Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 4 Hansard (8 May) . . Page.. 1116 ..

Mr Berry: And they are going much faster, and a few things like that.

MR MOORE: Indeed. Exactly the same logic, however, applies. If you wish to prevent more injuries and this is the method of doing it, if you are going to compel adults to look after themselves, to compel them to prevent injury to themselves, then we must look at it.

Mr Berry: Seat belts, speed limits - - -

MR MOORE: Mr Berry interjects about seat belts. The big difference between seat belts, with which I agree, and bicycle helmets is that the efficacy of seat belts was examined in huge detail, including a huge number of crash tests, before they were implemented. The benefits were clearly demonstrable. There are no similar studies showing demonstrable benefit from bicycle helmets. That is the question we want to argue.

I would love to have the Social Policy Committee, to which I propose this inquiry should go, come back and say, "Mr Moore, you have just missed the studies. The studies do exist. Here they are, and they are conclusive". In that case, I could see that the Assembly would say, "Yes, we have very good reason to argue for bicycle helmets". It may well be that public education is what we need. Public education has been very effective in slowing down drivers on open roads, combined with appropriate policing of speed limits. Maybe improvement of cycle routes and cyclepaths would also help. Since the helmet law came in in 1992, according to evidence provided to me - and this is the sort of evidence I would like examined by the Social Policy Committee - the riding of bicycles has declined by an average of 37 per cent, yet the number of bicycle casualties admitted to public hospitals is virtually unchanged. That requires a little bit of effort in interpretation to ask: What is happening? Is there any real efficacy with bicycle helmets?

I am not proposing the withdrawal of this law or putting this law aside while the Social Policy Committee is looking at it. All I am asking the Assembly to do is look in a sensible way at whether or not the law we put in place is working, because we know that it is discouraging people from riding bicycles. If it is discouraging people from riding bicycles, there may well be an adverse health effect from that. Indeed, we know that the British Medical Association recommends that cycling should be actively promoted as an environmentally friendly means of transport and an effective means of improving public health. That is what this issue is about. To expect only cyclists to make minimal use of the health system is also unfair and discriminatory. We know that people do take some risks, and in our society we recognise that and we still provide appropriate medical services for them.

What concerns me, amongst other things, is that former cyclists are losing the health benefits of exercise, and those who are still riding may even be at greater risk of injury because they wear helmets. I know that there are some people who argue that. I am not yet convinced of it myself, because I still wear my helmet. However, I would like to know whether the benefit to the population's health has increased or whether we have a disbenefit. With very little evidence, we have removed a basic civil right, a basic choice, for adults.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .