Dear
Mr Mulder and Mr Blackwood,
Please
find below my response to a letter I received yesterday, from a no reply
available email address, (DOT119642 - File No:
PC021188).
My
name is Vicky Creed - I am currently 55 years old and have held a car licence
for 34 years. I got my motorcycle learner's permit at age 44 and have been
riding for the last 10 years, after being a pillion for many years before that.
I have a daughter who is currently completing her car learner driver permit and
hopes to be taking her driver's licence test in the near future.
I
sometimes wear a construction industry standard hi-vis vest when riding, (not as
a pillion), with day/night reflective stripes. Whilst it may have assisted me
in standing out at times, it has never yet stopped a car from trying to run me
down. On two occasions when wearing it I was very nearly killed, and would have
been if it were not for sheer luck in the first instance, and my riding skills
in the second. I also have a grandfather who was killed whilst
riding his motorcycle to work, on a clear day, wearing bright colours, by a car
as it came swerving out of a side road.
I
have travelled extensively by both car, bicycle and motorcycle throughout the
eastern states of Australia, both urban and country, in all weather conditions
and road types. Because of my bicycle and motorcycle history, I am more aware
of these vehicles on the road, and look out for all road users. I will say,
that I find motorbike riders to be more safety conscious and more road courteous
any day over a cyclist, but that is another matter.
I
am a motorsport marshal, a member of the SES, have been involved with First Aid
and attending accidents for over four decades, and am currently studying for my
Diploma in OHS - hence I can say I am very aware of safety and have a lot of
experience in road usage. To that end, I give you my reply to your letter below
- please take very good note of it, as my vote is influenced by your actions,
and I am very happy to influence other's votes should I feel my voice is not
being listened to:
Para
1.
My suggestion was that if it was to become compulsory for motorcycle learners to
wear safety vests because of the high risk nature of riding, then it should be
compulsory for cyclists and pedestrians as they are more at risk of involvement
in vehicular impacts, and at far greater likelihood of serious injury - I at no
time suggested that this was a good idea in the first place.
Para
2.
If the Minister considers road safety to be so important, then why couldn't he
take the time to answer my letter himself, as it was addressed to
him.
Para
3.
With regards to measuring road safety intervention, there has been
very little effect of the road safety intervention of bicycle helmets given that
most suburban streets see cyclists of all ages riding without helmets, most
major roads often have cyclists without helmets, and whilst the wearing of a
helmet is compulsory by law, the Police do not enforce this law, VicRoads do not
consider it worthy of their attention, and people are still being severely
injured by not obeying this law. Where are your teeth in backing this up, or
are there just too many cyclists on the road for the Government to worry about -
"let's go after a smaller group that we can slug higher fines for not obeying
the laws we make"? A motorcyclist without a helmet will be pulled over by the
Police, even reported by other road users, but a cyclist without a helmet is
ignored (I have seen it too many times for you to tell me otherwise), and you
claim that you are only interested in safety!
Para
4.
High visibility clothing may be more effective in urban areas, but
not all motorcycle learners live in such areas - yet you would have everyone
wear them even if they are of little or detrimental benefit, as I have found to
be the case on country roads.
Also, you quote certain reports re- research conducted, but pay absolutely no
attention to the All Party Parliamentary Inquiry in to Motorcycle and Scooter
Safety, (which was very extensive, not to say expensive as well, given that this
committee travelled all over the world to gather their data), and their
recommendations that compulsory wearing of hi-vis safety vests would be of
little or no value in promoting and obtaining safety of
riders.
As
for that “80% of novice rider crashes occur within the greater metropolitan
area” - this is because that is where most drivers of cars/trucks are! Most of
these drivers have never been taught/educated on how to share the roads they are
on. Add to this that most, especially young drivers, do not pay attention to
other road users, and you get "I didn't see you" as an easy excuse and nearly
always the one used when a driver hits a rider, be that rider wearing a hi-vis
vest or not.
Para
5.
If the Victorian Government were really serious about improving
motorcyclist safety, why are you ignoring the recommendations of the PIMS, and
why are you concentrating nearly solely on the motorcyclist, with little or no
emphasis on drivers taking responsibility for their driving, i.e. little or no
education programs on road sharing, most media advertisements concentrating on
the rider being responsible for his safety even when the driver has done the
wrong thing, etc.
Para
6.
Pedestrians and Cyclists MAY benefit from hi-vis clothing? Are you serious? Of
course the wearing of such vests would be of benefit - especially given your
stance on high visibility for other road users!
Also,
if an educative approach is considered most effective for cyclists and
pedestrians, then why is it not considered most effective for motorcycle and car
users - when you come down to it, we are all the same you know, and many of us
make use of multiples of these modes of transport.
Added
to this, I have attended more cycling and walking incidents than motorcycle
incidents, when I stop to give my considerable expertise at an accident.
Cyclists, especially, can be injured far worse than a motorcyclist as they have
far less, if any, protective gear and are riding a vehicle that is much more
likely to not give them any protection in an accident. But for some strange
reason, there is little statistics recorded by TAC or VicRoads or even the
Police regarding these incidents, as they are not generally considered to be
"vehicle accidents".
Add
to all the above the following:
-
Hi-vis vests can and do create a perception of being safer, (what is called a
placebo effect), because the wearer believes they can be seen so therefore does
not need to be as super vigilant with regards to other traffic on the road,
leading to accidents and near misses. A learner has so much to concentrate on,
that a hi-vis vest can and will give the feeling of being able to concentrate on
other things, like riding style, rather than as much on road and other road user
awareness.
-
There is currently no compulsory training of car/truck users on others using the
roads, not at learner stage, not at accident stage, not at court stage, not at
any stage. Nothing on how to avoid collisions, what to look out for, how to be
aware of your surroundings. Some teaching institutions, such as METEC, do run
courses or include in their learner's courses, such training, but this is the
exception - not the rule. There are, however, recommendations that learners
drive in all weather conditions, on all road surfaces and types, at all times of
the day for a certain number of hours - so that they can gain experience for
when they are driving on their own and can do so safely - BUT AGAIN I SAY, no
emphasis is given whatsoever on sharing of the roads, especially with motorbikes
and cyclists.
-
There is no definitive data base, as has been recommended by the PIMS, of
vehicular accidents - ALL accidents involving vehicles, whether cars, trucks,
motorcycles, scooters, bicycles or pedestrians. Until such statistics can be
provided, there is no definitive evidence as to the amount of injuries and
deaths sustained in motor vehicle accidents, singular or multiple, by whatever
conveyance, and the costs of same. Without such evidence, the Government cannot
claim that motorcyclists are more at risk than any other group of road user.
Neither can they make effective laws or gauge how well a law or program is
working, for without this extensive evidence their facts and figures are just
pie in the sky.
-
The Government is intending to make a law with regards to the wearing of hi-vis
vests on motorcycles - first by learners but I am sure it will later come in to
force for all riders - with no consideration given to costs, type, conditions of
wearing, whether they are Australian Standard, what they are made of, when they
need to be replaced, etc. So how effective will a vest be then - and at what
cost to the riders.
As
I stated before Mr Mulder and Mr Blackwood, please pay attention to the above,
as your response to my original letter is full of flaws, and both you and the
Government really need to think this intended law through.
With
Regards
