Forum menu
Just going through the current bills in Parliament, and I see theres one that is to introduce a law for all cyclists using the public highways to wear a safety helmet.
Only in its first reading, but as its a good idea and likely to save lives and serious injury, it could well go through.
https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3472
Not for me.
In all honesty, I'd repeal the helmet law for motorcycles too.
I'd keep the seatbelt law though.
Cheeky pricks snuck that one in there didn't they.
Hasn't the Aussie helmet law driven down bicycle use? Just what the UK needs now eh?
Aside from the odd angry DM columnist who was really crying out for helmet compulsion? Good old Tories really got their fingers on the pulse.
Relevant question - does not wearing a helmet affect the punishment for someone who causes you a head injury you probably would have avoided if you were wearing one? As it could be said you weren't taking what most people IMO would consider normal and reasonable precautions.
Same principle as not wearing a seatbelt and then dying in a car crash I expect.
oes not wearing a helmet affect the punishment for someone who causes you a head injury you probably would have avoided if you were wearing one?
Yes, they'll get away with a minimum sentence even if they were in the wrong, and probably the other way around too. There will be some penalty if you are injured and not wearing a lid. Remember its a tory who proposed this, and the MP in question is a right nasty piece of work. A tory will always be a tory and from that you can easily guess how something like this bill is going to pan out.
Relevant question – does not wearing a helmet affect the punishment for someone who causes you a head injury you
probably wouldarguably might have avoided if you were wearing one?
Lack of a lid seems to get treated as a mitigating factor in some cases despite not actually being illegal, the link didn't include a direct link to the bill, what else is covered in the bill are they trying to compel Hi-Viz too?
Lid compulsion is a ready made victim blaming measure. If they actually gave two shits about saving lives on the roads they'd actually push for enforcement of the mobile phone driving laws.
Edit: fixed your question for you too, an EPS hat is not a shield of invulnerability 😉
Fair enough, those were the words I wanted.
Wasn’t it the case that after this was done in Australia the fall in numbers cycling was so great that increased deaths due to heart disease etc outweighed lives saved due to head injuries on bikes?
The bicycle helmet "debate" is one of the strangest little culture war battlegrounds when you think about it.
The good old Right of centre, small government loving, libertarian, anti-nanny-state lot pushing for a rather 'nanny-state' measure. It has of course got sweet FA to do with protecting bicycle users from injury or death, it's always been about kicking the sort of yoghurt weaving lefty tree huggers that the dusty old buffers that make up the core Tory vote imagine ride bicycles...
The stock answer I go to when someone starts talking about how such a measure will "save lives" is "Great but why aren't we dealing with all the pricks playing on their phones while driving first? They pose a far more imminent threat to my life when cycling than a plastic hat could ever mitigate".
Edit:
A further line of argument cited by opponents to mandatory wearing of cycle helmets is that legislation would be difficult to enforce. While it would certainly create an additional burden on the police, it does not strike me as particularly difficult to enforce compared with other offences: it is easier to spot a cyclist without a helmet than to spot a driver using a mobile phone, or a car passenger without a seatbelt. No one here suggests that wearing seatbelts should be a matter of individual choice on the basis of difficulties in enforcing the current legislation.
Bless him he addressed the point head on, don't deal with the cause, it's far harder than bullying the victims...
It's probably going to go through isn't it, now it's reached the commons.
personally, I always wear one, but since a bike can be an incredibly cheap transport with huge benefits of fitness, freedom and ability to reach work, education and entertainment I am against anything that puts a barrier in place for some potential cyclists. If (and I would need to see some data) the cost of a helmet is a barrier to some then no they must not be compulsory.
I’d be tempted to say yes to compulsory lids for delivery riders on e-bikes.
When you think of the sheer momentum carried by those bikes flipping over🫢🫢🫢
Though, most delivery cyclists round my part of town don’t even have any lights.
Fwiw, I’d have the police do more random checks for lights, and if the cyclists fall foul of the Highway Code, they could have the choice of paying a fine or buying a voucher for some lights.
At least that would clear any backlog of unsold lights in the bike shops.
Unlikely to go through.
"It is very rare for a Ten Minute Rule bill to pass into legislation. Since 1945, at the time of writing, only sixty Ten Minute Rule Bills have passed into legislation. "
https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/what-is-a-ten-minute-rule-bill/
cycle helmet compulsion would cost lives due to reduction in cycling and thus increased diseases of inactivity. so if yo u wantmore deths and an unhealthier population make cycle helmets compulsory
A good summary of the actual evidence
https://www.cyclinguk.org/briefing/cycle-helmets
You also need to know what 'problem' to is trying to fix. I don't wear a helmet but would guess that around 99% of people I see doing the sort of riding I do (road and gravel) are wearing them as it is unusual to see someone not wearing one.
Would be good to see the data (which of course they don't have) on how many people are not wearing them already and what type of riding they are doing.
The text of the Bill:
A Bill to require a person riding a bicycle on the public highway to wear a safety helmet; and for connected purposes.
It's the last 4 words that worry me. That reads as a prelude to smart/connected vehicles all talking to each other and all needing to recognise cyclists so therefore cyclists need a helmet with some kind of chip or beacon in it to talk to the cars.
The Tories can always be relied on to drag this one around every year or so. Maybe worth flagging it to British Cycling, Cycling UK and Sustrans though just so they can start encouraging members to write to their MP and ask WTAF the Tories are playing at (again) and point out that they could try a bit less corruption and a bit more fixing the country.
Absolutely for wearing helmets and totally against compulsion. It's unnecessary, unenforceable, and a huge barrier to active travel and exercise.
If only politicians and the media were so keen to resource the Police so existing traffic offences - including those committed by cyclists - were properly dealt with and effectively punished.
Cyclists are the most vulnerable road users. Given all the data about how much safer cyclists are when they wear a helmet
So let's not hurt them so much when we hit them....
As said above, complete waste of time and money this, completely unenforceable, the Police are under resourced, so unlikely to enforce this.
Reading that link, it is in response to a very nasty head injury one of his constituents suffered after falling off. It's not the usual anti-cycling-disguised-as-fake-concern churned out by the DM and friends.
Oliver had hoped to be in the Public Gallery here today, but because of the severity of his disability he would have needed two support staff to accompany him from Rugby
For some reason, I get a 403 error when trying to post a copy of the text.
https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-06-07/debates/877059D3-FC26-4823-84E2-364995CF4ABB/RoadSafety(CycleHelmets)
The MP backing it has already said that he's standing down at the next GE https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-63865213
The second reading is scheduled for 24th Nov, except that it's unlikely to happen on that date because the House won't be sitting
Everyone's winding up for the next GE, which will probably be called within the next 12 months
Won't happen (IMHO)
Compulsory helmet wearing is a bad idea.
Wearing a helmet is a good idea for cycling activities if you’re a child, or at increased risk of falling off and banging your head such as fast road riding and mountain biking.
For most other forms of cycling the benefits of helmets are very marginal.
Look at countries like the Netherlands where very few cyclists use helmets.
It's probably a good idea to wear a helmet. But if you are incharge of making things safer...
The Man seems to be having problems compelling motorcyclists to wear helmets round where I am, never mind cyclists.
Reading that link, it is in response to a very nasty head injury one of his constituents suffered after falling off.
Certain cases make it worth bringing in new laws - some so horrific that new / better legislation is the only way of dealing with it.
On the other hand if we introduced new legislation for everyone who fell over and hurt themselves - especially when there's no proof it would have solved anything - we'd be buried under a pile of totally bollocks laws.
It’s not the usual anti-cycling-disguised-as-fake-concern churned out by the DM and friends.
It's exactly that. It may not be meant as anti-cycling but it's exactly that.
It’s the last 4 words that worry me. That reads as a prelude to smart/connected vehicles all talking to each other and all needing to recognise cyclists so therefore cyclists need a helmet with some kind of chip or beacon in it to talk to the cars.
Don't worry, you're barking up the wrong tree. It's a phrase that's used in many bills. Google it. It just means the bill would do x (make it compulsory to wear a helmet), but also whatever other ancillary stuff is required to achieve x (create a Helmet Enforcement Squad, allow exchange of data with other countries, declare 2024 the Year of the British Helmet...). It's nothing to do with connectivity.
I’d be tempted to say yes to compulsory lids for delivery riders on e-bikes.
It's the law in New York City that delievery drivers need helmet, high viz, bell and light when working. It seems to be mostly complied with - certainly a big improvement from the old days. Whether it was overall worthwhile, I don't know. But we already accept the principle of higher H&S standards at work than at home, so...
https://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/pr2007/pr07_63.shtml
Private Members' Bill so still has a lot of hurdles to cross before it becomes law. The government wants to legislate to take away rights and generally make life worse for lots of other people before the end of the Parliament, so there may not be enough time for this to get through.
I’d be tempted to say yes to compulsory lids for delivery riders on e-bikes.
take up would be pretty much instant, as I’m pretty sure most ebike delivery riders won’t want a copper looking too closely at their ‘bike’
I wear a helmet 'cos I ride briskly and often off road (where I think I'm more likely to fall off as opposed to being in a collision). I don't think they should be compulsory. I think well designed and executed cycling infrastructure should be, in order to allow people to cycle as a means of transport without having to get specially dressed up.
Anyway good luck trying to enforce it.
https://twitter.com/TourofBritain/status/1700101726295019730
some one should send that nyc link to the proposer of this bill, any hint of a free helmet scheme should see it killed off 🙂
Reading that link, it is in response to a very nasty head injury one of his constituents suffered after falling off. It’s not the usual anti-cycling-disguised-as-fake-concern churned out by the DM and friends.
You reckon?
I think Oliver was just a handy prop I'm afraid (who apparently couldn't attend because of the costs of his complex care needs in the midst of the government laying waste to the NHS).
I'm sure he's a very passionate advocate for helmet use, I would similarly encourage people to wear them as a matter of course (which a large number already do), but compulsion by law is not required or likely to provide an overall benefit to society when stacked up against the probable downsides and the actual probability of enforcement.
Also this interaction almost certainly didn't take place as recounted:
At a personal level, on a recent family holiday, we rented bikes. When the person serving us offered me a helmet, I initially declined. He then looked me in the eye and asked, “Just how many brains do you have, sir?” I took the hint and I took the helmet
I wouldn’t let compulsory helmet wearing stop me from cycling, and doing so for that reason is just curmudgeon level narcissistic click bait whinging IMO regardless of political party enforcing it.
.
Its a bit like the toast/cat perpetual motion machine for the meathead right. Helmet compulsion is a massive PITA to cyclists and will reduce the number of one of their bogiemen - but compulsion is The Nanny State. Expect the instruction to hate cyclists wins out.
The case quote says the root cause was slipping off a pedal. So what needs to be mandated is better pedals.
Most of the reasons for needing helmets could be solved by sticking two zeros on any motoring offence fine. That would calm people down. Add automatic acceptance of helmet camera videos and much of the probelm would go.
Toatlly against any form of compulsion to look after oneself. M/c helmets, seat belts etc.
At a personal level, on a recent family holiday, we rented bikes. When the person serving us offered me a helmet, I initially declined. He then looked me in the eye and asked, “Just how many brains do you have, sir?” I took the hint and I took the helmet
https://twitter.com/_dhotya?lang=en
How would it work with all the bike hire schemes?
They must be a fairly big business and people who ride them seldom seem to have helmets.
Helmet compulsion is a rubbish idea. There's a reason almost no country does it
However, if the MP is genuinely concerned about saving lives then mandating car helmets would make much more of an impact (pardon the pun). In fact, what makes bikes uniquely dangerous, why not mandate helmets for anyone using the public highway.
Hasn’t the Aussie helmet law driven down bicycle use?
No, it hasn’t.
Just like cars speeding. Lots of people ride bikes without wearing helmets here. But people that ride bikes a lot always wear helmets
ie - it’s the law but nobody gives a ****, lots of people ride around with helmets on their handlebars but I’ve never heard of anyone getting fined.
It’s really not worth worrying about
Well it's not going to happen. It's a private members bill and the government just recently ruled it out after a fairly thourgh review on the matter.
Hasn’t the Aussie helmet law driven down bicycle use?
Yes it did significantly - without any real corresponding decrease in head injuries.
Another authoritarian ruling from this absolute state of a government.
I'm all for minimal government intervention in people's daily lives, sometimes however i understand its required and has its place, this however does not.
If people want to make stupid decisions and know what the impact of that decision could have, go ahead, be my guest, you do you and don't tell me how to live my life either,each to their own.
I love helmets, but would I have ever gotten into bikes at a young age if it was mandated? Probably not, I only started wearing one around 2010 when the idea of mortality and flying down trails past trees at 20+mph became more of a thing and I decided hey wearing a helmet is probably actually a good thing, and I hate seeing the youngsters up at the trails who don't wear them, but mandated on all public highways? It's just going to put people and kids off who hop on a bike for convenience to nip to the shops or their friends house, it's another thing to carry around and worry about, what if you misplace it and lose it? You have to wheel your bike home in fear of getting a fine from the police?
It also gives action man police who have gotten into the job for the wrong reasons more excuses to penalise and be a nob to people who are easy targets because investigating burglaries is too hard to do.
Not a fan of this at all. Quote me, disagree with me, try and have a STW edgy debate with me, call me an idiot for my opinion do whatever but you won't get a response from me as my opinion will not change on this matter.