Page 1646 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 3 June 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
fails to recognise they even did anything wrong. That is the sort of attitude this legislation seeks to address. It basically says that if you are operating in the reckless manner that the legislation targets and you do it in the vicinity of a vulnerable road user then the vulnerability of that user is increased. Your behaviour increases their level of risk.
The definition also provides a foundation for ongoing refinements and improvements in future ACT legislation and policy. We may see some suggestions for this in the report from the committee on vulnerable road users. My own view is that there are several further improvements we could make using this definition. I have outlined these in the Assembly before, as well as to the committee.
On the subject of the committee reporting, I think that that is not a reason not to move forward. I faced a similar line of questioning when I appeared before the committee about the fact that, as the TAMS minister, I have recently introduced a number of trials of improved and enhanced separation for cyclists in some areas in the ACT. I think that one should not be static about these things. It seemed to be suggested that I was pre-empting the committee. I think half a dozen small-scale trials around the city to get things underway where we can receive feedback, in fact, adds to the work of the committee. I think that this amendment today similarly reflects the work that the committee has been doing. It certainly reflects evidence given to the committee. I think that, given this legislation was coming before the Assembly, it would have been odd to move forward without incorporating this measure into the legislation.
I have received quite a lot of good feedback from stakeholders about it. They are supportive of the specific recognition of vulnerable road users and the benefits this will bring to individual users, in terms of safety, as well as to the broader community, in terms of encouraging more users to use sustainable transport modes. I have received this feedback specifically from groups such as the ACT Heart Foundation, Pedal Power and the Amy Gillett Foundation.
Some of these groups have a specific focus, for example on bike riders. I have also received positive feedback from groups with a broader focus. The Bar Association is in support of the vulnerable road user amendments. I also received a letter from the Australasian College of Road Safety. The ACT chapter wrote to me and I will quote what they said:
The ACT & Region Chapter of the Australasian College of Road Safety fully supports the introduction of this … concept as a means of reducing crashes, or potential crashes, involving road users who are particularly vulnerable in the Territory.
The Chapter publicly participated in the ACT Assembly Inquiry into Vulnerable Road Users because it believes these road users are at particular risk and a suite of measures is required to ensure the ongoing reduction in the number of crashes involving them.
The Chapter acknowledges that the Bill’s amendments will positively discourage drivers of motor vehicles from engaging in dangerous conduct that could result in the death of or serious injury to vulnerable road users.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video