Liberal Conspiracy Fails Cycling Proficiency

Liberal Conspiracy » Iain Dale Fail on Labour and motorists. Liberal Conspiracy maintains that no ministers are considering bringing in a civil law to make motorists automatically culpable in accidents involving cyclists:

The hysterial Iain Dale thundered yesterday: Labour’s Maddest Idea Yet: Find All Motorists Guilty!

Apparently,

Labour Ministers are intending to pass laws to ensure that all motorists are found to be the guilty parties when involved with accidents involving pedestrians or cyclists. Unbebloodylievable.

This demonising of the motorist has to stop.

The article however didn’t list a single government minister in favour of the proposal.

Adam Bienkov from Tory Troll:

Now if you actually click on the link, you find that Labour ministers are not “intending” anything of the sort.

The proposal (which isn’t to find drivers automatically guilty in any case) is from Cycling England, rather than ministers (or Labour).

But as usual, enough has been done to set off Dale’s readers:

And what did the government have to say on the proposal by a lobby group?

A Department for Transport spokesman said: ‘This is something that gets raised by pressure groups from time to time.

‘Cycling England has proposed it, but it is not something that is being considered by ministers.’

We look forward to a correction.

Fair point, you may think. But LC should have checked out that 'lobby group', Cycling England first. Here's who they are:

Cycling England is an independent, expert body, working to get more people cycling, more safely, more often. Established in 2005 by the Department for Transport, we promote the growth of cycling in England by championing best practice and channeling funding to partners engaged in training, engineering and marketing projects. With the Department for Transport’s continued support and funding we work tirelessly to make the case for cycling, showing how the humble bicycle can transform the way we travel to create a greener, healthier nation.

I don't think any comment (or correction) is necessary, is it?