T
Tony Raven
Guest
From the January Board minutes of the National Cycling Strategy Board:
e) Cycle helmets - BHIT campaign and Private Members Bill
2.8 Steven Norris noted that the Bill had received its first reading in Parliament and was likely to
proceed further. He had written to Kim Howells on the subject, accepting that it was a difficult
issue on which most (though not all) of the Board were in agreement. He believed that helmets did
not guarantee safety and that education of all road users was the key. He considered this would be
an extremely unhelpful piece of legislation and would urge the DfT not to support it but to ensure
that it was opposed.
3.9 Olly Hatch reported that the Bill was seventh in the priority list, but that even so there might
not be time within the current parliamentary session for it to progress further. He added that the
Cyclists' Public Affairs Group had not formed a unified response so far, and the All Party
Parliamentary Cycling Group were divided on the issue.
4.10 Robert Devereux said that DfT had not decided on whether it should support the Bill. It was
likely that pressure of other Parliamentary business would take precedence.
5.11 Phillip Darnton considered that the Board's statement was too non-committal and should be
strengthened, with more of an emphasis on individual choice.
6.12 Summing up, Steven Norris agreed that the Board's statement should be redrafted to reflect a
more positive position, and circulated to Board members to comment.
Link to revised NCS Board statement on helmets
Tony
e) Cycle helmets - BHIT campaign and Private Members Bill
2.8 Steven Norris noted that the Bill had received its first reading in Parliament and was likely to
proceed further. He had written to Kim Howells on the subject, accepting that it was a difficult
issue on which most (though not all) of the Board were in agreement. He believed that helmets did
not guarantee safety and that education of all road users was the key. He considered this would be
an extremely unhelpful piece of legislation and would urge the DfT not to support it but to ensure
that it was opposed.
3.9 Olly Hatch reported that the Bill was seventh in the priority list, but that even so there might
not be time within the current parliamentary session for it to progress further. He added that the
Cyclists' Public Affairs Group had not formed a unified response so far, and the All Party
Parliamentary Cycling Group were divided on the issue.
4.10 Robert Devereux said that DfT had not decided on whether it should support the Bill. It was
likely that pressure of other Parliamentary business would take precedence.
5.11 Phillip Darnton considered that the Board's statement was too non-committal and should be
strengthened, with more of an emphasis on individual choice.
6.12 Summing up, Steven Norris agreed that the Board's statement should be redrafted to reflect a
more positive position, and circulated to Board members to comment.
Link to revised NCS Board statement on helmets
Tony
