Motorists, cyclists and pedestrians (1)

George Debono's Talking Point (Protecting Vulnerable Road Users, October 8) raises several issues which go far beyond the issue of motorists being careful and respectful with cyclists and pedestrians, which issue is wholeheartedly agreed to. At the end of the day all motorists are also pedestrians and quite a few are cyclists as well.

Dr Debono advocates that the driver of the most powerful vehicle involved in a collision should be automatically liable for insurance and compensation purposes. Such a proposal has no logic and is manifestly unfair. Suppose a Mini crashes into a Jaguar. Why should the driver of the Jaguar be automatically responsible even if the Mini caused the accident? Are we not all equal before the law? Are we not all innocent before proven guilty?

Dr Debono also asserts that the change in the law will have an effect on insurance premiums for bigger cars, presumably increasing them. This could only happen if owners of bigger cars will be found to be responsible for accidents which they did not cause in the first place. Why is this a benefit? It seems to me that this is a miscarriage of justice. We should all be responsible for what we do, whether we are motorists, pedestrians or cyclists, not for what we are assumed to do.

And finally Dr Debono states that in an accident involving a pedestrian and a cyclist, the cyclist will be assumed to be at fault. The logic here is even more convoluted since in this case both pedestrian and cyclist have the same power, one "man power". So why is the cyclist to blame?