I refer to the letters by Jim Wightman and George Debono about cycling and safety on our roads (The Sunday Times of Malta, January 18).

Debono labels Malta as “Destination death” even though we have one of the lowest road death rates in Europe. One of the ‘solutions’ presented for improving road safety is the presumption of guilt for all car drivers involved in an accident with a pedestrian or cyclist, contrary to Maltese law which presumes innocence until proven guilty.

Shifting the blame away from cyclists would simply encourage dangerous practices. Indeed, Wightman supports cyclists who would ignore one-way signs and would give them priority over traffic travelling the right way up a one-way street. This is not the first time that Wightman publicly supported dangerous practices, such as that of not wearing safety equipment while cycling.

What is the benefit of allowing cyclists to break the law, with consequences borne by other road users? Could it be because car drivers are insured, and cyclists could benefit from such insurance policies? In that case, please present your proposal as such, rather than masquerading as advocates for road safety.

Since the necessary infrastructure to separate cyclists and heavy traffic is not in place in Malta, the only way to separate the two is for cyclists to avoid major roads. Should such infrastructure be put in place, cycling would still be dangerous.

The number of traffic deaths in the Netherlands in 2010 stood at 640, and 162 of these were cyclists.

An increase in cyclist deaths would be an unavoidable consequence of the widespread use of bicycles as routine transport on major roads. As such, cycling on major roads cannot possibly have any significant health benefits.

Shifting the blame to other road users would not change anything.