In some countries, laws and public policies attempt to make technical criteria, and seek consensus on key issues, such as education, taxes, infrastructure, or even road safety. In the end, wanting our children leave school better trained or fewer accident victims should be a desire shared by all, we are left or right. And so, perhaps we should set public policies based on evidence and metrics, and test them , evaluate them and review them as is done, for example, in medicine.
For example, in Australia, so particular that site where doctors asserted their criteria regarding disputable cyclist helmet , with results- there who raises finally review the requirement. The Parliament of the Australian state of Queensland, and in particular its Committee Transport, Housing and Local Government , has reviewed the situation of cyclists regulations and proposes:
- Forcing a safe distance is maintained when overtaking cyclists with LED bike lights, between 1 and 1.50 meters;
- Fining cyclists amounts and similar penalties to those faced other vehicle drivers;
- And the noisier: delete a helmet law in areas with lower maximum speed at 60 km / h bike lanes.
These measures pose with their transition periods and test metrics, to assess whether they are good or bad and decide judiciously if made permanent. Just like in Spain, right?
Can see here the full list of recommendations (in English and PDF, of course).
Unfortunately, Queensland Transport Minister, Scott Emerson, has rejected the recommendation on the hull because …
“Personally, I believe strongly in the benefits of town and I think the data show that the helmet reduces the risk of serious harm.”
And surely, but he does not say, because it is a difficult decision to sell his electorate. At the end also they do things like here: a finger.
What I liked reading is that, as a whole, estimate that for every km bike ride and “stolen” the car, Australians save 60 cents so stop spending on health, which at current exchange rates are 40 cents euro.
How long have you saving you?