Making cycling safe for youngsters

My 15-year-old son likes to ride a bicycle. I was consequently very disturbed to read the report Driver Cleared Of Injuring Young Fast Bicycle Rider (December 12) because the facts as reported simply don't add up.

Here we have a car driven by a motorist without a licence who hits a cyclist. The car he is driving is allegedly in bad condition and with defective brakes that do not function until the (brake) pedal is "pumped six times". This driver leaves brake skid marks 42 metres long.

The car driver's version was accepted. But we are not told what the unfortunate young cyclist had to say.

If I understand correctly, the skid marks started 14 metres before impact with the cyclist and then continued for a further 28 metres after impact. Yet, the driver testified that he spotted the boy when he was about "two feet" away before impact occurred. Why then did the driver brake hard at least 14 metres before impact and not "two feet" before impact? How did the court explain the 14-metre skid mark? Furthermore, one might add a further six to12 metres to the 14-metre skid mark before collision to allow for the few seconds of pumping the brake pedal until the brakes locked.

Dawret it-Tunnara is a quiet narrow road in what is presumably a speed-limited residential area. It is the sort of road where one would expect to be safe on a bicycle. Are skid marks of 42 metres consistent with driving at a safe speed within the limit for such a road?

Assuming that the facts were correctly reported, an acceptable alternative scenario would be that of a powerful car driven by an inexperienced driver by virtue of having no licence, travelling too fast as suggested by 42-metre skid marks and unable to stop soon enough from 14-28 metres to avoid an accident because the brakes had to be pumped six times to stop the car.

It is a common experience with pedestrians to misjudge the speed of an oncoming car when stepping off a kerb. Pedestrians can leap back onto the pavement but cyclists cannot - even with good brakes.

I happen to have read the Think Tank report on traffic pollution. Part III of this report deals with promotion of cycling. In this report it is emphasised that attitudes must be modified to make cycling safer in Malta because using a bicycle means having to share the road with motorists. Malta is still far behind in making cycling safe for youngsters. In European countries motorists are required to anticipate potentially dangerous situations and pro- actively avoid endangering cyclists.

Driving a car on a quiet residential road fast enough to leave a 42-metre skid mark is not in conformity with this. Neither could a young cyclist have anticipated that a car was coming at speed in a quiet residential road. In such a case as this, the motorist would be assumed to be legally responsible for such a collision as it cannot be proved that the cyclist deliberately caused the crash.

As long as there is no shift to the attitude where the cyclist is given the benefit of the doubt rather than the vehicle driver, I will be very worried about my son's liking for the bicycle. I urge all other parents to lobby for measures to make life safer for their children, especially those who wish to cycle.