Non-Believer

They additionally pay those charges to drive within the local speed limit permits and to make reasonable progress (which in itself reduces pollution). My argument isn't about cyclists paying road tax or their clothing. It's about them observing the laws, Highway Code and the rights of other road users, in the same way as those other road users are expected to observe the rights of cyclists, we now have the minimum distance to allow when overtaking cyclists and that's fair enough. But the cyclists themselves need to remember that they have responsibilities too and are not one special

I do, I'm afraid. For instance, a good wagon driver will keep an eye on the mirrors and if he or she sees a build up of traffic behind, they'll pull over where convenient to let the traffic past. It's nothing more than good road craft and courtesy and lots do it. Too many cyclists don't apparently feel the need to display the same. Motorised vehicle users pay a considerable amount in various taxes, charges and duties to be able to travel at legal, 21st or 20th century speeds to go about their business. If we're going to slow them down to 19th century speeds at the whim of a small group of

The road concerned was Sulby to Ramsey, the TT course, specifically Kerroomooar to Lezayre Rd in Ramsey which has the cycle lane, ironically. There are any number of points in that stretch where there is plenty of room to pass a single (file) cyclist without needing to use the the oncoming carriageway, there's oncoming traffic and various blind bends and brows that preclude using that oncoming carriageway anyway. @ nine+ cyclists, three rows, three abreast, in the lane make safe overtaking impossible in those conditions. Plus it's contravening the Highway/cycle code which is there fo

They took up the whole width of the traffic lane concerned. As opposed to riding in single file, particularly when they knew full well that there were motorised vehicles behind them and they were holding up those vehicles. It doesn't do them any favours IMHO.

You mean in the way that our local roads have corners and oncoming traffic in the other lane? How inconvenient, I'd never thought of that. I shall advise the DOI tomorrow and see if the roads can be modified and oncoming traffic banned just so cyclists can continue to disregard the rule of the road that requests them to ride in single file in order not to hold up traffic.

Has anybody told Skelly...?

The lycra mob have been out in force since early this morning. I was held up by a 20mph, three-abreast peloton for nearly 3 miles this morning who despite glancing over their shoulders and being aware that I was behind them (in the car) "declined" to narrow their formation to allow me to pass. These people need educating.

Everybody down to the mosh pit! 😂

It's clearly Public Sector.... 😂

Well....if you're going to get around, do it properly. And on the bright side, Ian Longworth appears to have one good customer anyway.....

We were told that there would be enough workers though, 60+ at any one time. There are not. We were told that there were community-swallowing voids underneath that were the justification for it being done in the first instance. There were none. We've been given progress and completion dates that have continually lapsed. We have politicians whose good-meaning will and requests for progress have been continually disregarded and ignored. It doesn't matter who we elect, they're not running the show. Our Treasury Minister is now alluding to this and has proposals to address at l

This edict from Government requesting voluntary compliance is only until tomorrow when they will hopefully have more information and be able to give us a better picture? That's my take on it. That request has been delivered in an extremely poor and ambiguous fashion but presumably if it's "all clear" we can go back to normality, if not, the compensation packages will have to be restarted again. But we need the time to establish the facts. The virus isn't interested in economics unfortunately.

We can all take positives from the current situation. Just think of how much money we're not directly or indirectly giving H&B. 😂

Pubs seem to closing voluntarily...4pm and 6pm depending whose they are.

This decision would appear to have knocked the ball firmly back into H&B's court, there would appear to be 3 options open to them now: 1) They offload it for what they can get for it, bearing in mind the state of the building and that the "no demolition" decree may also apply to the purchaser. What does that make the building worth? 2) They refurbish it and run it again as a pub, which isn't going to happen given the brewery's approach, the spend required and the likely patronage. 3) They sit on it, it owes them nothing and isn't registered in itself, meaning that there's no