Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 4 Hansard (8 May) . . Page.. 1119 ..

MR KAINE (continuing):

Another statistic is that between 1992 and 1994 the number of bicycle riders within each town centre increased by 34 per cent. Statistics also show that in 1995-96 there was a decrease in cycling activity across the board, although there was an overall increase of 27 per cent in commuter cycling to town centres over the same period. So there are all sorts of figures out there. Quite what they mean, I am not sure. An important statistic, however, is that from 1993-94 up to 1995-96 the wearing of helmets increased from 83 per cent to 96 per cent. So there are still the odd people who in 1995-96 were not wearing helmets.

There are many factors that may inhibit cycling and many of them having nothing whatsoever to do with the compulsory wearing of helmets. They include, perhaps, a lack of safe and convenient links in the path and road system - the Government continues to fill those gaps, and every year we do a little bit more; the condition of cyclepaths - we are aware that cyclepaths need to be maintained and we do the best we can; and the condition of on-road cycling lanes. In fact, in some cases there are none. Cyclists still insist on riding on the freeways and the highways, even though there is no provision for them, and it is no wonder that occasionally we lose one. In some cases, people work for employers who do not provide parking, lockers and showers for them to use when they get there after a hard ride in, and the weather is a factor, very often, of course.

On the question of injuries, Mr Moore says that there is no evidence. There have been several studies conducted which cover the period before and after the introduction of compulsory cycle helmet wearing. It is not true to say there is no evidence. Whether Mr Moore accepts it or not is another question. Both the South Australian Office of Road Safety report of November 1994, entitled "Evaluation of the Compulsory Helmet Wearing Legislation for Bicyclists in South Australia", and a report from the Monash University Accident Research Centre of July 1993, entitled "Injury Reductions in Victoria Two Years After the Introduction of Mandatory Bicycle Helmet Use", found a reduction in injuries preventable by the use of a cycle helmet. Mr Curnow's claim, I submit, that the National Health and Medical Research Council's view that cycle helmets may result in an increase in brain injury does not relate to any argument that they will. There are two propositions there. It is very easy to say that they may cause them, but I agree that there is no evidence to confirm that they will or that they will not.

On the general question of public health, to which Mr Moore referred, the helmet law is only one measure to ensure safety for cyclists. Other measures taken to prevent accidents, for example, are the provision of both off-road and on-road cycling facilities and cycle safety research, which all contribute to the safety and the health of people who use bicycles. The NRMA-ACT Road Safety Trust launched a Share the Road campaign, for example, for cyclists and motorists in November 1995. This was followed by the distribution of a brochure promoting safe sharing of the road system. So things are being done.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .