The Government needs to sort out mobility scooter rules, a report by MPs said today.Because governments just love data.
It was important that the Government collected better data on the use of these scooters, the report from the House of Commons Transport Committee said.
Oh, they rarely use it, and if it conflicts with what they want to do anyway, they’ll toss it out in a heartbeat, but they love it and horde it like dragons horde gold…
The MPs noted the DfT launched a consultation exercise on the issue of mobility scooters but was concerned that, after a similar review in 2005, ministers failed to act on many of its findings.You can see the ‘But…’ coming, can’t you?
This time it was important that the Government acted on the consultation conclusions, said the committee's chairman Louise Ellman (Lab, Liverpool Riverside).
She added: "Increasingly, mobility scooters are a vital aid for many people in the UK. We welcome the independence that these vehicles can give people to go about their daily lives."
"However, we are concerned about the many reported accidents and injuries involving the scooters.And naturally, the H&S people are on this in a flash:
"The Government does not have adequate data on either how many mobility scooters are currently in use or on the number and type of accidents in which they might be involved."
Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, said: "We welcome the call for data to be collected on incidents involving mobility scooters, because current evidence relating to accidents and injuries is sparse.Well, how about you don’t introduce them then? You seem convinced there is a problem without anything other than anecdotal data and your gut feeling.
"The lack of such data means it is difficult to justify introducing new regulations that may be disproportionate to the level of risk associated with mobility scooters."
Do you think you are a climate scientist, or something?
Andrew Howard, the AA's head of road safety, said: "One of the reasons for the success of British road safety has been that we monitor accidents well and act to stop those that we know are happening, rather than those that we think may be happening.Well, indeed.
"That is what we need to do here, to make sure that we don't deny people independence and mobility until we know what the real danger is and how we can remedy it."
He went on: "However, we must remember that these vehicles cannot provide as much protection as a car, and are used by the old and the infirm.
"Unfortunately, these people are more frail and therefore more likely to be killed or injured in accidents compared to younger, fitter people. That must not be forgotten when more information about accidents becomes available."
But it will be, if this post by Going Fast, Getting Nowhere is anything to go on:
In Edinburgh last weekend, an off-duty soldier fell from one, hit his head on the pavement, and sadly died. Now, it was the weekend, at 2.20 am, and the man was celebrating his birthday. I think it is safe to conclude that he would have been in a cheerful frame of mind. It would appear that he lost his footing when jumping off the pedicab to speak to a group of girls. One of those things, eh? No.*sigh*
SOMETHING MUST BE DONE.
There are, apparently 'fresh safety fears' after the incident. Council leaders have 'pledged' to examine the regulations, and Councillor Colin Keir said the rules surrounding rickshaws needed to be made more robust.
11 comments:
Sorry, but have you not heard of the thousands of disabled people on these carts who die horribly in fireballs after crashing into tables and chairs outside cafes and restaurants and overturning?
You really are heartless. I for one am happy to volunteer for a job monitoring the situation. Preferably from a chair in front of a cafe. Which has free newspapers. And a tab with the ONS.
I watched a public phone/text/email debate about this on the news this morning.
It was totally about weighing up the nuisance of these things against the freedom they give their users. Non users wanted them regulated or painted bright colours, users - didnt.
Not one person commented that it is simply another reason for the state to introduce more control.
Apparently their have been "calls for tighter regulation". They didnt say who had called for this but something I have noticed is that if you say "calls have been made for (insert whatever)" it will quickly follow that calls WILL be made by the public for that particular regulation.
Some low ranking jobsworth only has to point out some insignificant perceived problem and say "calls have been made". Immediately the public become divided over an issue that they were not divided over before.
Instant dishormony.
Don't forget the free wi-fi!
I think this may stem from a case a few months ago where a teenage boy was driving one of these things in a selfish way, and when Plod were summoned it turned out that there was nothing they could do.
Anyone can drive one, apparently, anywhere, you don't need a licence or insurance, and it doesn't matter if you're steaming drunk either.
Well obviously the tidy bureaucratic mind couldn't cope with that. Stand by for insurance rules, licences, tests, MOT's, and thousands of new officials with laptops, offices, company cars, standard sick-leave allowances, and - natch - inflation-proof final salary pensions, to enforce and manage it all.
As much as I agree that the government loves control, it should be noted that they haven't managed to get cyclists yet despite persistent calls for something to be done about us so they is no certainty anything will ever be done about mobility scooters.
Thank you very kindly for the link, Julia - This one misses the extra 'i' and hits the target. It's a sad world where the answer to every problem is more regulation.
"We are dreaming of systems so perfect
That no-one will need to be good."
Hmm, much as I dislike regulating things especially in the hands of this government, being half-blind has made me a vulnerable target for a 40-stone half-wit hurtling around the pavements and shops at 10mph. Let them test their steering prowess on the roads, not on me.
"Thank you very kindly for the link, Julia - This one misses the extra 'i' and hits the target."
Whoops! Fixed! :)
I wonder how many publicly-funded man-hours will go into this.
Meanwhile, the jobsworths at ground level are refusing to hand over NHS walking frames until 'clients' have been given official training in their use.
"Apparently their have been "calls for tighter regulation". They didnt say who had called for this but something I have noticed is that if you say "calls have been made for (insert whatever)" it will quickly follow that calls WILL be made by the public for that particular regulation."
Oh, indeed. That's a favoured trick. Often the calls (if they have come at all) have come from tame fakecharities...
"...it should be noted that they haven't managed to get cyclists yet despite persistent calls for something to be done about us so they is no certainty anything will ever be done about mobility scooters."
There's the obvious difficulty with cycles that they are too small to fit a useful reg plate to - not a problem with these scooters.
"I think this may stem from a case a few months ago where a teenage boy was driving one of these things in a selfish way, and when Plod were summoned it turned out that there was nothing they could do."
Ah, yes. I remember the case you mean.
"Let them test their steering prowess on the roads, not on me."
They are a bit of a menance, mainly because they are silent.
But people in cars still kill people despite government regulation.
"Meanwhile, the jobsworths at ground level are refusing to hand over NHS walking frames until 'clients' have been given official training in their use."
They should drop the term 'clients' and use one more fitting.
'Supplicants', perhaps?
Post a Comment