Road Traffic (Bicycles on Footpaths) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 26 May 2016.)

Ms SANDERSON (Adelaide) (11:14): I rise to speak on the Road Traffic (Bicycles on Footpaths) Amendment Bill. I distributed a flyer throughout my entire electorate to seek feedback on this very important issue. I just note my disappointment with the process. Coming into parliament, my expectation of how legislation and bills would work was that somebody, whether they are in opposition or in government, would come up with an idea and bring it to the parliament. Then, through the parliamentary process and through debate, we would improve and make amendments to that bill. We would have an open discussion and we would have time to consult our electorate and people who will be affected by the bill.

There are certainly parts of this particular bill that are very good. 'A metre matters' was already in place. It was not a law but everyone was very aware of 'A metre matters.' However, because the government put all the controls in the regulations, we are completely unable to have any input into how we think it could be improved. When a government uses regulations, you can either accept all the regulations or disallow all the regulations, which is crazy. It was terrible that we were put in that position in relation to such an important safety initiative.

I had over 450 replies to a flyer that I sent out through my electorate. As far as allowing cyclist to ride on footpaths is concerned, 33 per cent were in favour and 60 per cent were against. In relation to allowing motorists to cross the centreline to pass a cyclist, 57 per cent were in favour and 35 per cent were against, and in relation to leaving a one-metre gap or a 1.5-metre gap when passing a cyclist, 63 per cent of people were in favour. You can see the problem. People were in favour of the road initiatives, like crossing the double line when passing in order to ensure safety but, when it comes to riding on the footpaths, 60 per cent were against. However, as an opposition, our choices were to accept the whole lot or none. This is a very bad position to be put in and it left no room for us to actually improve the bill at all.

To put some feedback on the record, Debra from Prospect said, 'Cycling on footpaths should have a speed limit.' Currently, the speed limit on the footpath is the same as the speed limit on the roadway which is incredibly dangerous for children walking on the footpath, or for the elderly or people who cannot get out of the way of a speeding bike very easily. It actually puts pedestrians in danger. Debra also goes on to say, 'As a cyclist with children, and a pedestrian, I think it's time for a pedestrian rights and obligations campaign. I've had too many close calls with both cars and bikes as a pedestrian.' We have a lot of focus on bikes, but far more people are pedestrians and we are failing to consider pedestrians' rights at all.

Catherine of Elm Street said that we need more designated bike lanes connecting North Adelaide with Medindie. If we want more people to ride bikes for their health, to get cars off the road or to improve traffic management, then we also need some designated bike paths so that we are not putting pedestrians in danger. John from Prospect said, 'Allowing cyclists to ride on footpaths will be a disaster for cyclists and for pedestrians.' Victor of Prospect said, 'Let common sense prevail.' Jule of Walkerville says, 'The suggestions are okay in very limited cases but should not be made laws.'

There are places where riding on a footpath is definitely safer. A friend of mine quite often rides his bike from Medindie into the city with his daughter. Main North Road is certainly not a road I would want anybody to ride their bike on, especially in peak-hour traffic going into the city. It is incredibly narrow and it is very dangerous to ride along there. I would say that riding on that footpath is probably a good idea. If the footpath were shared and had a split down it, like Frome Road, with colour indicating quite clearly where the bikes should go and where the pedestrians should go, I think that would actually be a lot safer.

I would not want people riding along Main North Road. One issue that was brought to my attention recently is that when the car yards along Main North Road have their big sales and put up their bunting and temporary fencing, it actually cuts out the ability to walk or ride on the footpath. This same friend said that there was not enough room between the temporary fencing and the bus stop for him to ride his bike so he had to go onto the road, which is particularly dangerous when you are weaving from the road onto a footpath.

There are a lot of things that need to be considered. I think by putting it through regulation in this way, it did not allow us the opportunity to go electorate by electorate, street by street, footpath by footpath and work out the best way to handle this. It is unfair to dump this on councils and have them pick up the pieces and deal with it after the state government makes it a law. Simon from Gilberton said, 'If riders are on footpaths, they should leave a one-metre gap for pedestrians.' Enrico from Prospect said:

Cyclists should be required to carry photo ID and required to stop if they knock or hit a pedestrian, and also introduce something similar to a number plate for those cases where cyclists fail to stop, as happened to a neighbour the other day.

There are some other thoughts from people who have called my office. A lovely 96-year-old lady who lives on Fitzroy Terrace stepped out of her front yard to get her newspaper off the kerb and was nearly cleaned up by a cyclist riding at great speed along the footpath. It was probably at twilight if she was collecting her paper, but it was certainly near dark. She was very shaken up and very angry that people were allowed to ride on footpaths.

I think there should be speed limits. There should be a sensible rollout of something like this, rather than a blanket 'everyone can ride on the footpaths at the speed limit of the road next to you'. People are now riding on the footpath on Gouger Street, which is full of outdoor dining. To me that is not an appropriate place to have cyclists riding on the footpath. I think that needs to be managed.

Other sensible ideas would be riding in the direction of the traffic. When exiting my electorate office, I look to the left and the right. You expect slow-moving things on the footpath, and you expect fast-moving things to come only from the right side because that is where they always come from. In Australia, the traffic comes from the right. When you exit a driveway, you look to the left first and then to the right. I had a bike rider come from the left side at great speed and I nearly took them out because I was not expecting fast-moving traffic from the wrong side.

This law could have been better implemented. It is very dangerous to have fast-moving bike riders on footpaths in outdoor dining areas, where staff are walking from the cafes or restaurants to deliver coffee and food across a footpath. I think there are certainly footpaths where this is a great idea and makes a lot of sense (Main North Road, as I mentioned), and perhaps there should be some delineation of where bike riders and pedestrians go on major roads. We need a lot more infrastructure to separate bike riders from both pedestrians and cars.

My view is that if I would not feel safe riding a bike, then I would not expect other people to do it. There are not many roads in my electorate at the moment on which I would feel safe riding a bike and a lot more needs to be done in this area. I certainly commend the member for Unley for bringing this motion to the house.

Debate adjourned on motion of Ms Digance.