Take different approaches to different cyclist issues

The debate in Voices regarding cyclists has been centred on cyclist accountability (“LTA should look into cyclist registration” and “Cyclists should be clear whether they are pedestrians or motorists”, Aug 7; “Heavy-handed regulation of cyclists impractical”, Aug 18).

Enforcement, punishment and licensing are being advocated in an attempt to ensure cyclists conform to some kinds of rules.

While offended pedestrians may be calling for penalties to be dished out to errant cyclists, the issue cannot be solved simply by using scare tactics.

Cyclists ride for various purposes, including recreation, transport and sport, each of which brings problems the public comments on: Motorists are angered by cyclists on the roads, and pedestrians claim to be endangered on the pavements.

Calling for a blanket licensing or punishment system does not address the issues at their roots. Rather, we are doing what we have been complaining about for decades: Being a “fine” city. This is in addition to the strain, as the latest writer noted, it would put on public resources to monitor and enforce the situation.

Different cyclist groups have different needs, in the pursuit of which inevitable friction arises, as pathways are shared with other users. But different measures must be taken to address different problems resulting from different usages of pathways.

To target problems involving commuting cyclists, they can be encouraged more to ride on bike paths instead of pavements. Part of this involves pedestrians: While bicycles are seen on pavements beside bike paths, pedestrians are similarly seen on bike paths.

Just as the Traffic Police is rewarding conscientious drivers, there should also be a positive campaign to encourage cyclists to ride appropriately and pedestrians to walk accordingly — better than always calling for negative measures to be employed.

To improve the situation with road cyclists, fostering a sharing road culture is key. Some things cyclists do, such as riding closer to the centre of the lane instead of the side, arises from their fear that drivers would squeeze them too close to the kerb, which is potentially injurious should space run out.

If cyclists are confident that drivers would look out for them when turning and not limit their riding space by driving close to them, those tactics by cyclists to safeguard themselves would not be needed.

Ultimately, the cycling issue is multifaceted. There must be different approaches to different issues, and cyclists should not be seen as an undifferentiated group of people.