Bicycle Network chief executive Craig Richards: Why Victoria’s bike helmet laws are too strict

VICTORIA lead the way with compulsory seat belts and the world followed. After 30 years, New Zealand is the only country that has followed Victoria’s mandatory bike helmets — they are too strict, writes Craig Richards.

OUR mandatory bike helmet laws are too strict. Let’s give people the choice to ride free.

In 1970 Victoria lead the way with compulsory seat belts and the world followed.

In 1990 Victoria also lead the way with mandatory bike helmets but after nearly 30 years, New Zealand remains the only other country that has followed Australia’s lead.

Some countries do have partial bike helmet laws. Spain has the most curious where you need to wear a helmet when riding a bike outside the city unless you’re going uphill or it’s hot.

BICYCLE NETWORK PUSH TO SCRAP COMPULSORY HELMETS

BLOCKED BIKE LANES RISKING LIVES

FIVE OF THE BEST BIKE RIDES IN MELBOURNE

Supporters believe mandatory bike helmets are vital to prevent head trauma. Opponents believe it discourages bike riding by making it inconvenient and seem dangerous.

Each side of the debate waves a wand of the over 2,500 academic studies on the issue to prove their case. Frequently, any attempt to suggest there is an alternative view is met with explosive emotion.

Bicycle Network has just concluded a 14-month review of Australia’s mandatory helmet laws. It’s certainly been interesting.

I’ve had a frothing advocate poke me in the chest screaming that I’m ruining their life. I’ve had others point a threatening finger warning about my dire future for having the audacity to consider the issue.

The Bicycle Network is calling for our mandatory bike helmet laws to be relaxed. Generic picture

One day it dawned on me why some of the mandatory helmet law supporters are so passionate.

They see bikes as the beach head and want helmets to extend to other activities they see as high risk. The examples they used were being in a car or climbing a ladder.

The fact is there are only two activities where our government has intervened to say you must wear a helmet: bike riding and motorcycle riding. They haven’t felt the same need with contact sports like boxing, football or cage fighting.

The truth is the mandatory helmet law debate goes much deeper than bike helmets. It’s a debate about whether it should be a criminal offence for humans not to don protective equipment.

Every day we make a myriad of risk choices to prevent an incident occurring. The very last line of defence should be protective equipment. It’s a very bad day when you drop a concrete block and rely on your steel cap boot to save you, or if you fall off your bike and rely on your helmet.

Bicycle Network chief executive Craig Richards. Picture: Supplied

When it comes to bike riding, the reality is that the highest risk is on our roads. 4 out of every 5 bike crashes are the fault of a person driving a car.

We need to be doing more to prevent people driving cars hitting bike riders. Protected places to ride are critical. Relying on helmets is poor practice.

But as a first step, on our low risk bike paths, it’s time that bike riding wasn’t treated like a highly dangerous activity. It isn’t — the reality is the risk of crashing when you hop on a bike is incredibly small.

6 out of 10 bike riders are calling for change. They believe they’re capable of assessing the risk and deciding in low risk situations whether they should wear a helmet. Just as they’re assessing the risk of which route to take.

In summary, adults should be able to make adult decisions in low risk situations. If a person wants to go and grab some milk, trundle off for a swim at the beach or go for a leisurely Sunday pedal, it’s time Australia followed the rest of the world and let them decide whether they put on a helmet or feel the wind in their hair.

Craig Richards is chief executive of the Bicycle Network, Australia’s biggest cycling lobby group