Sir, – Mark Fox is correct in highlighting the vulnerability of users of micromobility devices when travelling on the roads alongside heavy vehicles (Letters, April 29th). That point raises a more immediate question: why do we permit children to use e-bikes on public roads with no minimum age requirement, no obligation to wear a crash helmet or to demonstrate a basic level of road competence?
A young rider may lawfully travel in mixed traffic, negotiating junctions, roundabouts and heavy vehicles, yet is subject to no training, no test and no obligation to wear protective headgear.
Falls and collisions at modest speed can result in catastrophic head injuries, the severity of which can often be reduced by helmet use. If helmets are considered essential for other two-wheeled road users, it is difficult to see why this apparently more vulnerable category is treated differently.
When public policy appears inconsistent, it does more than expose young people to avoidable harm. It undermines confidence in the coherence of decision-making more generally. At a time when governments are asking the public to accept significant changes in behaviour, including in response to climate and transport policies, that confidence is crucial. – Yours, etc,
READ MORE
PAUL O’SHEA,
Shankill,
Dublin 18.
