For my 50th birthday present, my wife and kids gave me a trip to see the last stage of the Tour de France in Paris.

I was able to pick up my daughter Kelsey in London first, and our trip became a lovely pre-wedding father/daughter weekend.

Before we staked out a spot against the barricades on the Champs-Élysées, we spent hours walking through this amazing city, soaking in its culture.

In addition to the breathtaking art, architecture, museums and cathedrals, I couldn't help but be blown away by the significant presence of the Velib system on the roads. It seemed every other bike on the street was a Velib.

The Velib system is Paris' version of a publicly shared bicycle program (PSB). Users pay a small annual fee, which gives them access to thousands of well-maintained bicycles that are parked all over the city.

Designed to move citizens quickly and efficiently around the city, the first 30 minutes are free of charge.

Additional time costs exponentially extra, so as to encourage frequent, short trips. It's been a wildly successful program, and versions of it have spread throughout the world.

Vancouver has had a proposal for such a program in the works for a while now, and it looked like it was going to be the first of its kind in Canada, but Montreal beat us to the punch with its "Bixi" system that began last year.

In its first five months, Bixi users had taken more than one million trips. Toronto is adopting a similar system for next year.

There are several issues that have held up Vancouver's implementation of a shared bike program.

One is the development of supporting infrastructure.

While Vancouver does have miles of bike lanes, it seems cyclists still need to feel more confident when using city streets, so council continues to work towards creating segregated lanes, in particular, within the downtown core.

Secondly, this system isn't cheap, though I believe, in terms of transportation and health care, it is actually quite cost effective. But this type of expenditure has to be both acceptable and desirable, and cycling has yet to achieve the same political acceptance that driving does.

Finally, there is the issue of B.C.'s bicycle helmet law. Helmets are not required in every successful bike share program in the world. Involved experts recommend that it should not be a requirement, as spontaneity of use is key to success.

Interestingly, in order to increase the chances of a successful PSB program, Mexico City actually repealed its helmet law.

Like B.C., Australia has a long-standing mandatory helmet law, so when Melbourne initiated its PSB scheme this spring, the cycling world watched and waited. The numbers are in and it's been a disaster.

In the first two months of use, Melbourne's PSB system has logged just 70 trips per day.

This makes me worry that the same thing could happen in Vancouver. Will a PSB system be worth the millions of dollars in investment, if we keep our helmet law status quo?

Studies have definitively shown that it's safety in numbers, not mandatory helmet legislation that is instrumental to increasing cycling safety. Helmet optional PSB programs the world over dramatically increase the numbers of people cycling.

So, if we want to have a safe and successful bike share program here, it might be worth revisiting our helmet law to let cyclists over the age of 18 be given the choice of helmet use.