It would be interesting if the Minister would write to me with the problems that he sees with the drafting of the amendment. I would very much like to see it properly drafted and acceptable. I am very happy to look at who is responsible and who would do the prosecuting. I am delighted with the support that I have received, but I am somewhat disappointed with some of those who have tried to pour cold water on it.
The noble Lord, Lord Berkeley, talked about who would enforce the legislation. Who enforces the legislation on the wearing of seat-belts or the wearing of helmets for motorcycle riders? Who enforces the rules on children under the age of 14 wearing hard hats when riding horses and ponies? To a certain extent, insurers will not cover people who are not belted up in their vehicles or who do not wear helmets when riding a motorcycle. Quite obviously, the police can see very easily and will stop and prosecute a motorcyclist riding along the highway without a helmet. School rules will help to ensure that any child cycling to school will wear a proper helmet and that it is properly fitted. If that is not being done today, schools are not taking their responsibility to the child seriously. They are responsible for the child when on school premises.
Persuasion will work with some people, but not all parents are responsible. We know that. We all like to think that we are. Sometimes we allow our children to take greater risks and other people would think that we are being unwise. We all do it from time to time. I know also that we have gradually to let our children widen the bounds and take greater risks. But taking risks that we know could kill them or maim them for life is not, in my view, one of them.
The Minister said that the number of deaths of child cyclists has been reduced by 40 per cent. I am delighted to hear that. It may be that some car users, which are a very nasty weapon to those riding a bicycle, are taking greater care. It may be that the warmer winter weather that we have had in the past few years has played a considerable part in that. It is much more difficult to see a cyclist when the snow is coming thick and fast compared with on a fine, dry, cold evening.
I am all in favour of children taking more exercise—I can understand the Government’s fight against obesity—but cycling is not the only form of exercise; there are many others. I well remember at the age of 10 cycling on the roads without a helmet. In those days such things had not been invented; there were no helmets for motorcyclists and many safety precautions in cars had not been invented. We must move forward; we must not be stick-in-the-muds.
I shall read what the Minister and others who have taken part in this short debate have said, but I shall probably return to this matter at the next stage of the Bill. In the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendment No. 161 not moved.]
Road Safety Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Swinfen
(Conservative)
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 c1286-7 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 21:00:44 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270595
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270595
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270595