If you support segregated cycling infrastructure in Hackney

the correspondingly low casualty rate gets trumpeted as a success, when it's a complete failure.

Except it's not a complete failure. At all.

We kill about 1700 people on the roads every year. The French, the Italians, the Germans, the Poles all make it well over 3000 and are significantly worse in per capita terms as well as in absolute numbers.

Pedestrians and cyclists are at a far higher risk in the UK than most other European countries.

Breaking down the figures is interesting but I'm too lazy (or google-challenged) to find decent ones. Skimming the absolute numbers by transport mode, about a quarter of our casualties seem to be pedestrians, while most other countries manage to keep it to ten percent or one in eight.

That seems bad, but my impression is that our per capita pedestrian death toll is broadly comparable to other countries (France, Spain; a bit worse than Germany, a bit better than Italy), not far higher.

(The stats I found don't give a breakdown by population, hence "impression." But just looking at the pedestrian figures as a proportion of overall casualties doesn't give a complete picture.)

But we've got 110 cyclist deaths out of 1770 (2013 figures), while the Netherlands has 112 out of 476. Per capita, that makes the cycling idyll of Holland three or four times riskier than the hell of the UK. (I'm sure that casualty figures per distance travelled tell a different story.)

It would be good if you had links to stats which offer a more detailed breakdown than the superficial ones I've quoted, but meantime the rhetoric of "complete failure" really isn't helpful.