unbelieveable.
Email sent to Guy Paker, CE of the ASA.
guyp@asa.org.uk
I am astounded that the ASA think it within their realm to adjudicate on what is or is not safe cycling with so little knowledge or understanding of the matter.
While the ASA admit on one hand that “UK law did not require cyclists to wear helmets or cycle at least 0.5 metres from the kerb”, on the other the ASA then go on to adjudicate that showing cyclists doing either is
“socially irresponsible and likely to condone or encourage behaviour prejudicial to health and safety” and so should be prohibited. Since when did the ASA become the arbiter of social responsibility and health and safety?
The extent of the adjudicator’s research appears to have got as far as a Daily Mail article and no further. Perhaps they could read a copy of Cyclecraft by John Franklin, or any of the research papers published on the rates of helmet use.
http://www.cyclehelmets.org/1249.html
http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/
Comments like “when the car behind overtook them and the car almost had to enter the right lane of traffic” really highlight the astonishing lack of knowledge of the issue and make it necessary for the ASA to amend it’s adjudication.
It is disappointing that access to the Appeal process is so heavily restricted as there is a substantial body of people who feel the ASA has reached far beyond the limit’s of it’s role making an ill-informed decision contrary to best evidence and practice.
Perhaps the ASA’s Chair, Lord Smith, who is also patron of Sutrans the cycling and green transport organisation, may be able to assist in educating the adjudicator.
Yours sincerely,
—