Page 1822 - Week 06 - Thursday, 9 May 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
being made all over the world, as well as a growing expertise in best-practice policies for vulnerable road users. The committee will provide the opportunity for the ACT to harness these new ideas and recommend improvements that we might implement here in the territory.
Northern Europe often provides a benchmark for road safety initiatives, and particularly so for action on vulnerable road users. Since 1980, fatalities of pedestrians and cyclists in all of Europe have reduced by about 65 per cent and 55 per cent respectively. Fatalities among car drivers and passengers decreased by about 35 per cent. Certainly we would need to closely examine the transferability of any European policies or methodologies before implementing them here, but clearly that continent is worth looking at for the way it treats vulnerable road users. Of course, it also stands out as an area where there are high levels of walking and cycling.
Some of the policies that are working in European countries can seem quite radical by Australian standards, but they do give us an idea of what is possible. Several countries, for example, place a special onus on “stronger” road users—that is, the motorised road users—establishing serious offences for endangering vulnerable road users. In some instances, the law places an assumed onus of responsibility on car drivers who are in an accident with a vulnerable road user.
The laws also allow vulnerable road users to obtain compensation for injuries even if they are unable to find a driver who was at fault. These laws have helped to grow a strong risk awareness and sense of responsibility amongst car drivers. While I am not endorsing such a major change here, I do think we can take some preliminary steps in this direction. I have suggested, for example, the quite straightforward step of requiring all new ACT drivers to complete specific training on vulnerable road users in order to obtain their provisional drivers licence.
The reality is that drivers have a special onus to be aware of the more vulnerable road users around them. But, of course, this is a two-way street. I think we should also look at ways to encourage cyclists, pedestrians and motorcyclists to behave in ways that are safe and respectful. It is also important to recognise that within the category of vulnerable road users there is a hierarchy of vulnerability. Vulnerable road users have a responsibility towards each other. For example, a motorcyclist is the stronger party in a crash with a cyclist. And a cyclist is the stronger party in a collision with a pedestrian. All of these road users have to take special care of road users that are more vulnerable than them.
To this end, I am interested in programs that will promote road user etiquette, safety and understanding, emphasising the responsibilities of road users to one other. There are plenty of good and interesting programs around the world focusing on this. I am not averse to changing laws when appropriate to help ensure that all road users, including vulnerable road users, behave safely and responsibly.
I think it is also worth examining some of the interesting developments taking place in the USA and Canada. The US has a variety of road safety initiatives that are often quite different across states. Already five states in the US have specific vulnerable road user laws that define a set of road users as vulnerable. Laws and policies are then
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video