Bit of road sense

IT seems that the responses to the issue of presumed liability have struck a defensive nerve with the Road Share Campaign for Presumed Liability.

I cannot speak for the other two correspondents cited by Chris Oliver (Letters, 21 June) but I do wish he had fully read and understood the thrust of my letter. Nowhere do I state, or infer, that I am happy with the road safety status quo. Rather I note that, “Roads are dangerous not just for cyclists and pedestrians but for vehicle drivers too”.

However I do have an issue with the haughty – and holier than thou – attitude of many cyclists and cycling groups, and their lack of the acceptance of responsibility and authority.

Are they pavement users or road users? If the latter, I as a car driver, do not have a problem with that and would welcome improvements to our roads network and infrastructure that would promote safety for all users.

Cyclists, however, must follow and be subject to the same rules of the road, and be required to have in place some form of, at least, third party insurance. Also some form of identification, whether by registration or licensing, for which a nominal charge would be levied which would contribute in some way to the cost of road improvements needed to maintain and improve safety.

David J Mackenzie

Keith Place

Inverkeithing, Fife