Just zis Guy said:People of URC:
Eric Martlew's bill is to have its second reading on April 23. The text is not yet available, but
it is being drafted by BHIT so expect the worst.
The Minister designated to respond, David Jamieson, is apparently in two minds about whether to
support the Bill. If he does it may well succeed. Up to half of all private bills pass in some
sessions. Complacency would be most unwise.
Contentious private bills, of course, rarely pass. The problem is that this bill is not likely to
be seen as contentious by many MPs: our job, as I see it, is to ensure that they realise the full
implications of any such measure being passed into law.
I've already written to my MP and to the MP in whose constituency my office and the school of
which I am a Governor both lie, one Boris Johnson. I will also be writing to Mr Jamieson.
Reading's other MP, Martin Salter, is a patron of BHIT.
My MP is giving me information about the progress of the bill which I will continue to pass on.
This is a call to action.
Those of you who have not yet written to your MP, please do. The time for action is NOW - MPs have
a lot of correspondence and I suggest that we should get in early, get replies and challenge those
replies which are unsatisfactory.
Those of you who have figures, insights, data which are relevant to this issue, I would be pleased
to hear from you. I have combed Google and <http://www.cyclehelmets.org> but any new data is
appreciated.
Copy of e-mail to Julia Drown MP (Lab). Too many exclamation marks, but I'm angry tonight...
Dear Ms Drown,
I have discovered that Eric Martlew MP is to introduce a private member's bill in the current
session which would criminalise any children who fail to wear a cycle helmet and leave their parents
liable to a fine.
I am a keen cyclist with the Swindon CTC section (I live in Wanborough) but am well beyond the age
group where I would be affected by the bill. However, I believe that the bill, if passed, would be
extremely damaging for the following reasons:
* the most immediate effect would be a drastic reduction in cycling by children, either because they
do not own a helmet or because they do not like to wear them (peer pressure is very important in
this age group). This will have consequences for child obesity and fitness as well as traffic,
because they will expect to be driven on some journeys that they might previously have made by
bike. Where helmet laws have been introduced in Australia and New Zealand a drop in cycling of up
to 40% has been observed.
* the efficacy of helmets is unproven. Their design is highly compromised because, unlike
motorcyclists, pedal cyclists generate a lot of heat so the helmet must be light and allow a lot
of airflow. The best helmets are only designed for impacts up to 20km/h (12.5mph) which means they
are practically useless in any accident with a motorised vehicle. Australian studies suggest that
the death rate per cyclist has actually increased since helmets were made mandatory. It is not
clear why this is, but they do not seem to have saved lives and may actually have increased the
risks slightly.
* Mr Martlew has been lobbied by the Bicycle Helmet Initiative Trust (BHIT) which uses distorted and
plainly false data to support its campaign. The Guardian has already had to correct its online
article on the private member's bill after these errors were pointed out to them.
* Helmet promotion is damaging to cycling as a whole because it portrays it as a dangerous activity.
In fact, cycling is safer than walking! Helmets are most vocally supported by non-cyclists who
think we should all wear them - in order to assuage their own fear of mowing down and killing an
unhelmeted cyclist.
* The CTC, the largest cycling organisation in Britain, is firmly against helmet promotion or
compulsion. With over 60,000 paying members, they have a strong vested interest in keeping
them alive!
There are some useful references at the following websites:
cyclehelmets.orgcyclehelmets.orgOpen ↗ (analysis of statistics - tends to be sceptical of helmets)
bhit.orgbhit.orgOpen ↗ (the lobby group for helmets supporting the Bill)
chapmancentral.demon.co.ukBHIT BillOpen ↗ (put together by a cyclist and
elegantly refutes the BHIT statistics) lesberries.co.ukhelmets.htmlOpen ↗
(John Franklin's - author of "Cyclecraft" - resume of the evidence) ctc.org.ukctc.org.ukOpen ↗ (the CTC -
Cyclists' Touring Club)
To declare my own personal interest, I do own a helmet but only wear it in icy conditions where I
might slip. I have no confidence in its ability to protect me in a collision with a motorised
vehicle so I ride with an appropriate degree of caution. As an asthmatic I find that the chin strap
tends to aggravate breathing problems on cold days, and I have seen too many helmeted cyclists
suffering from sunstroke to wear it in hot conditions!
I would urge you not to support the Bill as it will set back the Government's laudable attempts to
increase the use of sustainable transport by decades - even the car-crazy Conservatives have avoided
this particular banana skin.
Yours sincerely,
<real name removed from NG copy to preserve air of mystery
