Cameron’s failure to wear cycle helmet “irresponsible”

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””

  1. Colonel Sanders

    Our Life, Our Death.

    No one should have the right to waste breath critisiscing something insignificant like this.

    Liberty!

  2. Avatar photo

    Will Straw

    Charming, Silent. It works like this: because a bunch of chumps can’t be civil, we now moderate the first comment from any new IP address. This means that Nick’s comments got caught in the moderation queue. I was busy at 9pm and didn’t get to a computer until closer to 11pm. Capiche?

  3. Jules Wright

    What a laughable blog posting, found via Guido Fawkes. Didn’t know riding a bike without a helmet was against the law. So what if he doesn’t wear a helmet. I ride my bike without a helmet. However, I wasn’t brought up in a Nanny State where terminal bansturbators, po-faced prigs and sour officialdom insist on making my business their business when my business is none of their business.

    Which sadly is what people have to face today; from polemical, political finger-waggers like you Mr Reading. I bet you hate ‘Top Gear’ too. Go out, get a life – and spare us the opportunistic, faux outrage.

  4. Mike Smith

    Will, is it OK just to call paulstpancras pompous, without the twat bit? I have rarely heard more sanctimonious twaddle in my life. It’s not entirely clear to me either how cyclists wearing helmets are less likely to injure him (sorry, cost him his life!) than those who do not. Still, why worry when bashing the Nasty Party. They are, by definition, wicked people, unlike the Labour Party, who have offered us the most ruinous and divisive war since the 1940s, spin, character assassination of opponents, class warfare (wonderful campaign in Crewe by the way) and neglect of ordinary people on such a scale that it has given us a revival of the BNP.

  5. Jules Wright

    @Mike Smith

    Quite.

Comments are closed.