|
 Motorcycle Action Group Manifesto for Motorcycling
MAG Manifesto Word Doc - PDF
Established in 1973 the Motorcycle Action Group (MAG UK) is a lobbying organisation that exists to protect motorcycling from indifferent legislation that threatens the pleasure of riders.
Very much a grass-roots organisation MAG represents over 50,000 motorcyclists through individual membership and affiliated motorcycle clubs.
With a regional structure of local groups throughout the UK MAG has dramatically broadened the scope of its activity and established itself as the legitimate voice of the road-riding motorcyclist in the UK and Europe through the Federation of European Motorcyclists Associations (FEMA).
MAG has taken responsibility for promoting a better motorcycling environment through local lobbying on convenience issues such as bus lane use, advanced stop lines, congestion charging and parking facilities.
The views of motorcyclists as an organized lobby group and as individual voters must be taken into consideration by political parties when presenting manifestos and promises to voters!
Therefore MAG presents its motorcycling manifesto on a wide range of issues such as, Road Safety, Mobility and Consumer issues that affect motorcyclists and calls for the political parties to include the manifesto as part of their transport policies.
Future for Motorcycling
The Government’s pre election launch of the UK’s first National Motorcycle Strategy has been welcomed by MAG.
MAG worked in conjunction with Government, the Motorcycle Industry, user groups, the police and others to deliver the strategy.
The recommendations and initiatives as laid out in the strategy would be welcome for a post election government to take forward as the main drive for implementing a positive difference for motorcycling.
Whichever party is elected to Government must take forward the clear program of the strategy, which presents a sensible, practical and deliverable package of measures including:
- Motorcycling is recognised as a "mainstream" mode of transport.
- Central and local Government to take account of motorcycling in the planning process, when designing and maintaining the road network, when managing traffic and when considering safety.
- Better training to take skills to a higher level
- Improving rider and driver attitudes and behaviour
- Improved motorbike design
- Better infrastructure and smarter traffic management.”
The National Motorcycle strategy is a beginning and must not be relegated to sit on the shelf.
Motorcycle Infrastructure
In Great Britain, at the end of 2003, the annual turnover for sales, repairs and after-market products of motorcycles, scooters and mopeds, was almost £2 billion.
This excludes peripheral suppliers such as motorcycle insurers whose annual income alone is estimated at over £405 million .
There are over thirty manufacturers selling motorcycles, scooters and mopeds through more than 3,000 franchise outlets, operating from 1,500 motorcycle dealerships, represented by industry and retailer associations.
Data provided by the Motorcycle Industry showed that the registration figures for 2003 totaled 155,693 motorcycles, scooters and mopeds combined.
Overall, in 2003 there were 1.314 million of these vehicles in circulation and based on survey data from MAG, their value is estimated at more than £4 billion.
The motorcycle industry is vibrant, not only economically but it also offers considerable benefits for the community.
For example, in terms of sustainable benefits, powered two-wheeled transport is cheap and efficient and can make an enormous contribution to the reduction of congestion.
There is scope for utilising two-wheeled transport to provide cheap and reliable solutions to rural communities and to resolve problems of urban transport for those unable to afford the high cost of a car or even public transport.
Furthermore motorcycling includes large-scale commercial activities and recreational usage such as international sporting events, numerous club events, rallies, charitable work etc.
Continued representation at government level must continue at pre election level ensuring that the needs of motorcyclists are fully considered when making future decisions whether beating congestion as a form of sustainable transport or leisure riding.
Representation
Representatives for the motorcycling community include industry, consumer organisations such as MAG and other rider groups.
At Westminster, politicians in the All Party Group on Motorcycling regularly meet to discuss motorcycling issues.
Furthermore Government bodies like the Government Advisory Group for Motorcycling, the Motorcycle Crime Reduction Group, National Motorcycle Council(NMC), Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (PACTS), the London Motorcycle Working Group (Transport for London), ROSPA, IAM, Bikesafe as well as other national and local bodies, all play a significant role in promoting and resolving motorcycling issues in general.
The Department for Transport (DfT) drew together the motorcycle community within the Government Advisory Group for Motorcycling (GAGM) and presented the National Motorcycle strategy (FEMA has produced a similar document the “European Agenda for Motorcycle Safety”.) This work will continue through the National Motorcycle Council (NMC).
MAG believes that the need for representation and support from MP’s within legislative government and the need to encourage safe and responsible motorcycling has never been greater than it is today.
The motorcycle community is a strong lobby and able to influence individual motorcyclists. MAG policies are steered from individual members these are the riders or the bikers that are voters!
Principle Aims
The principle aims, issues which MAG considers require constant dialogue are listed in the bullet points below.
- Accident Research and Statistics: Commitment to an In-depth UK analysis of motorcycle accidents
- Safety Dialogue: Forming a positive attitude towards safety – Sharing experienced riders knowledge of riding techniques, traffic strategies and machine maintenance with the novice riders, preventing accidents caused by ignorance with Pan-European educational programmes (booklets, CD Rom, website) providing accurate and precise information on key subjects
- Road Infrastructure: The safety needs of motorcyclists - Wire Rope Barriers - Diesel Spillage - Road Construction - Road Maintenance – Manhole Covers - Road Pricing and Tolls
- Intelligent Transport Systems: ISA – EVSC – motorcycle compatibility with ITS applications
- Rider Training and Testing: Voluntary post-license training – Bikesafe - Training facilities and Instructor competence
- Interactions with other road users: Bikes in Bus Lanes – Advanced Stop Lines - Driver Awareness - Collision-avoidance skills
- Personal Protective Equipment: Conspicuity - Crash Helmets – Protective Clothing
- Motorcycle Design: Leg Protectors – Noise - Daytime Lights - Anti-Tampering – Airbags
- Enforcement: Effects of enforcement – National Rider improvement scheme
- Promotion: - Liaising with Motorcycle Industry – Rider Groups - Liaising with motorcycle sport organisations
Key Areas
National Motorcycle Strategy
MAG is of the view that the National Motorcycle Strategy recommendations should be fully implemented.
That government should build on the co-operative platform developed through the motorcycle community.
To provide the resources for a sustainable strategy with involvement from government to make sure that motorcycling takes its proper place in the transport mainstream as a safe, affordable means of transport.
Motorcycle Riding Licences
MAG is of the view that the proposals contained in the Third Driving Licence Direct which aims to harmonize motorcycle licences across Europe has created a hodgepodge of differing age limits to the licence structure for riders and in doing so, has denied riders the right balance between safety, mobility and access to Powered-Two Wheelers while failing to address the real issues of motorcycle safety.
MAG calls on Government to take into account the position of Europe motorcycle industry and users, not to pay hostage to “horse trading” to gain advantage and if a sanitised position cannot be reached by the European Institutions to dismiss the motorcycle licence structure within the directive.
Bikesafe Scheme
MAG is of the view that the police run Bikesafe scheme which has government support as a legitimate component of roads policing, as promoting road safety with a proven track record and public support should receive adequate funding.
Therefore MAG calls on government to implement a national funding mechanism for Bikesafe.
MAG supports the Motorcycle Industry view to change the rules to fund Bikesafe through existing safety camera partnerships.
Bikes in Bus Lanes
MAG is of the view that motorcycles should be permitted nationally to use bus lanes.
MAG calls on government to establish a national policy for authorities to allow access for motorcycles and not mere guidelines.
Access to bus lanes for motorcycles has been available for 10 years and there has been no conclusive supporting data that motorcycles are a “safety risk”.
Because of a lack of published data authorities are reluctant to permanently establish bus lane trials relating to the roads where the experimental use of bus lanes by motorcycles has been permitted, it is difficult for outside bodies to reach any firm conclusions and therefore some are drawn from anecdotal evidence.
MAG concludes that Bus lane use will help improve safety by moving smaller commuter PTW’s such as scooters out of the main traffic flow.
Encouraging a module shift as part of an integrated solution to the problems of traffic congestion.
Allowing PTW’s to play an essential role as the most practical means of personal transportation for those who cannot afford a car thus alleviating social exclusion for the young person and those on low income.
Liberating road space for essential traffic and reducing damage to the roads infrastructure by virtue of the elementary design and weight advantages of PTW’s compared to other transport modes.
MAG also calls on government to introduce standard motorcycle signage to aid bus lane schemes in their introduction.
Parking Facilities
As with any other form of private transport, including the bicycle, motorcyclists need somewhere they can legally park at both ends of their journey.
MAG found from a survey of motorcyclists that the lack of secure parking facilities is an issue of great concern to riders
Respondents were not satisfied with provisions for motorcycle parking and commented, that the provision of anchor-points at parking places would encourage them to use a lock. A high percentage were already using some form of extra security.
The cost of motorcycle theft runs into millions of pounds. Riders are increasingly concerned to see improved security at public and commercial parking places. Site operators and local authorities are under pressure to provide secure motorcycle parking places, both on and off the highway. Fortunately, many have responded positively and found that this can be done cheaply and effectively.
On-street motorcycle parking provision requires local traffic authorities to make an Order under section 32 or 45 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Off highway parking can be provided without making an order and can often be introduced in car parks as they are refurbished. A number of authorities have pursued a policy of introducing motorcycle parking, on a percentage basis, to all car parks as they are resurfaced or re-marked
However MAG recommends that the advice on motorcycle parking, set out in the Department for Transports Traffic Advisory Leaflet is accepted and calls on government to increase the amount of available motorcycle parking, putting into effect clear standards for local, city and borough authorities.
Local Transport Plans (LTPs)
MAG has been lobbying local authorities to have motorcycles and their users included in Local Transport Plans, due for implementation in 2006.
Guidance issued by the Department for Transport on the second round of Local Transport Plans, states, in Part 2, paragraph 45:
‘In developing their programmes, local transport authorities are expected to show that they have considered the services and facilities they provide to all users of local transport networks. LTPs must therefore not only provide solutions and opportunities for drivers, walkers, cyclists, and bus and tram users, but also taxi and private hire vehicles, freight and distribution vehicles, coaches, motorcyclists, wheelchair users and equestrians.’
For many people a motorcycle is a transport mode of choice. Many parts of the country are inaccessible by public transport, and for some journeys private transport is the most practical modal choice. While many urban areas have excellent transport links, not everyone who travels there enjoys the same access from their journey’s starting point.
While they only form part of the vehicle parc, the PTW represents a viable alternative to the car for many individuals.
On average, PTWs have much better fuel economy than cars. Because they are able to ‘filter’ in stationary or slow-moving traffic their engines are switched on for less time. They also cause minimal damage to the road surface itself.
Although they represent a small proportion of the total number of vehicles on our roads, PTWs fulfil a number of functions, including their use by the emergency services.
PTWs can help deliver the shared targets of tackling congestion, delivering accessibility, safer roads and better air quality, as well as other quality of life issues.
MAG calls on government to ensure that motorcycles continue to receive appropriate attention in future reviews of planning guidance documents.
Congestion and Toll Charging
Congestion charging schemes currently exist in central London and Durham. Consultation is on-going about a proposed western extension to the London congestion charging zone.
In all two schemes PTWs are exempt from the charge because they aid in reducing congestion.
MAG would urge that if any local congestion charging scheme is proposed then PTWs should be exempt because they do not cause congestion.
MAG further argues that PTWs should be exempt from road-user charging schemes. A PTW occupies far less of the road-space than a car. It also causes negligible damage to the road surface, unlike heavier vehicles. In their representations to Transport for London regarding the London Congestion charge, MAG successfully argued that PTWs can cause less congestion than a slow-moving bicycle in a narrow traffic lane as the bicycle can cause delays to other vehicles behind it, whereas the PTW is capable of moving at the speed of the prevalent traffic flow.
Since the introduction of the congestion charge in London, there has been an increase in PTW use, but a decrease in PTW casualties, not just in the C-charge zone, but throughout Greater London, despite an increase in PTW use. This could be because there are fewer cars to collide with PTWs, the most common cause of urban PTW accidents. This suggests that there are safety benefits to PTW users if congestion-charging schemes are introduced.
MAG is of the opinion that PTWs can assist in delivering the shared priority of reducing congestion.
MAGs definition of a highway is "a route which all persons, rich or poor, can use to pass and re-pass as often and wherever they wish without let, hindrance or charge" and endorses the European Parliament's RETT (Transport Committee) statement:
"Supports the use of all forms of public transport and improved mobility or pedestrians, including those facing barriers to access to transport, notably disabled persons and older/elderly persons, motorcyclists and cyclists, through institutional investment, subsidies and legislation reflecting this preference; emphasises the vitally important role played by local passenger services in terms of mobility and sustainable transport in towns and cities and regions, and stresses the major responsibility of local authorities in this connection."
MAG calls on government to act on rescinding charges levied on motorcycles by bridge and road toll operators and to change the Trunk Road Charging Schemes (Bridges and Tunnels) Regulations to reflect that motorcycles should be exempt from toll charges.
Diesel Spillage
A source of worry to motorcyclists is the spillage of materials on the carriageway, especially diesel, which makes the road as slippery as if it were covered in black ice. It is, however, less predictable.
Part of the problem with diesel spillage is caused by the practice of over-filling tanks which then causes diesel to spill during cornering manoeuvres. Diesel left on the road is the cause of countless deaths and injuries.MAG therefore supports the Kill Spills campaign www.killspills.org.uk
MAG calls on government to issue guidance to haulage contractors, fuel depots and filling stations. To implement the simple campaign of fixing warning stickers that “Diesel Spills Kill” to all fuel stations diesel pumps
MAG also calls on government to strive to change European regulations by:
- Introducing warning light signaling in the cabs of heavy commercial vehicles, thus informing drivers that the tank cap is missing or hasn’t been properly latched and closed.
- To support the introduction of the requirement for a chain fixing the tank cap to the filler pipe in conjunction with an un-retractable key while the tank cap is removed from the vehicle.
Crash Barriers
Metal crash barriers are extremely dangerous obstacles that can turn a fall into a fatal accident. In 2003 there was 253 motorcyclists injured in collisions with crash barriers.
The road side barrier's aim is to restrain and redirect uncontrolled vehicles with no harm to their occupant, or other road users. Posts supporting the barrier (Armco and Wire Rope) have been identified as the main impact point.
Safety fence is approved under CEN Norm EN 1317. The Federation of European Motorcyclists Associations (FEMA) produced in its Crash Barrier Report with the support of the Directorate General for Energy and Transport of the European Commission, considered: accident scenarios, types of fence, attenuation devices and rider friendly forms of safety fence, criteria to assess areas of greatest risk i.e. corners where riders are most likely to lose control.
The recommendation was that: “A European type approval procedure for motorcycle friendly crash barriers should be developed. This should be incorporated in CEN Norm EN1317.”
Motorcycles and motorcyclists are not included in the testing of crash barrier systems in CEN Norm EN1317.
MAG welcomes the testing by the Highways Agency, with the support of Kent police in providing a motorcycle friendly barrier system, a combination of Tension Corrugated Barrier and Open Box Beam, to reduce the severity of crashes associated with motorcyclist colliding with the existing safety barrier at Ashford, Kent.
MAG in association with riders groups in the Netherlands and Norway to produce a report on improving motorcyclists’ safety by improving crash barriers for FEMA.
MAG does not support any crash barrier system and is of the view that no matter what the skill of a rider in an accident, upright posts kill
MAG calls on government to amend CEN Norm EN1317 to include testing for motorcycles and motorcyclists.
Noise and Pollution
MAG does not have a solution to the problem of noise, but the solutions to excessive motorcycle noise are rider education and enforcement.
The problem with motorcycle noise comes often from: the fitment of illegal ‘after-market’ silencers.
Modern bikes, when supplied as standard, need to conform to the strict noise limits imposed by EU Directive. It is also an offence to sell a silencer that does not have prescribed approval markings for use on the road.
Many riders feel that their machine does not sound right with a standard exhaust fitment and so will fit an off-road or ‘race’ can to, in their opinion, enhance the sound of their machine. This was anticipated by MAG when the “Noise Limit” Directive was being prepared in Europe. At the time it was argued that if noise limits were set too low then a reaction from some riders would be to tamper with their machines and fit exhaust systems that were considerably louder than had previously been the norm.
Many riders believe that a loud exhaust gives them safety benefits, by making other road users aware of their presence. The popular slogan is, ‘Loud pipes save lives.’
There is a contrary argument that by creating excessive noise it merely serves to annoy not just other road users but also others in the vicinity who have no reason to hear a bike, thus creating anti-PTW sentiment which could result in anti-PTW measures being taken. The contrary slogan is, ‘Loud pipes cost rides.’
PTW emissions have, in the past, been less regulated than car emissions. New PTWs now have to meet quite strict emissions limits as laid down by EU Directive. When this came into force in June 2003 several popular models were discontinued by the manufacturers as they did not comply with the Directive.
In general, motorcycles consume less fuel than cars. While it is possible to find examples of very economic cars and very uneconomic (in terms of mpg) motorcycles, on a like for like basis (small car/small motorcycle, large car/large motorcycle), the assumption holds true. The other advantage that motorcycles have over cars is that they spend less time stuck in traffic and therefore produce fewer emissions while idling.
MAG is of the opinion that PTWs can assist in delivering the shared priority of air quality and urges government to look at noise and pollution as applied to motorcycles in scientific terms rather than the overwrought ranting dialogue of motor cycling’s detractors.
Road Casualty Statistics in Great Britain
In the endeavour of government and research institutes to find solutions for accidents and injuries on our roads, there is an ever increasing move towards more social control and the use of technology as a panacea for driver/rider behaviour. However, there are many elements that are overlooked. Therefore, in order to offer a more balanced perspective on accident statistics, MAG has analysed the Road Casualties 2003 report by the Department for Transport (DfT) and reworked casualty data. It is important to consider the DfT report on road casualties comments in the preface of the report:
“…. readers should note that while very few, if any, fatal accidents do not become known to the police, there is evidence that an appreciable proportion of non-fatal injury accidents are not reported to the police and thus are not included in this publication. In addition research has shown that up to a fifth of casualties reported to the police are not included in the statistical return”.
However, irrespective of the previous statement it is also common knowledge amongst traffic police that it is ultimately the tick in the accident report box that counts and nothing else and that is down to the officers’ perception as to the seriousness of the accident.
With that in mind, data in the report on collisions with other road users highlights that 38% of fatal PTW accidents are due to collision with cars while 43% of PTW serious injuries are due to collisions with cars. What is problematic is that there is scope to manipulate the data by including or excluding columns of severity of accidents. For example the three headings 'Fatal accidents' 'Severe Accidents' and 'Slight Accidents’ but slight accidents can be and are included in the columns for fatal accidents and serious accidents and then these have three sub totals.
By combining serious injuries from fatal accident scenes and serious accident scenes and compared them to the total of ALL accidents including slight, (See table 39 from DfT Road Casualties 2003) the data show that serious accidents compared to total accidents is proportionately about 3 times higher for PTWs (24.5%) than for cars (8.2%). Fatalities for PTWs are 2.4% of total PTW accidents compared to 0.96% for cars. This suggests that PTW fatalities are slightly more than one and a half times higher than car fatalities (1.8%) NOT the 20 or 30 times higher used by the safety lobby in order to impose more restrictions.
It is ironic that safety reports continues to identify motorcycles as “dangerous” machines, but as stated previously, 40% of all deaths and severe injuries to riders are caused by cars and as the following tables demonstrate, it is very apparent that the dangerous vehicles are cars – or rather the dangerous people are car drivers. Of all 1,310 fatalities involving collisions with other road users 1,300 involved cars colliding with cars or with more vulnerable road users and of those 773 or 60% were collisions between cars and more vulnerable road users.
The total number of collisions resulting in serious injuries was 18,015 of which 17,626 involved cars colliding with cars or with more vulnerable road users and of those, 11,079 or 63% were collisions between cars and more vulnerable road users.
The automotive industry and safety lobby have been extremely effective in finding red herrings as to the cause of accidents. While MAG UK believes that there are serious problems in relation to road engineering and road furniture, it is patently evident that there is a very serious problem with car drivers. What difference would more restrictions make to PTWs either through limiting age or horsepower or by introducing more devices such as airbags and ABS brakes?
Restricting PTWs is not the problem – because PTWs are not the only vulnerable users. Does the government also wish to stop pedestrians or cyclists as well? There is a fundamental problem of behaviour and attitude which MAG believes is specifically related to the lack of training of young car drivers and to a lesser degree, insufficient training for PTW users.
Education
Rather than eliminating portions of road users by restricting the right to choose one’s preferred means of transport simply based on data which are seriously open to interpretation, long term solutions would seem far more beneficial.
While MAG accepts that fatal and serious accidents are tragic and that driver/rider behaviour needs serious consideration in order to prevent further carnage, MAG is also of the view that educating the public could easily be achieved by starting with the young through teaching road awareness in schools - including how to drive cars, ride mopeds, scooters or motorcycles – which could become part of a curriculum.
Clearly, this is a medium, long term solution, but one which would ensure that when the time comes, the young people of our country would be capable of joining the rest of society as responsible road-wise drivers and riders rather than restricting them and praising them just for surviving.
MAG advocates that this manifesto is supported by the Prospective Parliamentary Candidates
And to be included in the Transport manifestos of their political parties
For further information or details of MAG in your area please contact:
Trevor Baird Director Of Public Affairs
MAG UK
PO Box 750
Rugby
CV21 3ZR
Tel. 0870 444 8 448
Fax. 0870 444 8
Email. public-affairs@mag-uk.org
Website: www.mag-uk.org
|
