---

Road Safety Bill [HL]

My Lords, while I think the amendment is extremely well meaning and that it is a very good idea for people to take proper safety measures, whatever it is they are doing that is dangerous, I am against compulsion. There are two sides to it. First, there is enough compulsion about things in life, and it should be up to individuals largely to decide. Children, I realise, are not mentally experienced enough to always make correct decisions, but they can be influenced very strongly by their parents. That brings me on to the business about permission—who is liable? Living in the country, our children go in and out and pop on a bicycle. They may decide to unlock the bike shed and get one out. We have no idea really what they are up to, where or when. They come and go as they please. On the practicality of suggesting they should be checked every time they want to go on a bike ride or whatever, they have general permission to use their bicycles. I am not quite sure how parents like us, who have a relaxed attitude to the comings and goings of their children, would fare on this. So I feel that that is probably the biggest downside. I do not like the potential liability and the potential chance for some person in authority to bully adults about their children’s behaviour when maybe the adult has not been in a position to do much about it. I do not think that we should over control society. The real fact of the matter is that we are more likely to die of a heart attack, cancer or a stroke, or something related to that. Your chances of being damaged badly in an accident realistically are very low.