As I understand it, this is why swimming is compulsory (or very nearly). To make the argument that cycling should be compulsory, one also has to make the argument that sufficient kids will get on bikes - essentially, show that cycling dangers 'could happen to anyone', in the same way that a watery mishap 'could happen to anyone'. I think that argument is no stronger than the proportion of cycling (or cyclists) compared to other means of getting about (or people using those other means). IOW, if 95% of people cycle, then fine, if 5% cycle, then it's a hard case to make.
I suspect that close to 95% of people ride a bike at some time in their life. And they all have to cross roads, so road training of some sort seems highly desirable.
