26 March 2011

This house acknowledges...

Early day motion 1393 is a breath of fresh air - let's hope it succeeds.  It proposes to put the onus on motorists to prove their innocence in the event of a collision with a cyclist or pedestrian - a helpful measure!

Compare that with the (successful) efforts by Andrea Leadsom MP to introduce 'tougher penalties for cyclists   who kill" - even though the numbers of such unfortunate events are microscopic.  I entirely sympathise with the plight of the parents of the victims of the so-called "cyclist" in this case, and fully agree this individual should have gone to jail for what he did.

Ms Leadsom assures us that there was no political point-scoring in this.  Ms Leadsom is an honourable person.  However, as reported in the press this can seem like one of those campaigns aimed at the soft target of cyclists and cycling - who cause so few fatal incidents but are also a "hard to hear" minority, a fringe group against whom this legislation is easy to introduce.

The fact is, when it comes to fatalities on the road, injustice is visited on cyclists just like on any other group of road users.  The idea that somehow the law treats motorists more harshly is nonsense.  It would be far more helpful for people like Andrea Leadsom to look at good and bad road users than to attack the problem piecemeal, concentrating on a particular mode of transport (usually cyclists) first.

Which takes me back to Early day motion 1393.  Ms Leadsom has not signed it - I'll request that she does: let's see what happens.

No comments: