Page 1820 - Week 06 - Thursday, 9 May 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I am pleased to present the Assembly with a motion to refer the issue of vulnerable road users for inquiry by the Standing Committee on Planning, Environment and Territory and Municipal Services. “Vulnerable road users” is a term that refers to people who are most at risk in traffic and who are most sensitive to road injury. They are always the weaker party in a collision. Essentially, the term refers to road users who are not protected by a hard metal shell. It includes pedestrians and pedal cyclists, as well as motorcyclists. Specific categories of vulnerable road users also include children and older people. Children and older people are commonly pedestrians that need special consideration and face a higher risk.
Now is an ideal time to do this work and to establish a best-practice approach to vulnerable road users in the ACT. There are several reasons why it is important to hold this inquiry. Firstly, there is a clear body of evidence showing that certain categories of road users are particularly vulnerable to injury and death. It should be instinctively clear to all of us. We have all been in traffic. We have probably all walked or even ridden a bike in traffic. We have a good sense of the energy and force involved in a collision with a motor vehicle.
The fact is that if a pedestrian is struck by a motor vehicle travelling at 60 kilometres an hour, the chance of death is essentially 100 per cent. Interestingly, at 40 kilometres an hour, this reduces to about 25 per cent, which is one of the key reasons we are expanding 40 kilometre an hour speed zones to our busier town centres.
The vulnerability premise is also reflected in the ACT’s most recent road safety statistics. There are many more car drivers than there are cyclists, pedestrians or motorcyclists. But in 2012 there were four pedestrians killed, one cyclist killed and three motorcyclists killed, compared to three car drivers. There was also one car passenger killed. That means eight out of 12 road deaths in the ACT last year were from the category of vulnerable road users.
Injury statistics reflect the same pattern. There were 151 reported pedestrian and cyclist injuries last year compared to 453 driver injuries. Overall, about eight per cent of vehicles involved in traffic crashes involved injury. But of all bicycles involved in crashes, 57 per cent were injury crashes. For motorcycles, 44 per cent of crashes were injury crashes.
This reflects a disproportionate level of injury and death amongst our vulnerable road users. It is something I do not believe is acceptable. There has been considerable effort put into road safety over the years, which I do acknowledge. But as far as I am aware we have not conducted a focused inquiry on the needs of, and best practice response to, vulnerable road users.
As well as being important for safety, the proposed inquiry is significant in the context of our city’s changing transport patterns. Canberra will benefit greatly from an increase in people using sustainable modes of transport. Unfortunately, sustainable modes of transport also tend to be vulnerable modes of transport. Cycling, walking and catching public transport all require people to travel as vulnerable road users.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video