Road Safety Charity advocated Cycling Minister losing their job

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

downfader

extimus uero philosophus
Location
'ampsheeeer
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Cy...en_He_Uses_His_Bike,_Campaigners_Criticise_MP

Firstly SkyNews gets the data wrong. 2500 cyclists are not killed on UK roads each year. Its about 5% of that.

Secondly Brake suggest:

Ministers should practise what they preach and when a minister directly responsible for cycling safety refuses to wear a cycle helmet, we then have to look at their suitability for the role.

He is suggesting removal of freedom of choice. He makes no comment on bad driving, or prevention but instead seems to (along with Sky) decide it would be better to slag off and character assassinate the guy.

Annoyingly Sky is refusing all emails and comments of corrections, or any professional opinion counter to "helmets save lives".
 

ThePainInSpain

Active Member
Location
Malaga, Spain
Another typical load of trash from a Murdoch company.

Why is it that the media have to LIE instead of reporting the FACTS. The problem is that people actually believe what they read and hear from this media.

I just looked up the figures from a government web site, the latest figures I could find were for 2008. The number of cyclists killed in Great Britain in 2008 was 115. That is somewhat different to the figure quoted by 'Brake'. So why was that not checked and corrected.

The total number injured was 16,297, but that would include anyone with a little scratch or graze (including overprotective parents with their sprogs) that presented themselves to A&E.
 

ohnovino

Large Member
Location
Liverpool
This is why I rarely bother watching/reading the news at the weekend. All the proper journalists stop working and random, meaningless, mistake-filled drivel like this is all that remains: that article's been up for over 24 hours without a sub-editor glancing over it.
 
OP
OP
downfader

downfader

extimus uero philosophus
Location
'ampsheeeer
Guardian Bike Blog have written a rebuttal, it seems... havent had the energy to read it (not feeling too good, has been a baaaad day)

I also might have a rebuttal to a letter porinted last week in the telegraph. One of their people asked me for sources. Can she not use google? Tried me best but f*** it I dont feel up to it right now.
 

atbman

Veteran
Lazy reporting/editing by Sky. The original quotation in the Grauniad was, "But Joel Hickman, spokesman for the road safety charity Brake, said that Baker was setting a terrible example and the evidence was conclusive that helmets saved lives. "Last year, over 17,000 cyclists were injured on UK roads with over 2,500 killed or seriously injured."
 

Davidc

Guru
Location
Somerset UK
The last year for which I know of figures being available was 2008, and the killed or seriously injured figure was 2565, of which 115 were killed. The most likely explanation is that sky couldn't understand the difference between the two.

As TPIS says the remainder of the published number of injured were minor injuries. It just surprises me that Sky don't report them as all being dead!

The data is available from DfT here.
 

dellzeqq

pre-talced and mighty
Location
SW2
BRAKE are just an embarrassment, but if that Hickman geezer is being quoted accurately, then they've plunged to new depths on this one.

What was the rubbish story about the TdF fatality that they were putting out a few years back?
 
OP
OP
downfader

downfader

extimus uero philosophus
Location
'ampsheeeer


Brake have done good work in the past. I would hate to judge them on just this, they do need to realise its the wrong stance and alienates them from the public. They come across as preachy, and preachy is never good (unless you're a Minister, LOL)
 
I think it is fantastic!

It poses the simple question.....

If the evidence for helmets is so unequivocal, why are they having to tell such blatant lies?
 

Lurker

Senior Member
Location
London
Good piece in support of Norman Baker by Roadpeace, as pdf, at http://roadpeace.org/resources/PR_130411_Wind_in_your_hair.pdf "The joy of the wind in your hair… 13 April 2011 The media (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/apr/08/cycling-minister-refuses-bike-helmet) has recently reported that road safety campaigners are criticising Norman Baker for not wearing a helmet while cycling. On behalf of campaigners for road danger reduction, we want to say thanks, Norman! Rather than criticising him for not wearing a helmet, we want to congratulate him for being one of the minority of the population who actually gets out on a bike, which is good for his health, and for the health of others and our environment. The fact that Norman Baker is a member of the Government and has responsibility for cycling is even better. RoadPeace believes that if more government officials, policy makers, magistrates, local councillors and senior police officers used a bicycle as a way of getting around then we would have a very different and much safer road environment. Norman Baker is also supportive of 20mph as the default speed limit in residential areas. If you really care about the safety of cyclists then slowing the speed of traffic is vital. And of course this benefits us all; we are all pedestrians at the end of the day. Slower speeds reduce the severity and likelihood of collisions, and they also create a road environment which is less dangerous and intimidating, and one where more people are likely to walk and cycle. On helmets, we take issue with the claim that the majority of deaths and serious injuries to cyclists involve head injury. Even the Department for Transport is unable to come up with any estimate of the number of deaths that would have been prevented if the cyclist had been wearing a helmet. And to be sure, wearing a helmet will offer little protection to a cyclist in a collision with a multiton lorry, which for London cyclists is a key concern. Our Chair Cynthia Barlow has been campaigning to reduce lorry danger since 2000 after her (helmet-wearing) daughter was killed by a lorry in 2000. It has also been incorrectly stated that many of our international and European partners have already introduced compulsory helmet wearing. In reality, very few countries have this legislation, and where they do, the legislation has either failed through lack of enforcement, resulted in a drop in cycling, or been repealed. So, thanks again Norman, and enjoy that wind in your hair."
 

the snail

Guru
Location
Chippenham
BRAKE are just an embarrassment, but if that Hickman geezer is being quoted accurately, then they've plunged to new depths on this one.

What was the rubbish story about the TdF fatality that they were putting out a few years back?

They still refer to it, Casarteli crashed without helmet and died, Boardman crashed wearing helmet and survived. QED.
 
Top Bottom