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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 4 Hansard (30 March) . . Page.. 1122 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

controlled by traffic lights. Cyclists will still be required to get off their bikes at pedestrian crossings which, for the reasons I have mentioned before, is inhibiting, unnecessary and impractical.

Also, the amended rule will apply to controlled crossings only if a so-called traffic control device, such as a sign or bicycle crossing light, installed at the crossing permits the cyclists to stay on their bikes. Therefore, the rules will create two classes of controlled crossings - one where cyclists can stay on their bikes and one where cyclists have to get off their bikes. That could only create more work for Urban Services in assessing which crossings need signs and then putting up and maintaining the signs. I wonder whether Mr Smyth is worried about the cost of that. Cyclists will have to be constantly looking out to see whether there are signs adjacent to the various crossings to determine whether they stay on or get off their bikes. There will also be much scope for vandals to remove these signs and confuse cyclists even more.

A much simpler and practical approach would be just to remove the rule altogether and let cyclists ride across all crossings when it is safe to do so and without obstructing pedestrians, which is what my amendment provides for. I do not think that this change would create any real problems in terms of consistency with the rules in other States. Motorists anywhere in Australia still have an obligation under the road rules to approach a pedestrian crossing at a speed at which the driver can, if necessary, stop safely before the crossing and then give way to any person on the crossing. It should not matter whether that person is walking or on a bike, skateboard, tricycle or wheelchair; the motorist should still stop. In conclusion, I believe that the national rule requiring cyclists to dismount is impractical and unworkable in Canberra and would be a disincentive for cyclists at a time when we should be encouraging cycling.

MS CARNELL (Chief Minister): Mr Speaker, could I let the Assembly know that Mr Stefaniak will not be at question time this afternoon. I will take questions on his behalf.

MR STANHOPE: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Minister for Health and Community Care. The Minister will be aware that the head of his department has completed a draft review of the appeal by the board of the COOOL Houses of Macquarie Association against the decision to refuse CHOM's application to self-manage the residences. The Minister will also be aware of CHOM's response to Mr Butt's review. Does the Minister accept that CHOM's trenchant criticism points to the fact that the entire process of appointing a support and housing management agency has been seriously flawed?

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