Following David Cameron's irresponsible failure to wear a cycle helmet, it has emerged that one of the leading campaigners for compulsory helmets is a Tory MP.
David Cameron was today “under fire” for choosing to cycle without a helmet. And, as the news prompted an online row about whether it is “sanctimonious” to highlight cycling safety, it emerged that one of the leading campaigners for compulsory helmets is a Tory MP.
Just weeks ago, Peter Bone, Conservative MP for Wellingborough, spoke out in favour of making helmets compulsory for children up to the age of 14:
“If somebody said 16 per cent of people who died in road accidents could be saved, you would bite their hand off … The savings to the NHS alone would be enormous … I believe individuals can make up their own minds whether they want to kill themselves. Youngsters can’t, however, and we have to do it for them.”
In January 2010, Bone asked a question in parliament about the Department for Transport’s assessment of the safety case for children to wear safety helmets. He received this response from Paul Clark, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the DfT:
“The Department commissioned a research project on cyclists’ road safety, which included a new review of cycle helmet effectiveness.”
The review concludes that, assuming cycle helmets are a good fit and worn correctly they should be effective at “reducing the risk of head injury, in particular cranium fracture, scalp injury and intracranial (brain) injury for users of all ages but would be expected to be particularly effective for children”. The report that Mr Bone highlights also includes the results of a forensic case review of more than 100 British police cyclist fatality reports:
“[The] case review … highlighted that between 10 and 16% of the fatalities reviewed could have been prevented if they had worn a cycle helmet.”
It also found that helmets would be “particularly effective” for children.
Given the currently available evidence (highlighted by one of his very own MPs) of the safety benefits of wearing a cycle helmet, and the (uphill) efforts of safety campaigners to encourage children, in particular, to wear a helmet, David Cameron should be trying to set a good example. Instead, he is irresponsibly choosing to look good for photo opportunities, regardless of the message this sends to Britain’s young cyclists.
46 Responses to “Cameron’s failure to wear cycle helmet “irresponsible””
Mike Smith
Paul St Pancras, your son must be almost as much of a pompous twat as you. I have an 11 year old son. Neither he nor his friends have any interest in what Boris or Cameron do or whether they wear helmets. As for necessary safety requirements, I think that a man on warfarin should not be allowed out on foot – he is clearly a danger to himself and this should not be allowed in a caring, progressive society. Best you stay home. Maybe you are one of the many pedestrians I meet on my bike every day who walk out in front of me without looking or who cross on a red light and then shout at me for cycling on green.
Nick Wilde
I see you have deleted my two posts, Will. What’s the matter? They weren’t profane or abusive. Aren’t you a little thin skinned to be blogging at all? Oh, i forgot, in the progressive left there is no room for dissenting voices.
Will Straw
Mike – If you want to call someone a “pompous twat” please do it on another blog. If you’re going to comment here, read our comments policy: https://www.leftfootforward.org/about
Nick – We didn’t delete anything, we just had better things to do this evening than moderate your comments.
Nick Wilde
Will, was one of the better things you had to do commenting on a politician’s legal choice not to wear a helmet. If you want to be treated as a serious political blog then you should act like one.
Silent Hunter
Nick – We didn’t delete anything, we just had better things to do this evening than moderate your comments.
Or in other words – “Yes; we deleted it”.
A chip off the old block – as Walter Wolfgang would attest to.