I sincerely don't think he's being nasty about bike riders, he is simply out of touch.
Sutherland claims to have once been a rider himself, having been hit whilst trying to navigate a roundabout he subsequently made the decision to give up riding. Many cyclists are put in his shoes, I myself considered giving up after I too was hit.
He claims that he had been stuck behind a few riders for a couple of minutes, and it seems he suggests that he cocked up his overtake and nearly crashed both into an oncoming car and the riders he had attempted to pass. Many of us on two wheels have witnessed such an overtake. On the forums we call this "MGIF syndrome" (or "must get in front", some riders verbally pronounce it as "em-giff" just as some say "smidsy" as a word).
Its the kind of rushed decisions that lead many of us to question the what-ifs, and Sutherland is asking this himself in this very video.
He makes the assertion that off-road cycle paths (as this is what he appears to be describing) are "safer" and "for your convenience". Sadly I'd have to disagree. For one thing do we think that Sir Bradley Wiggins or Sir Chris Hoy would have been able to train on them? Secondly it is still the legal right of a cyclist to use the road and there are still many reasons cyclists have to resort to it: I have yet to see one where it is continuous in the same way as the adjacent road, Or where I can safely pass other riders without a dangerous squeeze. I have yet to ride on one that is free of pedestrians and glass. I have yet to ride on one that is salt-treated during the winter like the road next to it.
We have this fixation that once a pavement is dedicated towards bikes that problems of road safety should go away. But many a modern rider will tell you this doesn't happen. If you don't make the environment inviting then people wont come. Many of the cycle lanes and cycle paths that I have researched locally, or studied online (Google streetview is great for this, as are dedicated cycling blogs) seem to have been put in to get cyclists off a road to aid traffic flow.
I have been told by older riders here in Southampton that the older off-road routes were put in due to the councils of the day thinking that cars would come down in price and cycling would just naturally die out. It eventually transpired that there is only so many cars you can get on any road, and that what comes from the exhaust is not all that sweet. Cycling started to become more desirable from a socially responsible angle.
So back to Sutherland. I don't think he's evil, just misguided. Many drivers have gone through the last 15 years without much interaction with cyclists - things are changing and drivers, too, need to adapt. This, added with the attitudes of TweetNRun drivers, is why the AA and BSM driving schools are adding cyclist awareness sections to their syllabus. Drivers have to understand why a rider might not be on the path and accommodate with patience and safety.
Calling for cities and routes to "Go Dutch" is one tool in our box, but helping drivers understand will be just as major a game changer for cycling in the UK. Lastly, don't we all think that if deliveries, freight, and public transport were THAT important that we'd have invested more in rail..? It makes you think, and should make you think too.
