There is one thing I have marvelled at in history is how people who would have done well working together wind up at each others throats. When I think about the new wonderful plans for the creation of a more environmentally sustainable Sydney. I find that the latest missive from Harold Scruby otherwise known as the Pedestrian Council of Australia (it literally is only him and a fax machine) quite a bit perplexing.
In my opinion cyclist and pedestrians ought to be doing something about their real danger – cars. There are groups in other cities such as Transport Alternatives in New York who lobby for better pedestrian and cycling facilities. They also promote cycling and walking as alternatives to cars. I have read Car Busters and found articles on both walking and cycling. The New York Bicycle Messenger Association even organised a ride/march in memory of pedestrians and cyclists who have been killed by cars.
Harold is usually on the ball with his observations of motoring culture but the latest claims regarding the demerit points for motorists exceeding limits for motor vehicles makes me wonder if he really is just pretending to be a road safety advocate. From the Sydney Morning Herald of November 15 “The Pedestrian Council chairman, Harold Scruby, said he had long been pushing for an overhaul of demerit points.”As it is at the moment, it is inconsistent and unfair because gradations of the speed limit go up by 10 kilometres while the penalties go up by 15 kilometres,” he said.” He also mentioned that those drivers caught exceeding the speed limit by less than 10km were committing just a “misdemeanour”. Drivers caught committing a “misdemeanour” would get just a whopping big fine. Harold evidently has not seen Victorian road safety adverts that demonstrate that going just 5 kilometers over the speed limit run the risk of killing or seriously injuring pedestrians and cyclists. This risk is due to the increased stopping distance that just 5 kilometers over the speed limit incurs.
On the 3rd of December 2008 he issued a press release trying to frighten the councils of Sydney and elsewhere into not creating more Shared User Paths. In the press release he claims that “It is an offence for anyone over the age of 12 to ride a bicycle on the footpath. However, the Australian Road Rules allow the authorities to create a Shared Bicycle Path (SBP) and invite all cyclists to ride upon them.” Unfortunately for Harold the lie (by omission) in this paragraph is that an adult cyclist supervising a cyclist under the age of 12 is permitted to ride on the footpath.
Second omission is “There is no offence for speeding on a bicycle in NSW (and most other jurisdictions)” . He obviously has not figured that a bicycle is a vehicle and as such is liable for speeding fines (that is what the organisers of the Sydney Spring Cycle & the Gong Ride assert) It is also enforced in Centennial Park.
The other bits of idiocy and stupidity in the press release were “Mr Scruby added: “This is utter lunacy. Under the current system, a cyclist can hit an elderly person on the footpath, cycle away and disappear. Such injured persons can then be required to pay up to hundreds of thousands of dollars in health care costs from their own pockets, unless they sue the authorities.” Should a cyclist collide with a pedestrian they are also likely to be injured. They may even be injured seriously enough not to be able to ride away. Furthermore members of Bicycle NSW, Cycling NSW and other bicycle organisations get 3rd party insurance. Cyclists who are not members of the state based bicycle organisations are also liable to be sued for damages should they injure a pedestrian in a collision.
The line that gets the ultimate piece of stupidity “Cyclists are not required to display number-plates or be licensed and are almost impossible to recognise especially when most are wearing helmets and sunglasses.” Apart from using the usual lies from motorists who use the registration (number plates) and licencing arguments this line made me wonder which other groups in society Harold thinks all looks the same?
The other issue that made me laugh was “Cyclists are required to give way to pedestrians at all times on a SBP. Yet many Councils erect signs advising cyclists to ring their bells. This frequently frightens pedestrians and creates a most threatening and unfriendly environment.” Ooooh dear! Which would you prefer me just riding past or me warning that I was coming? Mind you they do actually have to have their hearing unencumbered by Ipods, walkmans and mobile phones etc.
There have been some wide reactions in the community. I will be doing an edition of this blog on the activities of the Bicycle NSW CEO Alex Unwin soon, but suffice to say that he is obviously in fear of Harold. Alex was heard on ABC radio a while ago and made a meal of fending off the usual trolling from squawk back radio as well as a hostile interviewer.
We had the usual crap from idiotic drivers in of all places the Sydney Morning Herald. I suppose they must have made a transition from reading the Terror.
The sad fact is that the cup is half empty as regards pedestrian cyclist conflict as it is known. I have see other riders riding extremely fast past pedestrians on Shared User Paths such as the Pyrmont Bridge and the paths near the SCG. However I have had my share of pedestrians walking around in the night on unlit paths in black. I have had them dawdling along with Ipods etc.
A warning for Harold is beware of what you want for you might just get it. “For all the above and many other compelling reasons, we demand that the RTA and all Councils immediately cease the approval and creation of any future Shared Bicycle Paths and remove all existing SBPs” I would love to have the Cooks River and Bay to Bay cycle paths pedestrian free.
The shared user paths could be divided. There are sections of the bay to bay cycle path that are divided into pedestrians and cyclists. Ultimately the Sydney Harbour Bridge has a bicycles only path on one side. Pedestrians are warned that they face fining if they walk on the cycle path.
The only token acknowledgement we get from Harold is “While cycling is also a great form of exercise and transport, councils must be required to build Dedicated Cycle Paths.” How about you put your money where your mouth is Harold? Get your shoulder to the wheel and lobby for the Bourke St bike road and other facilities. Oh that’s right you won’t be able to drive or walk on them!
Jonathonsbicycleblog's Weblog 