Dead cyclists are today's hot topic, but what about tomorrow?

You could tell right away that the Cycling Death Review, released today in Toronto, would be a trending topic with the mainstream media.

I showed up 30 minutes early for the press briefing at Xeriscape Park at the corner of Grosvenor Street and University Avenue in Toronto and there wasn't a parking space to be found. CTV, CBC, CityTV and the lot had filled up the street, and the hottest part of this little treed square bordered by the Whitney Block and the Mowat Block in Queen's Park.

Pretty good-sized crowd at the briefing, with camera crews, print media, bloggers, cycling advocates and others. And although the review was passed out prior to the briefing and, in theory, everyone could have just taken off to read it and post their thoughts, pretty much everyone stayed to listen to chief coroner Dr. Andrew McCallum; Toronto West regional supervising coroner Dr. Dan Cass; Share the Road Cycling Coalition's Eleanor McMahon; Patrick Brown, who stood for a number of road-user groups, including Cycle Toronto, 8-80 Cities, Hoof and Cycle and United Senior Citizens of Ontario; and Toronto Police Service Const. Hugh Smith, himself a Can-Bike examiner and co-founding member of the Toronto police cycle patrol.

Can't blame the Toronto media for turning out in droves: bicycling has been a hot-button issue for the Toronto media, esp. with Toronto Mayor Rob Ford's battle against the so-called "war on cars" and all the buzz about adding and removing bike lanes.

McMahon addressed some of the vitriol, by speaking against the "overheated and irrational environment" that now exists, so over-heated that politicians are trying to figure out what they can do to please cyclists without alienating motorists.

McMahon said that cycling safety is "not a bicyclist versus motorist issue. It is us, it is we. We are all trying to navigate roads that are becoming increasingly crowded."

She might have pushed the envelop a bit too far when she said that "all Ontarians want this to change." Well, clearly, some Ontarians don't want it changed. They are happy with roads full of cars, and bicycles relegated to parks and multi-use trails that are out of sight and out of mind.

She moderated that later, but pointing out that "many" Ontarians want a better cycling environment. The "blame game is not an acceptable refuge," she told the gathering, inviting politicians to stop criticizing and make roads safer for all users.

Hers was the most political, and most passionate, of the addresses. But we'll need more than passion to make change in Ontario. We'll need commitment of cycling advocates and others to take this review and do something with it. Time to hold our politicians' feet to the fire.

Comments

[Ryan]

Unfortunately this really only matters to one 'group'...cyclists.

The media will report on it for now only because they have to. It might be cynical of me to think, but the media seems to only like playing up the "bike vs. car" stories.

It's up to cyclists to collectively push the government(s) to making improvements.

As for the "what about tomorrow"?
Local radio host said he'll be talking about bike safety tomorrow...What will his solution be (he already stated it). Helmets and that's it.
It should be noted that he is anti-bike. He won't even allow his young kids ride them.

[Graham Roe]

So Bill is this cycling report just another way to sell the news today and tomorrow?

[Frank Xavier]

Like the report or not, it is a step in the right direction. Media spin or not, it is on the headlines for a couple of days, better than not. Like it or not, with the wheels very shortly to fall off the Euro, there will soon be a lot more bicycles on the road by necessity rather than choice. Next topic when the bicycle number jacks up will be riding competence..and competency testing :) A motto that I recently came across is: "Always ride like there is an X on your back which you want everyone to see". Happy riding folks !

[Peter Parker]

I don't think you're right, Ryan.

I think many planners want to increase cycling because they see it's a WAY more efficient form of transportation for most trips. They can see how many bikes can fit into one block, versus cars.

I think many health promoters want to increase cycling, even if they don't do it themselves, because it incorporates physical activity into everyday life every day.

I think some (though maybe few) tourism promoters are seeing the benefits of cycling infrastructure in their cities and regions.

Given the research done in Toronto a couple years ago, I think some urban shop owners have realized that cycling is good for business. Community activists know that cycling builds community & sense of place better than multi-lane roads and parking lots.

And of course environmentalists are all in favour of cycling.

I think pedestrians, bike cops, and a variety of others groups all have an interest in increasing cycling versus cars.

We can also put pressure on *these* groups to put pressure on government.

[clasher]

Most of the establishment is pro-automobile so of course they'll try and spin the mandatory helmet thing as being a cure-all. Reality is that it just decreases the number of riders while not really doing much for head injury rates.

It's a great way for a politician to look like they are doing something and it's a feel-good thing for many riders and busy-body types that haven't really examined the issue from a statistical rather than "gut feeling" perspective.