we do though, it’s important to recognise, what skin you have in the game when proposing a minimum passing distance law…

Opponents of it will have their say in many ways and there can be some unintended consequences. Matters such as 2 abreast cycling, increased fines for cyclists, legalizing overtaking on solid white lines are just some that I’ve seen from overseas. Further ‘opportunities’ can present themselves in the guise of mandatory helmet laws, mandatory hi-viz etc.

I have always been very guarded when campaigning for MPDL to protect these..

Sometimes though, campaigns don’t come out as ‘clean’ as originally thought and when such an opportunity presents itself, then it can be seen as a positive.

 

Firstly, let’s say we had a different meeting on that day. 

Let’s say that instead of pointing out to us the potential that MPDL had of becoming a paper tiger, that everyone agreed with the originally proposed MPDL and popped this directly into law as proposed. 

What then? 

Many would have thought, job done. 

The following day, we could have all have gone out into our new cycling utopia and the roads would now be a safer place for bicycle riders, free forever of the dreaded close pass. 

 

Well it simply isn’t that simple..! 

Many places have done just that already and haven’t added the essential ingredients of awareness and enforcement and have seen little change. 

That should come as little surprise..

This is also ‘unsurprisingly’ what came out of the RSA report into MPDL. 

Simply put, if this, or other traffic law worked in any other way, our RSA and traffic corps would become redundant..

 

Many of you will be aware of the excellent work pioneered by Officers Hodson and Hudson from the West Midlands Police in England. 

They and other police units conduct sting-type operations where a police officer goes cycling. Close passes are reported to other officers and the offender is given the option of attending an awareness session or paying a fine. This has developed to include third-party video footage submissions. It is a relatively new model having being instigated in 2016.

We look across the Irish Sea longing for our own Gardaí to give Irish riders similar protections. 

In their first year of introduction of their gold standard operation close pass, the number of cyclists killed or seriously hurt on the region’s roads had dropped by a fifth. in their area.

In the context of Ireland’s 15 rider fatalities for last year, this could be three less doors that our gardaí have to knock on to inform some unfortunate family of the preventable loss of a loved one.

But here’s the thing that causes much confusion. The U.K. does NOT have a cyclist specific minimum passing distance law.

The police in various areas there use current driving without due care and attention laws to enforce this. 

This is how operation close pass works as reported by BBC Inside Out South.

The enforcement piece starts at 3 minutes.

 

(Video supplied by presenter Jon Cutrill and is for education purposes only)

 

In fact this was a point made by the AA’s Conor Faughnan in an opposing piece on proposed MPDL for the journal.ie debate room and if he proves to be correct, I will happily shake his hand. 

“There is definitely a problem here. There is a minority of motorists who are obnoxious to the point of being dangerous when they pass cyclists. The AA has no problem with those individuals being fined and given penalty points.

The best way to do that though is to use existing laws. It is already an offence to drive a car “without reasonable consideration

 

In terms of enforcement, let’s compare this to Queensland, Australia where MPDL was introduced over 4 years ago. I follow many pages from there and enforcement has been a real stumbling block (Roughly 3 infringements per month). For starters, that’s 3 more per month than we see in Ireland currently where the ‘no contact no harm’ method seems the standard measure. 

 

We get many close pass clips shared with us on our Stayin’ Alive at 1.5 social media and by email. The hope would be, whatever tool you need to employ to help put an end to this close passing intimidation, it would do as it says on the tin. 

Let’s compare models using video clips. 

This one is from Queensland submitted to the Queensland Police by Cameron Frewer. 

It’s a similar clip that we see many riders sharing online..

 

 

This wasn’t seen as an infringement by the Queensland police. 

This may surprise many of you but there are several other examples from Cameron alone..

Many such clips have ended up in disappointment in Queensland. 

Many excuses are used, from police discretion, to public interest to unfairness to indeed, community expectations (whatever that is..) etc.

They are currently working through this problem and will hopefully make the necessary progress.

Unlike the U.K., where some close passes have survived court challenge under due care and attention laws,  Queensland’s MPDL has not yet been challenged in court. 

 

 

I decided to do a little experiment with Cameron’s first clip here involving the red Kia and sent it on to the West Midlands Police a couple of weeks ago. Bear in mind, the U.K. doesn’t have MPDL at their disposal. 

They came back to me with a very direct response..

 

 “We would prosecute for driving without due care and attention on the basis of the video”.

 

In fact the West Midlands Police would argue that the addition of a measurement in law would make their job harder as the onus of proof is higher. 

 

We should also note that this is not always perfect either with this one for example slipping through the net in their own area..

https://road.cc/content/news/234384-near-miss-day-73-motorist-passes-cyclist-so-closely-make-contact-adult-language

 

 

The U.K.’S chief cycling lobby group, Cycling U.K, would make a similar argument regarding distance as the West Midlands Police. 

In their article issued at the end of June, they stated: 

“Cycling UK is not recommending an MDL. This is because it would be difficult to enforce given the need to establish in evidence the exact distance and speed of the overtaking vehicle, if the minimum distance set by the law were linked to driving speed.

By way of example: if the minimum distance set were 1.5 metres at under 30 mph, and 2.0 metres above that speed, then the police might have to prove that a driver was travelling at 31 mph rather than 29 mph. Equally, the driver might dispute the alleged distance – they might claim it was 1.45 metres, and the police that it was 1.55 metres

This is basically is what our DTTAS is telling us too.

 

I have always been of the view that, the burden of proof would be to establish beyond reasonable doubt that a vehicle encroached the defined minimum lateral space. Their legal advice though would be that if this legislation were challenged, that the precise measurement might need to be proven. 

Exact measurements in respect to passing distances are very difficult to ascertain with 100% provable accuracy.

Beyond reasonable doubt less so, as you can make estimates with camera footage based on identifiable road features etc., but not in all cases..

The ultrasonic device C3FT, because it’s mounted on a bicycle (which is itself moving) doesn’t seem to be able to overcome this either (I did pose that question)

These are some of the methods used with MPDL overseas but the exact distance if that’s the case, could be seen as a stumbling block.

https://www.safecyclingireland.org/mpdl-enforceme

 

I have had some private conversations with senior traffic corps and this defined measurement is their perceived stumbling block too. 

For this to work, we certainly need the support of the Gardaí and if the exact measurement is an issue for them (for now), then we have to listen to that. 

Anything else will allow Queensland style excuses. 

 

The flip side of this when we look at MPDL as originally proposed though, is that particular model would have potentially allowed us to police an arbitrary lateral distance. Our new DTTAS proposed one may refer more to inch fly-bys, and this is the trade off. 

Since it would appear that we can’t legally copper fasten 1 metre and 1.5 metres in to legislation, then maybe to allow some discretionary ‘wiggle room’, we should look closer at putting our ‘recommended’ distances out to 1.5 and 2 metres respectively.

This is in keeping with what Cycling UK are seeking (see above)

 

I wrote this blog in Dec last year https://www.safecyclingireland.org/how-do-we-solve-a-problem-like-close-pass/

and I would ask you to spend a little time with it and watch the attached videos which show different models of how the problem of close passing can be solved. I don’t think any of them are perfect in their own right but when pieces are cherry picked from each model, we just could have led the way with this in Ireland. 

That was where I really wanted this to go but alas that is not to be…(at least for now..)

In the fullness of time though with continued Road Safety Authority messaging and the proposed change in the rules of the road further defining this distance, this may form part of case law and work by that means. 

That is in essence how the German model of close passing seems to work. 

 

Now some opponents of MPDL such as the IRHA may see this as some type of victory but nothing could be further from the truth.

There was an interesting case in the U.K. where a truck driver received a court summons for close passing a rider under due care and attention laws.

 

On seeing the footage the driver felt he did nothing wrong and challenged the £100 fine and 3 penalty points. He was subsequently found guilty and was ordered to pay fines and costs totalling £1,038 and given five points on his licence, but still didn’t seem to accept that he was at fault. 

Full story here

Indeed, strong messaging around safe passing in the U.K. is relatively new and their Highway Code doesn’t include a measurement. Even the wording itself is quite vague so there’s every possibility the driver didn’t realise he had done anything wrong. 

On the other hand in Ireland, there can scarcely be anyone who isn’t at least aware of the safe passing message at this stage and we DO have a measurement in our rules of the road. 

Personally I believe this to be a fairer way of dealing with this problem. 

Some close passes seem to come from a position of ignorance rather than malicious intent and this is where further awareness along with appropriate light and heavy policing comes in. 

However, the carrot needs to go out the window to deal with the ‘aware but don’t care’ drivers.  

Note: From personal experience and feedback from many others, truck drivers in the main are some of the most careful out there but could benefit from the addition and further clarity of the safe passing message in driver CPC training. 

 

So you may ask, what exactly will be the benefit of the addition of making the dangerous overtaking of a bicycle rider a specific offence without a specific measurement?

Well, right off the bat, the answer is very little really. 

Bear in mind that there has never been anything stopping our Gardaí from initiating a West Midlands style operation close pass but it’s addition if rolled out properly should add some focus.

However, the addition of this law as a stand alone measure would be very unlikely to change much. (It’s been offered before – See next paragraph 

But it’s existence will now allow us to ask for direct figures for the enforcement of this new law. We simply couldn’t get them before and the narrative was that may lay hiddden in other traffic infringements but I’m not convinced.

Importantly, when it is in place, we need to latch on to it immediately and demand quarterly figures to ensure that we hit the ground running. 

We also need more tools to be provided to the Gardaí that compliment enforcement techniques such as this one from the UK.

Here, the rider was close passed and the resulting police action is under the clip.

 

Here the driver was sent on a driver awareness course. This costs around £100 to the driver and takes a full day and is a national standard to re-educate drivers about using the road safely. Insurance companies can ask if the driver has been sent on such a course and it may effect costs in the future. If the driver reoffends in the next three years, they can’t do the course and must take penalty points or court action.

 

 

A couple of years ago along with Regina Doherty & Ciaran Cannon (both of whom, I can’t praise highly enough in this process) met some of the same officials and the RSA. This addition was suggested as an alternative at that stage and I felt then that this was simply a box ticker and would have had little actual effect. 

Bear in mind this was prior to the West Midlands Police initiative and would no doubt have just been popped in to legislation with little awareness (the offer at the time from the RSA was to add the 1.5 message to their backpack cover which I didn’t feel went far enough) and possibly zero enforcement (especially as Garda numbers were decimated at the time) 

This would also have put the Stayin’ Alive at 1.5 campaign to bed when there would have been much unfinished business. 

 

So what’s changed? Why is it different now? 

Further campaigning has brought us to a very good place; a much better place than we were at after that first meeting. 

The Stayin’ Alive at 1.5 campaign developed and fostered a good working relationship with the RSA: We helped with their radio ad. They funded the Stayin’ Alive at 1.5 developed awareness mat and invited us to display it and offer education sessions in their interactive village at events such as the Tullamore Show and the National Ploughing Championships. (A tough gig and in the future, I hope will be led by the Gardaí)

The current safe passing ad that is screened on our TVs came about through our suggestion. The May bank holiday RSA safety initiative focused on safe passing distance which I was invited to.

Some of these, along with further campaigning, culminated in being awarded with the RSA CEO’s leading lights, special recognition award along with a joint RSA/SIMI outstanding personal contribution award. (We were also presented with an IRVA light of hope award which I treasure).

 

Following our die-in protest in November last year, I along with members of Dublin Cycling Campaign and IBikeDublin met with Fianna Fáil transport minister Robert Troy.  As a result, MPDL was proposed to be added to the traffic bill. Politicians were lobbied by us, IBikeDublin, cyclist.ie members and various associated cycling groups who are too numerous to mention. This was assisted by the Irish Road Victims Association, cycling Ireland, triathlon Ireland etc and a real cohesive voice was heard. Ultimately, Deputy Troy’s bill was thrown out by the attorney general as not being relevant to the traffic bill but the need for a tool to solve the issue of close passing had come firmly to the fore. 

 

Crucial too was a meeting that that I had with Shane Ross in Sept last year. At the end of that meeting, he gave me an undertaking that his department would look more closely at the Queensland model of MPDL. This eventually led to the RSA review of MPDL. 

Note: Much has been made of the RSA not recommending the introduction of a minimum passing distance law. Their reasoning was far less forceful.  “At present, there is limited empirical evidence currently available to support the implementation of MPD legislation. The potential safety benefits and arguments put forward in support of motorists observing safe passing distances for cyclists in Ireland must be acknowledged…”

Most importantly in the context of our aforementioned ingredients, were some of the recommendations that were made in this report, including..

*  An education and awareness campaign recommending an advisory MPD of 1m on roads with a ≤50km/h speed limit, and 1.5m on roads with a >50 km/h speed limit, be implemented in the Republic of Ireland.

*  Inclusion of recommended MPDs (i.e. 1m on roads with a ≤50km/h speed limit, and 1.5m on roads with a >50 km/h speed limit) in the official Driver Theory Test material and test questions, and in the Rules of the Road publication, to educate young and novice drivers as to the importance of safe passing distances for cyclists.

*  In light of increasing numbers of cyclists on Irish roads, and increasing numbers of casualties since 2012, it is recommended that An Garda Síochána place a greater emphasis on enforcing unsafe motorist-cyclist interactions, including potentially enforcing an advisory MPD, or prioritising the enforcement of the existing legislation on unsafe overtaking.

http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Consultations/Cycling%20MPD/Examining%20the%20International%20Research%20Evidence%20in%20relation%20to%20Minimum%20Passing%20Distances%20for%20Cyclists.pdf

 

These are some of the recommendations and they are crucial in the overall context. 

Without taking this campaign to this point, I’m not sure we could have had these..We certainly didn’t after our first meeting. 

 

The support of the Times Irish Edition announced early this year has been absolutely invaluable. Richie Oakley is a bicycle rider and really gets what this is about and my liaison journalist, Catherine Sanz has been a joy to engage with. 

The most important statement that she has gotten from the dept Transport followed our most recent meeting and it a big bold statement on public record that we need to keep the DTTAS honest on. 

“Whilst it is acknowledged that legal obstacles have been identified by the attorney general, the minister is determined to introduce equivalent and enforceable measures that will provide for the protection of cyclists and improve the behaviour of motorists towards these vulnerable road users,”

 

To add to this, I attended the launch of RSA/Garda May bank holiday launch of the safe passing message. At this was Assistant Commissioner David Sheahan who said on that occasion, that there would be consequences if motorists were not mindful of cyclists.

“We are anticipating the MPDL legislation coming into effect soon but all gardaí have been warned to pull over any drivers found to be overtaking cyclists dangerously.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/my-articles/steer-clear-of-cyclists-or-be-stopped-garda-warn-0trg0p5kw

 

Between the RSA recommendations, Assistant Commissioner David Sheahan‘s statement and that of the DTTAS, we have the genesis of a working model if they are true to their word. This is now THEIR recommendation and the onus is on them to make this work and on us to keep them honest. 

We need ALL stakeholders involved, including the Gardaí. 

Ideally, this would involve a conference with the West Midlands Police and a more efficient model of accepting video footage as they do in some of the more progressive areas the U.K.  

This could indeed present a golden opportunity for the Gardaí as written in this article in the times by Conor Lally.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/new-close-pass-cycling-rules-a-golden-opportunity-for-garda-1.2985490

 

At our recent meeting, it was proposed by DTTAS that we set up cycling advisory committee and have it chaired by the minister for Transport so that it doesn’t become just another ineffective talk shop…

In light of this there will be many points of discussion that need to be fast tracked. 

We need to stop plucking low hanging fruit..

We need to fast track dedicated cycling infrastructure

MPDL has never been touted as a substitute for that a neither should it ever be!

We need to start accurately collecting cyclist collision data and separate sports cycling from everyday cycling within that dataset. 

We need to roll out safe passing signage. 

We need at least 20% of driver theory test questions to relate to vulnerable road users. 

We need a specific module in driver CPC, preferably delivered by a cycle right instructor.

We need further non apologetic and clear, cyclist awareness ads such as this one from the USA

 

 

We need our agencies to start replying to misinformation posted in comments from various social media posts on their pages. Misinformation and confirmation bias are strange bedfellows but live happily on social media and it’s important that our agencies don’t seem ineffective in the face of this. 

These agencies include the RSA, Garda Traffic and the Dept. Transport. 

We need to conduct a statewide audit on cycling infrastructure 

etc…etc….etc…

 

So there we have it. Thanks for staying with it!

Our key components of (a type of) legislation, awareness and enforcement now seem to be in play but they need to ALL tie in to make this work and in the Irish context, we are starting from a low base..

To make a success of this we need to go all in. 

I cannot repeat that often enough. It needs to go ALL IN! 

Grasping at low hanging fruits won’t get us there; we need to grasp the nettle!

This was always going to be the case whichever model we ended up with. 

Anything else will butter few parsnips…

Phil.