Bring Back The Green Cross Code

How many of you are aware of the pending changes to the Highway Code, due to come in to force on 29 January 2022?

No, me neither. Nor were my friends in the pub when I asked them last night.

The rules are still pending ratification by parliament which, given their current predicament of trying to work out whether they were at parties or not, means they still might not come in to force. But, while some of the changes seem obvious, there are others that I think are going to cause problems, are largely unnecessary, and highly likely to cause frustration if not injury.

The hierarchy of responsibility changes - those vehicles more likely to cause the greatest damage in the event of a collision carry more responsibility. The priority for cyclists is changing, as is when and where motorists should give way to pedestrians.

"With great size comes great responsibility." [sic] This new rule lays the onus more on drivers of bigger vehicles who's size and/or weight (the vehicle's, not the bod behind the wheel...) means they must ensure they take more care, give more room, allow greater stopping distance etc. Seems common sense but there's no accounting for stupidity from the drivers of smaller vehicles and the driver of a bigger vehicle can't always predict what's going to happen. While it might seem to make sense when an accident occurs between a lorry and a car, how long before insurance companies start blaming the driver of the Range Rover when a driver of a Corsa has driven in to the back of it?

And, as a cyclist, I get the new definition around where a bike can be on the road. Out of courtesy, I always try to stay to the inside of the lane where possible when cycling but, depending on the condition of the road surface or the time of day, I have ridden further out in to the lane to be more visible or prevent a front wheel tragedy with a kerbside pothole. Previously, there was no definition where the cyclist should ride in a lane but now it does define that cyclists can ride further out in to the lane to be safer. Cue more motorists shaking their fists at us and passing us closer than ever before.

It also gives priority to cyclists at junctions. As a motorist, if I've seen a bike ahead of me as I'm approaching a junction I need to turn in to I've never tried to pass the bike first but, as a cyclist, I've experienced many drivers do just that to me, either because they've simply not judged time and distance or because they just don't want to be held up a few seconds on their journey.

This new rule in the Code makes sense and should make road use for cyclists safer. Should. Most drivers, even if aware of it, will simply ignore it and pass the cyclist anyway.

However, this next rule makes no sense to me at all: at junctions, drivers, motorcyclists and cyclists must now give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road in to which or from the vehicle is turning, regardless of whether it is a marked crossing for the pedestrian or not.

What?

No driver, turning left off a busy road and seeing a pedestrian standing at the corner waiting to cross, is going to stop. The driver is then at risk of being shunted from behind by traffic still progressing.

Worse, should a pedestrian take it upon themselves to step out in to the road because they now have priority over the turning vehicle, and they will, they are likely to meet limb with bonnet. Why did this rule ever need to change?

It makes no sense whatsoever and just makes crossing the road even more dangerous for pedestrians rather than safer.

I think it's time to bring back the Green Cross Code Man.

What do you think to these new rules? Did you even know they were happening? And, for a bonus point, what other famous role did the Green Cross Code actor play?