The Government's proposal to raise the age for the mandatory use of a child car restraints in vehicles is set too low and should include children up to the age of 12, Plunket national child safety adviser Sue Campbell says.
The change would mean children up to age 7 must be in an appropriate child restraint while travelling in a vehicle and those aged 7 and 8 be required to use a child restraint, if available. The current law requires children up to age 5 to be in a car restraint and those aged 5-8 to use a child restraint, if available.
Ms Campbell, of Dunedin, said Plunket had put in a submission for the Government to increase the mandatory age to 12, or the height of the child being 148cm, ''whichever comes sooner''.
The 148cm height restriction was used in many countries, such as the United Kingdom and several regions of the United States and Canada, she said.
A mandatory age of 7 was too low and would put children at risk of injury.
''A 7-year-old isn't physically tall enough to fit the vehicle seat belt with everything positioned correctly and they are at risk of injury in a crash or a sudden stop.''
World Health Organisation research revealed that more than half of all 7-year-olds were not tall enough to be safely restrained by a vehicle seatbelt, she said.
She had spoken to many people who had children who had been injured because they were not in a booster seat, she said.
''They are the strongest advocates you can get. It is those parents saying `if we kept our child in a booster seat, the children wouldn't have sustained the injuries that they did', so please, everybody keep you kids restrained in booster seats longer.''
Associate Transport Minister Michael Woodhouse said the change to age 7 was a ''sensible increase'' and would align New Zealand with Australia.
The restriction needed to be ''flexible enough'' to avoid undue difficulties for large families, friends and family members, and taxi drivers.
''New road user rules need the buy-in of New Zealand parents to work and I don't think extending the age to 11 at this stage would be widely supported in the community, as there are costs involved and everyday activities, such as taking your children's friends to sports practice, could prove to be unworkable.''
Ms Campbell said it was irrelevant what the age was set at. People would always make the argument it was unworkable.
The issue was about whether people wanted to provide the best protection for children or if they wanted to fit as many children in the car as possible.
''People may have to rethink about how they transport children and who takes them in what vehicle. It's certainly not unworkable.''
