Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Drop requirement for bike helmets

Re: "More cycling means better health, lower costs," Aug. 17.
img-0-7144680.jpg
A letter-writer suggests that helmet legislation is the largest factor limiting bicycle use in the capital region, and that repealing the laws would be more effective than spending millions on expanding the trail network.

Re: "More cycling means better health, lower costs," Aug. 17.

A perceptive point of interest is raised on the number of ditched bikes around Victoria, but the question flagged is the wrong one: "How many of of these people would take their bikes for local trips if we had a completed, connected and safe cycling network with proper support facilities?"

As it is in the rest of the world, the way to get more people on bicycles in this province is to get rid of helmet legislation. Although it's instructive, one doesn't have to look to Europe where cycling rates are in the order of 10 times what they are in Victoria. Stanley Park, with many segregated bicycle paths, has an infrastructure that is far more conducive to occasional cycling than most of the landscape in Victoria.

It doesn't take too much of an effort to see that for every cyclist in the park wearing a helmet, there are almost two who are not. In every jurisdiction that has introduced mandatory helmet wear, these two are the ones who drop out, regardless of cycling infrastructure.

In terms of getting more people on bikes, reducing pollution improving public health, $220 million is the wrong solution.

Brian Nimeroski

Sooke