Jeremy Vine criticises driver for passing five-year-old cyclist, sparking online debate
We got the definitive answer from a road safety expert
A video of a five-year-old cyclist being passed by a motorist has sparked an online debate after broadcaster and cycling advocate Jeremy Vine shared it on Twitter, claiming motorists who can’t see why the driver was at fault should cut up their licence.
The video by Twitter user AZB shows a child cycling along a residential street in the Kingston-upon-Thames area, with vehicles parked on both sides. A car approaching from the other direction passes without incident but the parent filming the ride from another bicycle behind admonishes the driver for not slowing or stopping.
“How can we expect parents to let their kids ride to school if this is how their neighbours drive towards them?” wrote AZB in their post on November 4. “He’s five by the way and this is 100m from his home.”
A follow-up tweet read: “This is what happens when you don’t provide safe cycling infrastructure around schools or on the way to schools … Today it was my child but it could easily have been yours or anyone else.”
Jeremy Vine retweeted the video this morning, causing it to go viral. Backing the cyclist’s claims, Vine wrote: “This clip now has 1.6m views, and 75% of people responding are defending the car driver. The child is FIVE. The driver MUST go dead slow, or stop.
“Any petrosexual who can’t see this needs to cut up their driving licence and send the pieces back to the DVLA.”
However some on Twitter questioned AZB’s parenting.
“No real danger of ever hitting the child unless he somehow fell or came off the bike,” Amato86 wrote.
“Biggest issue here is why such a young child being put on a busy main road in poor weather conditions. Horrific parenting.”
Mike O’H went further: “No sensible parent lets their 5 year old wobble along an obstructed road alongside traffic. Madness. I hope the police had a word with this poor kid’s parents over duty of care.”
Other examined the video and posted still images in an attempt to prove their arguments that either the cyclists or driver were at fault.
AZB simply had this to say about the fact that so many people had an opinion on the matter:
“It’s safe to say that my notifications have blown up. So if you’re being sensible and supportive, thank you. If you’re victim blaming or anything else then just have a little think about yourself.”
What the highway code says
One road safety expert who trains motorists and riders on best practice on the roads told Driving.co.uk the cyclists have a right to feel aggrieved.
Tim Shallcross of IAM Roadsmart said: “There is no minimum age limit for cycling on a road; the lad is a little younger than most cycling organisations recommend to be on a road, but he’s certainly riding competently and with confidence and under supervision, so no problem there.”
Shallcross also pointed out the final paragraph of Rule H3 in the highway code, which was updated in January this year with a hierarchy of road users designed to protect the most vulnerable, including horse riders and cyclists.
Rule H3, for drivers and motorcyclists, states:
“You should stop and wait for a safe gap in the flow of cyclists if necessary. This includes when cyclists are:
- approaching, passing or moving off from a junction
- moving past or waiting alongside stationary or
- slow-moving traffic travelling around a roundabout
Shallcross highlighted the second bullet point as applying in this case.
“The cyclist reached the parked vehicles on his side of the road before the car reached them on the other side,” he told us. “He’s also sensibly keeping away from the parked vehicles to minimise the risk if a door opens.
“Highway code guidance is for cars to give 1.5m clearance to cyclists in 30mph limit, and since the cyclist was already passing parked vehicles and there was clearly not room for 1.5m clearance, the car should have waited until the cyclist was clear before carrying on.”
Shallcross also noted that the highway code rule uses the word “should” instead of “must”, which means no specific law applies. But he said even so, drivers should never forget the definition of careless driving — “driving below the standard expected of a careful and competent driver” — which is a punishable offence.
He said: “A careful and competent driver would be aware of the rules and advice in the highway code and obey them. Ignoring or contravening a ‘should’ rule is not driving to the standard and therefore the driver could be guilty of careless driving in one of its forms.”
Related articles
- If you were interested in this story about Jeremy Vine admonishing a driver who passed a five-year-old cyclist, you may be interested in the full changes to the highway code announced earlier in 2022
- You might also be interested to know the highway code is changing to allow drivers to read books and watch moves behind the wheel
- And don’t miss what this charity had to say about using headphones while cycling
Latest articles
- Hyundai Ioniq 9 seven-seat electric SUV gets claimed 385 miles per charge
- Jaguar XJS reinvented as 660bhp ‘Supercat’ by resurrected racing specialists TWR
- Jaguar asks customers to ‘delete ordinary’ in make-or-break brand reinvention
- Extended test: Genesis Electrified GV70 2024 review
- First look at Jaguar’s electric future as four-door grand tourer begins on-road testing
- Abarth 600e 2025 review: Another welcome hot hatch for the electric generation
- Ford Explorer 2024 review: Electric crossover needs to be a monster hit, but is it a Frankenstein’s mismatch of parts?
- Leapmotor C10 2024 review: Chinese SUV needs to compete on more than just price
- Rolls-Royce Cullinan II 2024 review: Makes a statement … but is it the right one?
