So far as I know, nobody has been arguing that a complete lane overtake is necessarily safer than a straddle overtake. The problem that we discuss here is that the cyclist-FRAP law positions the cyclist so the overtaking motorist is enticed into making a dangerous overtake by squeezing between the cyclist and the traffic in the adjacent lane, whichever way that traffic is moving. By repealing the FRAP law, which has many other disadvantages beside this one, the cyclist may position himself at any lateral position in the right-hand marked lane. He should position himself so that the motorist from behind realizes that he must overtake only when traffic in the adjacent lane is clear, so he can overtake the cyclist with safe clearance. That is what makes the situation safer, preventing the motorist from being enticed into the dangerous squeeze-through overtaking. There is no argument that, under these circumstances, a straddle overtake is less safe or more safe than a lane-change overtake; the safety aspect is practically identical (provided, of course, that the motorist provides adequate safe clearance when overtaking the cyclist). The point that most of us argue is that, for the motorist, there is insignificant additional delay, if any, when making a safe lane-change overtake than if he makes a safe straddle overtake. Therefore, the cyclist's lateral position within his lane is irrelevant to the motorist's delay.