As a point of interest... why don't bicyclists have mirrors? They're useful for seeing what's behind and act as an occasional reminder that the individual is dawdling about on a road with an assortment of very heavy objects piloted with varying degrees of suicidal incompetence.

The problem with this and every other law in favour of cyclists is that whereas the car driver, motorcyclist etc is required to pass a rigorous testing process; pay tax and insurance, the cyclist is not - and can, with no other qualification except to demonstrate the ability to negotiate a set of plastic cones at primary school, take to the road on something approximating an upgraded clothes-horse on pram wheels.
They don't know what's around them, what's behind them, and believe it is acceptable behaviour to cause tailbacks while they dither about at 5 mph yacking to their buddy.
They are as reckless and unaware entering the road from the pavement, and suddenly sweeping across the lane after remembering they live up that side street they passed 5 seconds ago, as they are deluded into thinking that the apparent absence of any legal requirement to equip a peddle-propelled clothes-horse with a mirror somehow renders themselves immune to the earthly laws of physics, common sense and the Universal Law of English Courtesy that every other poor sod has to adhere to in order to stay alive long enough to get home.
Maybe if they had a mirror they would perhaps heel-over - therefore creating a mutually agreeable arrangement where the facilitation of an overtaking manoeuvre can by an otherwise mutually joyous experience.

Of course... this does not apply to everyone, cycles or motorist. It only applies to the stupid ones in both camps; of whom there are many and who appear to be in the majority.

Motorists can pass their test and use the ensuing years on the open road to really hone their incompetence and discourtesy skills. The particular law which requires the motorist to enter the oncoming lane in order to overtake just gives them the excuse to risk head-on collision with opposing traffic... which happens... every day... every time there is a bicycle on the road. ,, because they are imbeciles and no by-law, statute, threat of death or appeal to their innate sense of fairness and consideration for their fellow man/woman et al.. will penetrate that thick skull all the way to the pea-sized kernel, barely functioning as an engine shed for their primitive nervous system.

It is a waste of time, in my opinion, implementing laws which simply aren't thought out. If a person hasn't the mental capacity to realise that overtaking a bicycle requires a level of consideration for everyone on the road then they should not be on the road themselves. Similarly the cyclist, who thinks it's his/her inalienable human right to take a Sunday diddle along a major thoroughfare with a 3 month old child duct-taped to the luggage rack should also be excluded... and quite possibly arrested ( in my opinion) and stoned to death !!

What we should be doing is prosecuting against stupidity. Not making laws that just allow the stupid to legitimise their stupidity, by allowing them room to exercise their judgement of a situation that is beyond their understanding.
Using the road isn't a right... it has to be earned...

This was brought to you by a motorist who is constantly confronted by motorists head-on, while they overtake cyclists in the on-coming lane.