New cycling rules in NSW

[Simonr]

I received the email below from Bicycle Network yesterday. They are changing the rules for cycling, in particular rules about ID. You can carry your NSW driving licence, but if you don't drive, or you are from outside the state, you need to buy an official I'd.

 

It also means I would have to stuff my wallet in my Lycra shorts!

 

Is this the cycling gestapo just getting their (Lycra) knickers in a twist over nothing that car drivers already do, or is it the progressive erosion of the freedom and benefits of cycling?

 

Simon

 

 

Quote email:-

 

Turn the tide on rider ID

 

Having overcome the shock of yesterday's announcement that adults will need to carry a government issued photo ID card when riding a bike in NSW, it's time to turn the outrage into action.

 

By making the announcement just before Christmas the government was probably hoping the news would slip through while we were all busy shopping and roasting turkeys.

 

Let's show them that bike riders actually matter. See the comments we made yesterday about why it matters.

 

The announcement was truly a shocker. It included:

 

All adult bike riders must carry an official government photo ID card

A 500% increase in fines for bike riders, while at the same time lowering the fine for drivers driving too close to a bike rider

The cost of the card for people without a NSW drivers licence is $51. If you lose it you are up for $24 for a replacement. If you change address you have to notify authorities within 14 days or face fines up to $2200.

 

But the good news is that these oppressive regulations won’t hit until 1 March 2016. They can be challenged in Parliament and in the Courts. And in the court of public opinion.

 

If enough bike riders show their displeasure, we may just stop this discrimination and draconian restriction to freedom.

 

We know the new government doesn't care about bike riders. But we do know two things it does care about: votes and money. We need to show the government that its voting citizens are unhappy and that those outside NSW will spend their tourist dollars elsewhere.

 

So here's what you can do:

 

If you live in NSW, ring your local member of parliament and make an appointment to see them to discuss these laws

Wherever you live write to Premier Baird and let him know that this is wrong

If you live outside NSW, write to Premier Baird and Tourism Minister Stuart Ayers and tell them you won't be coming to visit NSW if these anti-bike laws are not changed

Also, spread the word. Ask your friends in NSW who ride to act. Ask your friends overseas to write.

 

This will get things started. We all know by working together bike riders are an unstoppable force.

 

Of course, there will be more to do but for the moment, let's get cracking on showing the decision makers that bike riders are worth caring about.

 

Best wishes,

 

Craig Richards

Cheif Executive Office, Bicycle Network

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CaptainR]

Really unusual way of forcing riders into responsibility. Personally I think bikes that ride on public roads should have a license with third party insurance built into that, rather then forcing riders into having ID. Freedom slips away.

[Eera]

Wonder if this was the same mob who kicked up big time when helmets were made compulsory back in the late 80s / early 90s? I remember the fuss with people swearing they were never going to ride again and it would destroy the Aus cycling fraternity blah blah blah.

[dmjg]

If a cyclist is operating a mode of transport on a public road, why shouldnt they be required to be able to identify themselves?

 

As a car driver, Im expected to carry a licence.

 

I have no qualms carrying ID if im out on my bike.

 

Its not like i had to take a licence test to prove i was competent and proficient with the road laws.

 

Maybe i, (and everyone who operates a vehicle on a road) should do?

 

I wonder if my 7 year old son could pass the test???

[Country vic]

Where I live there are a lot of mobility scooters and few pavements so they use the road, should they have special ID and insurance.

 

Because of the lack of pavements, and the appaling state of the pavements we have, people with pushchairs, people in wheelchairs and who use walkers also use the road should we be angry and intimidate those people or show some maturity slow down, wait and give them room. If they get hurt because we demand our right to use the road as we like do we blame them because the road is ours and they don't pay road tax or insurance.

 

I ride a bike (and drive) but not much these days, the (mostly male) anger out there is very disturbing, then there is the total carlesness, mobile phones, speeding, failure to obey give-way signs, opening doors without checking, distraction etc. it all made it to dangerous.

 

if you want to experience how bad and selfish drivers are ride a bike for a week.

 

I would like like to ask angry, selfish and impatient drivers, say you are involved in an accident and a cyclist dies and it is the cyclists fault (i make mistakes as a cyclist) you go to the coroners court and again it is ruled the cyclist was at fault are you happy about that or would you wish you had taken more steps to protect the cyclist.

 

if it was you at fault would you justify the killing on the grounds that cyclists don't have licenses, you don't like them and, arrogantly, believe the road is yours and you don't care about anyone else.

 

if a child ran out in front of your car and they died, would the fact that it was their fault make it OK, my point is calm down, look out for other people, be proactive in your own safety and that of other people.

 

Patience, kindness, consideration, maturity ....... we could all have more of these qualities.

 

Car v bike: there is only one outcome, bike loses, once someone is dead who is right or wrong becomes irrelevant surely.

[newjez]

It does make sense to carry photo I'd. In case of an accident they know its you, and can get quick access to your hospital records. All cyclists should carry photo I'd. You can clip it into your helmet easily. (Please don't)

[Rallyman]

Where I live there are a lot of mobility scooters and few pavements so they use the road, should they have special ID and insurance.

 

Because of the lack of pavements, and the appaling state of the pavements we have, people with pushchairs, people in wheelchairs and who use walkers also use the road should we be angry and intimidate those people or show some maturity slow down, wait and give them room. If they get hurt because we demand our right to use the road as we like do we blame them because the road is ours and they don't pay road tax or insurance.

 

I ride a bike (and drive) but not much these days, the (mostly male) anger out there is very disturbing, then there is the total carlesness, mobile phones, speeding, failure to obey give-way signs, opening doors without checking, distraction etc. it all made it to dangerous.

 

if you want to experience how bad and selfish drivers are ride a bike for a week.

 

I would like like to ask angry, selfish and impatient drivers, say you are involved in an accident and a cyclist dies and it is the cyclists fault (i make mistakes as a cyclist) you go to the coroners court and again it is ruled the cyclist was at fault are you happy about that or would you wish you had taken more steps to protect the cyclist.

 

if it was you at fault would you justify the killing on the grounds that cyclists don't have licenses, you don't like them and, arrogantly, believe the road is yours and you don't care about anyone else.

 

if a child ran out in front of your car and they died, would the fact that it was their fault make it OK, my point is calm down, look out for other people, be proactive in your own safety and that of other people.

 

Patience, kindness, consideration, maturity ....... we could all have more of these qualities.

 

Car v bike: there is only one outcome, bike loses, once someone is dead who is right or wrong becomes irrelevant surely.

 

 

You can say the sane about selfish bike riders,jumping red lights weaving In between cars at lights and generally not obeying traffic rules, in all honesty I don't think anybody would be relieved if a cyclist was to at fault who caused a accident which resulted in a death.

Do you honestly believe that people jump into their cars and think lets get a cyclist today .

i have been in the position where somebody walked out In front of me ,let me tell you it's not a good feeling at all ,it took a few weeks to get over it,thankfully said person was ok ,

If you use the road be it as a cyclist, motor bike, car ,van ,ute or truck driver you should respect all other users and give everybody time and space. This is where the problem lies people don't have a minute to live.

To carry some form of ID is not a major problem is it I bet a lot of cyclist take a mobile phone with them ,not the end of the world .

[JockinTas]

You can say the sane about selfish bike riders,jumping red lights weaving In between cars at lights and generally not obeying traffic rules, in all honesty I don't think anybody would be relieved if a cyclist was to at fault who caused a accident which resulted in a death.

Do you honestly believe that people jump into their cars and think lets get a cyclist today .

i have been in the position where somebody walked out In front of me ,let me tell you it's not a good feeling at all ,it took a few weeks to get over it,thankfully said person was ok ,

If you use the road be it as a cyclist, motor bike, car ,van ,ute or truck driver you should respect all other users and give everybody time and space. This is where the problem lies people don't have a minute to live.

To carry some form of ID is not a major problem is it I bet a lot of cyclist take a mobile phone with them ,not the end of the world .

 

Saw a lot of that in Sydney - they also used to mount the pavement - to hell with pedestrians. Some bike riders were just downright dangerous :mad:

[Rallyman]

Saw a lot of that in Sydney - they also used to mount the pavement - to hell with pedestrians. Some bike riders were just downright dangerous :mad:

 

Agree, Sydney is quite shocking

[rammygirl]

Believe me there are some drivers who hate cyclists with a passion. I have been abused many a time and I am a 50 plus woman in normal clothes riding my bike to a volunteer job, saving parking spaces for cars I might add. Also had many a near miss with errant drivers. Hubby who is a Lycra clad roadie has been clipped with wing mirrors and is again abused for just being there. Not to mention people spiking roads in the hills, a trick that could easily kill a cyclist going downhill.

 

most cyclists are also drivers but most drivers do not ride a bike and realise how vulnerable cyclists are.

 

we all need to be more careful and pay attention AND PUT THE MOBILES DOWN!

 

ID, not sure but I could easily carry my license and I guess city hire bikes have to take ID.

 

There are bad cyclists and bad drivers out there.

 

interestingly in Amsterdam a city of bikes they have more rights and ANY clash with a car is the drivers fault no matter what caused it. Makes the drivers a lot more careful!

[northshorepom]

Wonder if this was the same mob who kicked up big time when helmets were made compulsory back in the late 80s / early 90s? I remember the fuss with people swearing they were never going to ride again and it would destroy the Aus cycling fraternity blah blah blah.

 

Well, it HAS damaged cycling on Australia, both in terms of participation (much less especially for more casual cycling) and as a result has polarised things and made conflict between drivers and cyclists worse here than I've come across elsewhere.

 

Poor law that has had counterproductive effects

[Country vic]

There are people who brag about bullying and abusing cyclists, hating cyclists is one of the few 'socially acceptable' forms of bigotry.

 

If we feel it's imperative that ID's are important in case of accident, or sudden illness, that seems to me an argument that everyone should carry photo ID at all times. Sadly bodies are often found that take time to indentify, some are never identified, I doubt if a law requiring ID would change that.

 

As for who is careless or dangerous, or who is fault, you seem to have missed my point.....

 

I can not do anything about other peoples attitudes or behaviour but I do choose my own, I choose to do everything I can to show care to other people as well as myself. This is partially for selfish reasons, being involved in any incident is something I want to avoid.

 

Being 'right' would be of little consolation to me if someone's was hurt or killed, whether that is me or another person. When I see people driving across a give-way into my path I choose to take whatever defensive action I need to to protect myself, I can't see lying in the road saying 'you should have stopped I had right of way' is going to help me to feel better.

 

We can all make a choice to be more patient and understanding if we wish....or not if we prefer.

 

Another consideration, some years ago I had received an urgent call to get to the hospital, I left work and drove to pick up the persons pets, I remember driving straight across a roundabout (one of those small ones we see on back roads) I imagine anyone seeing that would have thought what an idiot, shouldn't be in the road.

 

When I see people do things that look crazy I always remember that time and consider that I do not know what is going in in that persons life, maybe they just had a call that one of their children was involved in a serious accident, who knows.

 

I am sure I have made many driving, walking and cycling errors, I hope that people will choose to demonstrate understanding that I am flawed and don't see my many imperfections as justification for me to die.

 

The 'provocation defence' rarely works for me.

 

Jails are full of people who genuinely believe it's someone's elses fault they are there.

 

If someone (an idiot perhaps) bumps into you, deliberately or otherwise, you can choose to point out how wrong they are, or you can smile and move away.

 

Remember the days (in the UK) when someone walked into you on the pavement and you apologised to them : -)

 

Peace, patience and compassion everyone......

[Country vic]

Well, it HAS damaged cycling on Australia, both in terms of participation (much less especially for more casual cycling) and as a result has polarised things and made conflict between drivers and cyclists worse here than I've come across elsewhere.

 

Poor law that has had counterproductive effects

 

Bath university did some research into this and the evidence is cyclists are in more danger in some situations.

 

Personally if I am going for a serious ride I would put on all the gear regardless of the law, but if I was going 500 meters down the road to pick up the local rag I wouldn't.

[JockinTas]

There are people who brag about bullying and abusing cyclists, hating cyclists is one of the few 'socially acceptable' forms of bigotry.

 

If we feel it's imperative that ID's are important in case of accident, or sudden illness, that seems to me an argument that everyone should carry photo ID at all times. Sadly bodies are often found that take time to indentify, some are never identified, I doubt if a law requiring ID would change that.

 

As for who is careless or dangerous, or who is fault, you seem to have missed my point.....

 

I can not do anything about other peoples attitudes or behaviour but I do choose my own, I choose to do everything I can to show care to other people as well as myself. This is partially for selfish reasons, being involved in any incident is something I want to avoid.

 

Being 'right' would be of little consolation to me if someone's was hurt or killed, whether that is me or another person. When I see people driving across a give-way into my path I choose to take whatever defensive action I need to to protect myself, I can't see lying in the road saying 'you should have stopped I had right of way' is going to help me to feel better.

 

We can all make a choice to be more patient and understanding if we wish....or not if we prefer.

 

Another consideration, some years ago I had received an urgent call to get to the hospital, I left work and drove to pick up the persons pets, I remember driving straight across a roundabout (one of those small ones we see on back roads) I imagine anyone seeing that would have thought what an idiot, shouldn't be in the road.

 

When I see people do things that look crazy I always remember that time and consider that I do not know what is going in in that persons life, maybe they just had a call that one of their children was involved in a serious accident, who knows.

 

I am sure I have made many driving, walking and cycling errors, I hope that people will choose to demonstrate understanding that I am flawed and don't see my many imperfections as justification for me to die.

 

The 'provocation defence' rarely works for me.

 

Jails are full of people who genuinely believe it's someone's elses fault they are there.

 

If someone (an idiot perhaps) bumps into you, deliberately or otherwise, you can choose to point out how wrong they are, or you can smile and move away.

 

Remember the days (in the UK) when someone walked into you on the pavement and you apologised to them : -)

 

Peace, patience and compassion everyone......

 

You and many other cyclists are totally different to the yobs on bikes I've witnessed in Sydney particularly in the CBD - they were certainly not rushing to someone in hospital. I cycle here and everyone seems to be very polite. I've not had any problems and I feel safe.

[Country vic]

Believe me there are some drivers who hate cyclists with a passion. I have been abused many a time and I am a 50 plus woman in normal clothes riding my bike to a volunteer job, saving parking spaces for cars I might add. Also had many a near miss with errant drivers. Hubby who is a Lycra clad roadie has been clipped with wing mirrors and is again abused for just being there. Not to mention people spiking roads in the hills, a trick that could easily kill a cyclist going downhill.

 

most cyclists are also drivers but most drivers do not ride a bike and realise how vulnerable cyclists are.

 

we all need to be more careful and pay attention AND PUT THE MOBILES DOWN!

 

ID, not sure but I could easily carry my license and I guess city hire bikes have to take ID.

 

There are bad cyclists and bad drivers out there.

 

interestingly in Amsterdam a city of bikes they have more rights and ANY clash with a car is the drivers fault no matter what caused it. Makes the drivers a lot more careful!

 

Exactly that is the point, drivers must accept the onus is on us to behave In ways that protect those who are more vulnerable.

 

We alway have a responsibility look out for cyclists, pedestrians, kids, mobility scooters, learner drivers.... etc.

 

Read any running or cycling forum, some of the things people do are weird. I have had plenty of abuse and intimidation I have not had a beer can thrown at me.....yet.

[Country vic]

Yobs on bikes, yobs in cars, yobs in the pub yobs everywhere so what, it doesn't matter, it is irrelevant. Even if I think (rightly or wrongly) someone is a yob I will still do whatever is needed to see I do not hurt them and protect myself.

 

Truck v car = car loses, one of my most frightening road experiences was a truck trying to kill me, god knows why, there are some very scary people out there.

 

The bigger you are the more onus is on you. The case of the 'yob' who smashed that poor kids face in for hitting his car was a disgrace and another symptom of the anger out there, the courts let the offender off, maybe he will kill someone next time.

 

Keep safe everyone.

[joeperth]

Well, it HAS damaged cycling on Australia, both in terms of participation (much less especially for more casual cycling) and as a result has polarised things and made conflict between drivers and cyclists worse here than I've come across elsewhere.

 

Poor law that has had counterproductive effects

 

As someone who has cracked two helmets in accidents I'd strongly disagree with that statement. The opinion of the Doctor that treated me last time was that I'd have been in resus rather than a&e if it wasn't for my helmet

[JockinTas]

As someone who has cracked two helmets in accidents I'd strongly disagree with that statement. The opinion of the Doctor that treated me last time was that I'd have been in resus rather than a&e if it wasn't for my helmet

 

Agree! My lads took some tumbles from bikes and skateboards over the years and like you ended up with cracked helmets - better than a cracked skull.

[Mike@Bonbeach]

I'm thankful that the Peninsular Trail has been completed. I cycle 3 x 40-60 ks a week and used to do it on roads but got so fed up of idiots doing weird and unexpected things with their cars that I almost gave it up. I don't know of a cyclists who gets all the gear and says to himself "I'm going out today to do silly things and get myself injured/killed".

A cyclist will always come off second best even if he doesn't get hit but driven off the road, I know because it happened to me once in one of the most "cycle friendly" countries in the world .. France. I was cycling up a hill when someone coming towards me decided to overtake a car just as they got level with me, if I hadn't taken to the gutter I probably wouldn't be writing this now. It cost me a few scratches, some new shorts and a front wheel.

You can now cycle from Mordialloc to Mt Martha on the trail,(40k+) and all crossing points have traffic lights. The first part to Patterson river is on gravel but after that it is all made up tracks.

Mike

[fish.01]

As someone who has cracked two helmets in accidents I'd strongly disagree with that statement. The opinion of the Doctor that treated me last time was that I'd have been in resus rather than a&e if it wasn't for my helmet

 

It's wouldn't be mandatory no helmet. There are many other sides to the argument rather than just whether a helmet can sometimes help in an accident or not.

[joeperth]

It's wouldn't be mandatory no helmet. There are many other sides to the argument rather than just whether a helmet can sometimes help in an accident or not.

 

Of course, but it was similar when seatbelts were made mandatory in cars.

It's the same with helmets now. My helmet stays on my handlebars when I'm not wearing it and it's never a conscious decision to put it on. I don't even realise I'm wearing it. The younger generations who have grown up with helmets don't see it as an issue.

There's just a small group of people that seem to think wearing a helmet is a big obstacle to getting on a bike. Never really understood that one. Especially with modern day light helmets.

[fish.01]

Of course, but it was similar when seatbelts were made mandatory in cars.

It's the same with helmets now. My helmet stays on my handlebars when I'm not wearing it and it's never a conscious decision to put it on. I don't even realise I'm wearing it. The younger generations who have grown up with helmets don't see it as an issue.

There's just a small group of people that seem to think wearing a helmet is a big obstacle to getting on a bike. Never really understood that one. Especially with modern day light helmets.

 

Not at all. There are many arguments that show it has very little in common with the seatbelt argument. Assuming it is similar to seatbelts is understandably usually the starting point for many but the many discussions on the internet show there is much more to it than that. They also show it "may" harm more people than it helps which is not an argument that could ever sensibly be made for seatbelts in cars.

 

...The younger generations who have grown up with helmets don't see it as an issue....

 

Disagree. I have met many who do.

Edited December 24, 2015 by fish.01

[newjez]

Well, it HAS damaged cycling on Australia, both in terms of participation (much less especially for more casual cycling) and as a result has polarised things and made conflict between drivers and cyclists worse here than I've come across elsewhere.

 

Poor law that has had counterproductive effects

 

They never used to wear helmets in the tdf.

 

They do now.

 

Times change. People grow up.

[newjez]

Not at all. There are many arguments that show it has very little in common with the seatbelt argument. Assuming it is similar to seatbelts is understandably usually the starting point for many but the many discussions on the internet show there is much more to it than that. They also show it "may" harm more people than it helps which is not an argument that could ever sensibly be made for seatbelts in cars.

 

 

 

Disagree. I have met many who do.

 

 

My father has gone through three helmets through crashes. Hard to see how they could cause more harm than good. I have scars under my right eye that wouldn't be there had I been wearing a helmet.

 

But I think high viz is much more important than helmets.

 

For the sake of a couple of quid. Be seen, be safe.

[fish.01]

My father has gone through three helmets through crashes. Hard to see how they could cause more harm than good. I have scars under my right eye that wouldn't be there had I been wearing a helmet.

 

But I think high viz is much more important than helmets.

 

For the sake of a couple of quid. Be seen, be safe.

 

Possibly someone riding like your father would continue to wear helmets if they weren't compulsory. Surprised a cycling helmet would affect an under eye injury. Obviously the experience that helmets can help some individuals in some crashes is built into the argument. It is worth reading the arguments if you haven't already as they take you on the journey from the safety of the individual cyclists in a singular incident to the safety of the population of the city overall - including non cyclists. Sometimes counter intuitive notions are worth exploring specially given the evidence of experience.

 

I think the far morst important safety feature is enough cyclist numbers to encourage respect for cyclists, convince of the need for seperate infrastructure and convince of the need for better safety built into penalties, crash investigations etc.

 

Similar to mandatory helmet laws, I suspect individual hi-viz may help safety but compulsory hiviz may harm it.

Edited December 24, 2015 by fish.01