CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

Strict liabilty

(2 posts)
  • Started 11 years ago by crowriver
  • Latest reply from Arellcat

  1. crowriver
    Member

    I have posted on this previously in another tthread, but thought it may be clearer to start a new one.

    A certain FOI request received a response:

    https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/evidence_regarding_liability_law#incoming-437451

    Make of it what you will.

    To me the 'research' conducted by officials seems a textbook example of how to give the appearance of answering the question, while in fact failing to answer it.

    If this is how 'evidence based' policy works in Scotland, then we really are off to Hell in a hand cart!

    Posted 11 years ago #

  2. Arellcat
    Moderator

    The FOI response makes it clear that datasets could not be obtained to normalise KSI stats with respect to the number of cyclists on the roads or the amount of cycling, and that—quite rightly—drawing any meaningful conclusions simply from the long term trends in the KSIs for different countries with and without liability law is next to impossible.

    As such, most of the FOI response can be ignored.

    The next question to ask probably is: on what legal grounds has the Scottish Government (or the UK Government perhaps) based its decision not to introduce stricter liability law for vulnerable road users? If so many other European countries have introduced it, is the UKG's view based on a preference for a softer approach, or on legal impediment?

    Posted 11 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin