How to Convince a Lobbyist?

This was originally going to be a private letter, but having received 'boilerplate' responses from every politician I have contacted, I thought it would be more productive to have this kind of policy lobbying discussion in the open.

Although I have concerns about the policy being lobbied for, I have far greater concerns for how the foundations upon which that policy were built. I really need to try to understand more about the process of how that lobbying viewpoint is formed. My fervent belief is that government (and government policy) should be for the benefit of the society it serves as a whole. As they used to say: "For the greater good."

I read with interest the assertion of Mehboob Khan on Twitter:

Been convinced by the strong case for compulsory helmets & will start lobbying in my private capacity for a change in law @cyclingweekly
— mehboob khan (@cllrMehboobKhan) July 22, 2014

As I was a little late to the conversation, I went back over Mr Khan's timeline to learn more. As a result, I would dearly like to open a dialogue and possibly meet Mr Khan to try to understand how he managed to be convinced to do the wrong thing. This is important. This is not an insult. Mr Khan is clearly a smart man who has great energy and passion for his causes. I admire that. Yet, even based solely on the anecdotes he has chosen to use, I cannot, for the life of me, arrive at the same conclusion that he has.

Here is the question every helmet compulsion advocate should ask of themselves:

Would you entrust the life of your child to a cycle helmet on the roads of the United Kingdom?

If your answer is 'Yes', then you need to do a bit of research about cycle helmets. They are not motorcycle helmets and the vast majority of KSIs (Killed or Seriously Injured) of people on bicycles are not from head injuries.

If your answer is 'No', then you should devote your energy to campaigning for a solution to the cause, not attempting to stick a plaster on the symptom. Campaigning for helmet compulsion is a distraction. It does not solve the problem. It will never solve the problem. People will continue to die unless you address the root of the problem.

That's not to say you shouldn't wear a helmet if you are cycling for sport. I wear a helmet. I make my children wear a helmet (unless we're on holiday in Denmark). I usually wear a helmet when I ride on the road, but I am under no illusion. It will not protect me from an impact with 2-40 tons of vehicle at any speed. Cycling for transport is not dangerous. Being hit by people driving motor vehicles is.

There are many interesting statements from Mr Kahn's on his timeline, some of which I may address later. For now, I would like to focus on the several 'savings to the NHS' comments, as these are symptomatic of the fallacious logic in  almost every other argument put forward for helmet compulsion.

Even by TRL's flawed analysis, helmets may save just 15 lives per year. Well, that's 15 people who would be still alive, so that good isn't it? Well, no it isn't. Because along with those hypothetical 15 saved lives, are over a hundred lives will still be lost and thousands of lives will still be irrevocably changed through serious injury. Additionally, we have tens of thousand of people who die each year from polluted air in our towns and cities and tens of thousands more who die as a result of an inactive lifestyle. Many, many thousands more in both groups suffer a long slow decline, placing a huge burden on the economy and the health service.

Danish government figures show the health benefits of cycle infrastructure to be DKK 2 billion krone per year for Copenhagen residents alone. [pdf]. Yes, I had to read it again too, DKK2,000,000,000 just in Copenhagen, each and every year.

So, potentially, we could save the NHS £200 million every year for each city and large town in the UK. That has to be a greater incentive than the cost savings of (perhaps) 15 lives per year. But it gets better. With proper infrastructure, those 15 lives (and the hundred or so others) will not be lost.

There is no other national project that can give such a massive return on investment to the economy and the health of the nation than building proper cycle infrastructure.

It is an absolute no-brainer. A slam dunk. A sure thing. Yet neither side of the house has politicians with sufficient courage to do the right thing for the nation.

I hope, Mr Khan, you read this far.

I hope you seek out the wisdom of people who can give you guidance.

I hope you have the grace to acknowledge there is a far, far better solution than helmet compulsion.

I hope you have the passion to lobby our political decision makers for the courage to do the right thing for the greater good.