Latest news straight to your inbox Subscribe Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice Invalid Email

We know that our readers often hold strong opinions on subjects and we are committed to providing a platform for people to have their say. Here cyclist Mike Doneghan gives his view on the recent dispute with a cabbie.

IT is hard to know where to begin to challenge the mendacious inaccuracies in the headline article ‘Vigilante cycle gang attack taxi in bus lane’ (Mail, October), which is understandably being perceived by the cycling community as a hatchet job.

The real story here is the beginnings of a protest movement demanding a safer environment for cyclists.

There have been numerous avoidable deaths of cyclists in Birmingham recently including 13-year-old Hope Fennell and mother-of-five Muthumanaka Pinhamy.

This protest was initiated in response to a cyclist who was knocked of their bike at that very crossing just two weeks ago and, as such, the cyclists of Birmingham are taking a lead by deciding that enough is enough.

Astonishingly, the police actually assisted the taxi driver in breaking the law, leading to him driving on the incorrect side of the road into a crowd of cyclists, resulting in his wing mirror coming into contact with a cyclist.

Instead or reporting both sides of the story, the Mail has smeared and dehumanised this considerate group of people by referring to them as a ‘gang of vigilantes’.

Conversely, the taxi driver is sympathetically referred to as a ‘dad-of-five’ and his refusal to take responsibility for his illegal actions goes unchallenged.

Blaming the signage is a poor excuse and it is astonishing that the taxi driver’s aggressive attempts to force his vehicle through a crowd of cyclists is framed simply as ‘I tried to move around them’. Presumably he had numerous opportunities to reverse his vehicle and use the correct lane, but chose to stand-off with the people protesting and force his way through.

Many cyclists are of the opinion that there is a small minority of drivers who act aggressively towards them – for example carrying out ‘punishment passes’ where drivers accelerate fast past cyclists at close distance, a punishment for some perceived intransigence, or perhaps a resentment over cyclists’ ability to weave in and out of traffic. This needs to be understood for what it really is – not a minor driving offence, but a threat comparable to waving a smashed bottle in front of someone’s face outside a pub late at night.

There is a clear problem with the attitude of the authorities regarding dangerous driving and attacks against cyclists.

Darren Foster, the driver involved in the fatal accident with Hope Fennell, has received just a one-year driving ban. In a matter of months Darren Foster could be at the wheel of a lorry trundling through YOUR neighbourhood.

Whilst prison sentences are rarely constructive, there is a strong argument that people who have killed on the road due to negligence should never drive again.

Dangerous driving should result in short bans rather than fines or licence points. This would increase the likelihood that dangerous drivers would become experienced at cycling out of necessity and therefore be able to empathise with the predicament of cyclists.

There is a continuum between the authorities’ failure to protect the public from Darren Foster and the police’s refusal to hold this taxi driver to account, therefore it is vitally important for the police and local authorities to deter drivers from putting cyclists at risk.

Over the years the media has played a significant role in engendering negative attitudes towards cyclists.

There have been suspicions that the sentiments espoused by the likes of Jeremy Clarkson could have resulted in a country-wide spate of unprovoked attacks involving cyclists being pushed off their bikes.

In this context, this article is deeply irresponsible and will serve only to further entrench such hostile attitudes within a small minority of dangerous drivers.

The Mail needs to understand that the articles it publishes have real-life consequences and that those consequences could be very serious indeed for this group of road users.

The Mail has a choice ahead of it – to continue publishing articles which engender the view that cyclists are second class citizens or do everything in it’s power to make our city a safer and more equal place for cyclists.

Which is it to be?

* Editor’s note: The Birmingham Mail is satisfied that its report was accurate, fair and responsible. This was a serious incident in which the police were involved and, as such, was of public interest. The comments by the taxi driver were balanced by quotes from a spokesman for the cyclist, police and the council. Rest assured, we do not condone illegal or dangerous behaviour of any kind.

* If any other of our readers want to submit articles about issues that really matter to them, email letters@birminghammail.net and we’ll consider them for publication. Please put ‘Your Viewpoint’ in the subject line.