That is a factor but given his noble friends’ due regard for research, they propose the amendment because they do not believe the wearing of cycling helmets meets the safety standards. The wearing of cycling helmets may be a factor. The amendment is before us because young children do not in large numbers wear helmets. Nevertheless, we have got cycling accident rates down. We would say that that is because we have concentrated a great deal of energy on the issues of improving child cyclists’ safety. Our programme includes the education of children and their carers about the dangers implicit in cycling, publicity, better child cycle training and improved infrastructure. It also includes the promotion of helmets because we are concerned, as are noble Lords, to see the wearing of helmets increase.
Noble Lords will recognise that I have some difficulty in accepting the notion of the compulsory wearing of helmets. We are concerned to increase cycling. It is healthy for children. It is an excellent way of getting about. We want to encourage it. Increased exercise is a major part of our strategy to deal with child obesity. Cycling is an excellent form of exercise so we want children on their bikes.
The noble Earl, Lord Listowel, said that children are not put off by helmets. We are not convinced of that argument. We are fearful that if we indicate that you cannot get on your bike without a helmet the use of cycles will decrease and that will be our loss in so many ways. We are concerned about that factor. We are at one with the noble Lords who introduced the amendment in seeking to bring home to those who cycle the advantages of wearing helmets and we shall proceed to do that. We will also follow a whole range of strategies for increasing safer use of bikes by children.
We have a big programme on cycle safety rolling out in the coming year. We have common objectives in mind. The question is whether those objectives would be realised through making helmets compulsory. At present we are not convinced of that, but we are keeping a very open mind on it. We regard the issue of such salience and significance that we are looking at every strategy that can be deployed to reduce cycling deaths. So we have an open mind and we will carry out our research. But, for the moment, we are worried that the compulsory use of helmets might reduce cycling, which would be a loss to the nation.
Road Safety Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 26 October 2005.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Road Safety Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c1285-6 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:01:49 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270592
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270592
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270592