Stop Headway - Helmet compulsion in Northern Ireland

[meic]

I assume that the people who voted yesterday had not read the article, they would not have a chance to do so really.

I thought the article was excellent for the task, very good piece. Just too sanguinary late.

[Graham]

That's NI off the list of places to tour in the UK then

Or perhaps it is time to organise a protest tour of NI ??

PS. I am not an organiser. I know nothing. It just happened.

=======================================================================================
Northern Ireland Legislative Process
----------------------------------------------------

http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/legislatio ... rocess.htm

1. Pre-Introductory Scrutiny

Bill text, Explanatory Memorandum, Statement on legislative competence and Secretary of State’s consent, if required, submitted to the Speaker by Minister/Member in charge of the Bill.

Speaker notifies Minister/Member that Bill may be introduced.


2. First Stage / Introduction

On introduction the Clerk reads the Bill title. Statement on legislative competence is published with the Bill. Bill ordered to be printed and set down in the list of pending future business for Second Stage.


Bill copied to Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC).


3. Second Stage

Consideration of general principles in Assembly Plenary.


Bill may be referred by the Speaker, on a motion being agreed at any stage, to either the NIHRC or the Special Committee on Conformity with Equality Requirements for advice and, if agreed on a vote, the Equality Committee may take the Committee Stage.

*** The bill is reported to have been voted through this "Second stage". ***

4. Committee Stage

Bill stands referred to a departmental Committee, except were accelerated passage is granted.


5. Consideration Stage

Committee reports findings and proposed amendments to Assembly Plenary. All amendments and the details of the Bill voted on at this stage. Bill reprinted, as appropriate (i.e. if amendments made).


6. Further Consideration Stage

A second opportunity for the Bill to be amended by the Assembly. Only amendments debated and voted on at this stage. Bill reprinted, as appropriate (i.e. if amendments made).


7. Final Scrutiny

Bill referred to the Speaker for consideration under section 10(c) of the NI Act 1998. Bill proceeds to Final Stage.


8. Final Stage

Debate on the motion “that the Bill do now pass”.


9. Reconsideration Stage

Bill returns for reconsideration under SO38. Amendments considered. The question is that “The Bill, as amended, be approved” should be put forthwith and decided without amendment or debate. Bill reprinted.


10. Royal Assent

Bill becomes law. Act printed.

[coshgirl]

I agree that this could easily make the jump across the Irish Sea. Headway have now got a foothold in the UK Parliament. Peter Bone MP, who has been campaigning for mandatory helmets for years, will be monitoring this very carefully. What do we do? I think MHLs could be the final nail in cycling's coffin here in the UK - when we should be addressing the elephant in the room and the real danger - cars. It makes me sick to see police resources targeted on cyclists jumping red lights while ignoring motorists' on their mobiles / failing to indicate / encroaching in the ASL and jumping lights too. This will give them another reason to harass cyclists, as we are far easier to ticket than motorists.

[[XAP]Bob]

I agree that this could easily make the jump across the Irish Sea. Headway have now got a foothold in the UK Parliament. Peter Bone MP, who has been campaigning for mandatory helmets for years, will be monitoring this very carefully. What do we do? I think MHLs could be the final nail in cycling's coffin here in the UK - when we should be addressing the elephant in the room and the real danger - cars. It makes me sick to see police resources targeted on cyclists jumping red lights while ignoring motorists' on their mobiles / failing to indicate / encroaching in the ASL and jumping lights too. This will give them another reason to harass cyclists, as we are far easier to ticket than motorists.

Are we - they'll have to catch us through the stationary traffic

[Graham]

I find it quite extraordinary that a subject of such minor importance ( in the big scheme of things ) should command any significant time in a legislative process.

I really would have thought that they would have more important things to spend their time on.

OTOH. Picking on marginalised "out-groups" is a political goldmine, especially if they can be forced to ( seemingly ) mitigate the danger that is usually caused by others ( i.e. the poor, hard-done-by motorists ).

"Those ruddy cyclists. They're a real menace. They should be made to wear plastic hats and pay road tax. . . . rant, foam, etc."

[simon1]

You know this issue of people wearing plastic hats when riding a bicycle reminds me of the issue of sticking plastic covers into 3-pin wall sockets. The campaign to stop that nonsense seems to have some similarities with what's going on here and I note they have had some high profile press coverage and have a 'celebrity' patron.

http://www.fatallyflawed.org.uk/

Seems to me that the "common sense" position that a plastic hat is the "obvious" thing to put on your head when riding a bike needs to be "debunked" - in a similar way to how they have shown that plastic covers inserted into sockets are, not safer, but demonstrably more dangerous.

[Cunobelin]

These things are always badly thought out as the instigators have no real idea of the facts.

When the HSE refused to back helmets for Post Office workers, specifically excluding them from PPE the Post Office did it by the back door making it a "uniform policy"

A friend of ours used to wear a helmet on his post bike by choice, but suddenly ended up with a helmet that was certified to EN1078 as opposed to SNELL, very uncomfortable and poorly fitting - because that was the supplied item.

The Post Office action actually forced him to wear a helmet that broke all the sensible rules for selecting a helmet and made him more at risk!

A spectacular own goal and I suspect a sign of things to come if we ever get compulsion.

[[XAP]Bob]

These things are always badly thought out as the instigators have no real idea of the facts.

When the HSE refused to back helmets for Post Office workers, specifically excluding them from PPE the Post Office did it by the back door making it a "uniform policy"

A friend of ours used to wear a helmet on his post bike by choice, but suddenly ended up with a helmet that was certified to EN1078 as opposed to SNELL, very uncomfortable and poorly fitting - because that was the supplied item.

The Post Office action actually forced him to wear a helmet that broke all the sensible rules for selecting a helmet and made him more at risk!

A spectacular own goal and I suspect a sign of things to come if we ever get compulsion.

Could he not refuse to wear it on the basis that it was ill fitting and dangerous?

[kwackers]

These things are always badly thought out as the instigators have no real idea of the facts.

When the HSE refused to back helmets for Post Office workers, specifically excluding them from PPE the Post Office did it by the back door making it a "uniform policy"

A friend of ours used to wear a helmet on his post bike by choice, but suddenly ended up with a helmet that was certified to EN1078 as opposed to SNELL, very uncomfortable and poorly fitting - because that was the supplied item.

The Post Office action actually forced him to wear a helmet that broke all the sensible rules for selecting a helmet and made him more at risk!

A spectacular own goal and I suspect a sign of things to come if we ever get compulsion.

All the postmen I know and have seen with helmets around Warrington ride around with the straps undone as a form of protest. (At least they did)

[iron legs]

As a CTC member of over 25 yrs living in Northern Ireland I have to agree with meic's comment above. The local DA brands itself Northern Ireland but is Belfast based. (You will search in vain to find any runs starting outside the greater Belfast area). I contacted the CTC HQ about the threat posed to local roads by the new A5 road scheme here in Northern Ireland running from the border at Auchnacloy to Londonderry. The response, I received, was frankly bloody awful with little or no interest. My job precludes me from being involved in politics and campaigning against a road scheme is political. Sustrans have been more heavily involved lobbying against the road scheme. CTC have not only failed cyclists who they claim to represent in Northern Ireland and handed insurance companies a stick to beat all cyclists with but also failed cyclists in the rest of the UK by not effectively fighting this motion. This is the thin end of the wedge and this legislation will be tried in other devolved regions before trying Westminster.

It is also a sad comment on the charity debate. For years our subscriptions have been syphoned off and increased to support cycle campaigning in some areas of the UK without fulling disclosing what was going on to the membership. How much did the CTC spend in Northern Ireland as a percentage of their campaigning budget year on year? The proposer for the charity motion was Mr Flood the council representative from Northern Ireland. Great things were promised and members exhorted to support this 'all singing bells and whistles necessity' which was essential to bulwark cycling and protect the interest of all cyclists in the UK. I think the facts now speak for themselves as the CTC has been acknowledged as late and ineffective.

The question is, do I still remain a member of the CTC or get insurance to ride the bike more cheaply from another cycling body?

[Nutsey]

Don't underestimate Boris Johnson as a barrier to compulsion in England.

[Graham]

The Bill itself :-
http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/legislatio ... 10_efm.htm

The supporting speech in the assembly
Note : you will have to search on "cyclists" to get to the start point

http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/record/rep ... 110131.htm

I feel sure that researchers from http://www.cyclehelmets.org/ and CTC will be carefully examining this speech and will rebut any dubious claims or misuse of statistics.
A few years ago CTC did "persuade" a pro-compulsion organisation** to withdraw public claims that cycle helmets prevented 88% of head injuries.

** I think it was BHIT, but I'm not completely sure.

[KTM690]

Reading the bill it seems to me your task is to justify that the slim possibility of a reduction in cycling (with no long term studies to prove this) is worth one child's life?

The Initial intention was just to enforce child helmets but this is now extended to adults - in part for role model purposes.

TRL and BMA - both in favor/evidence to support. hmmm they're hevyweights.....

And sporting cycling bodies mandate helmet use - double standards?

Seems the main strength in counter argument is SUSTRANS claiming it will reduce numbers cycling....as said balance that against a child's life.

demonstrate that children (under 18's for this purpose) do not benefit from wearing a helmet when they''re head strikes the floor at 20mph and you've a good case.

Politically, counter rows about reduced cycling numbers, quality of science and civil freedoms and so on will be weak as will attempts to blame motorists.

[kwackers]

Reading the bill it seems to me your task is to justify that the slim possibility of a reduction in cycling (with no long term studies to prove this) is worth one child's life?

The Initial intention was just to enforce child helmets but this is now extended to adults - in part for role model purposes.

TRL and BMA - both in favor/evidence to support. hmmm they're hevyweights.....

And sporting cycling bodies mandate helmet use - double standards?

Seems the main strength in counter argument is SUSTRANS claiming it will reduce numbers cycling....as said balance that against a child's life.

demonstrate that children (under 18's for this purpose) do not benefit from wearing a helmet when they''re head strikes the floor at 20mph and you've a good case.

Politically, counter rows about reduced cycling numbers, quality of science and civil freedoms and so on will be weak as will attempts to blame motorists.

Emotive nonsense.
If you want to save children's lives, close playgrounds, stop them running around like idiots, remove them from bad parents etc etc.
As for role models - close pubs, stop selling alcohol, stop drivers speeding, stop people driving to kids to school, legally enforce 'proper' diets.
There are a whole host of stuff that would have much greater benefits than the handful of kids that manage to bang their heads whilst riding a bicycle (and suffer any lasting damage) something I've never known happen - not even indirectly.

I'd suggest if we really want a nanny state then we start with the low hanging fruit rather than something that seems to be based on nothing other than "common sense" and struggles to find any basis in statistics.

[meic]

Reading the bill it seems to me your task is to justify that the slim possibility of a reduction in cycling (with no long term studies to prove this) is worth one child's life?

The Initial intention was just to enforce child helmets but this is now extended to adults - in part for role model purposes.

TRL and BMA - both in favor/evidence to support. hmmm they're hevyweights.....

And sporting cycling bodies mandate helmet use - double standards?

Seems the main strength in counter argument is SUSTRANS claiming it will reduce numbers cycling....as said balance that against a child's life.

demonstrate that children (under 18's for this purpose) do not benefit from wearing a helmet when they''re head strikes the floor at 20mph and you've a good case.

Politically, counter rows about reduced cycling numbers, quality of science and civil freedoms and so on will be weak as will attempts to blame motorists.

Hardly double standards, if I was going racing or doing a downhill event, I might consider that there was enough risk to justify wearing a lid too.
Not because I am cycling which is relatively safe but because I am doing adventure sports.

Likewise if I was whitewater canoeing I might wear a lid but not to paddle on the local river.