Member

Insurance is a benefit for two reasons. The victim of negligent riding may be compensated in a way they presently cannot be. More importantly, insurers manage risk: they make drivers who are more dangerous, and likely to lead to more payouts, pay higher premiums. In that way, they incentivise all of us to reduce the likelihood of a collision or someone getting hurt. Both in absolute terms and as a crime prevention measure in a Bill where the Government argue for extra cycling offences, I struggle to see why an amendment on insurance is out of scope. I accept that the ruling was made, but I would like to come back to it at some stage on Report. I would like to understand better why what I see as a road safety measure cannot be considered within this Bill. And the Government might want to respond to explain why the 603 people who I mentioned earlier are unable to seek an insurance payout as compensation from the person who injured them.