Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rob W on May 18, 2012 at 17:46

I don't think that is likely to happen at all.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Doddsy on May 18, 2012 at 17:58

The Australian bureau of statistics reports that 52% of all Australian Motorvehicle Journeys are less than 5 kilometres. 

An increased participation in active transport is very achievable.  

Facts aside, If South Australia starts declaring its a world class cycling city and advertising it, the state government might need to start putting its money and policies where its mouth is. It is an encouraging slogan. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael G on May 18, 2012 at 18:06

I agree. Whilst we have the potential to be a great cycling state I think that branding is something you are rather than something you hope to be.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Andrew Bunney on May 19, 2012 at 5:22

Branding the State

Thanks Heather and all for the many interesting ideas. I agree with Heather that it would be great to adopt a state or city-wide positivity towards cycling. ‘The Cycling State’ for SA or ‘The Cycling City’ for Adelaide would be something to aspire to. If it were done pre-emptively to show a commitment, then as Heather suggests, it could have a powerfully self-fulfilling aspect.

I agree though with the sentiments of Rob W, Doddsy & Michael G that such a brand-name would be inappropriate as things stand. The infrastructure is poor, and the legal framework and policing of cycling are both discouraging. Hostility, recklessness and carelessness towards cyclists from many in the community mean that is not a fair description at present. It would be a fraud.

(Maybe we could have an interim pro-active name like “The Wannabe Bike-friendly State”, as we work to improve cycle-logical conditions for bicycling. I’m sure we’d get a lot of media and other interest in our efforts if we put that on all the number plates.)

The other part of the “branding” issue is that we really need to call the state something other than South Australia as highlighted by Paul S. It is more “Lower-Central Australia” for a start, however that doesn’t seem too appealing for a name. I agree that to the unsuspecting, ‘South Australia’ sounds like an area or grouping of regions or states even, more than an actual state itself. It’s more like ‘South America’ or ‘Southern Germany’ or the ‘deep south’ of the USA. An obvious inference is that ‘South Australia’ refers to Victoria, Tasmania and Mt Gambier (possibly including Perth). It also makes some people think of South Africa (and probably some of Southern Austria).

To build a “brand”, the State should probably be re-named ‘Adelaide’, in all the circumstances. (As with the neighbouring state of Victoria, it’s the name of a British queen, which is fitting as it refers to a geographical area defined by arbitrary, colonial, ruled lines.) The name Adelaide is known internationally in various circles for our Arts and Film festivals, Grand Prix track, Don Dunstan etc. As a name, Adelaide has some power and recognition and could be developed as a brand for the state.

The city then should revert to its original, historical name Tarndanyangga, the traditional meeting place referred to by the Kaurna portmanteau word for red kangaroo dreaming or red kangaroo rock.

Although “Tarndanyangga” is now one half of the official name of Victoria Square, it was used in Kaurna language to refer to the greater area of what is now the immediate Adelaide city region, which is also a meeting place for later arrivals. The name is said to originate from a red rocky outcrop in Elder Park which resembled a kangaroo. The rock was apparently removed and used in the construction of Parliament House, the meeting place of the state’s elected representatives.

So, I guess I’m in favour of “Adelaide the Cycle-friendly State”.

I imagine a sign at the airport, “Welcome to Tarndanyangga (Red Kangaroo meeting place), cycle-friendly capital of Adelaide, Australia ‘The Cycle-friendly State’. Hosting Velo-city Conference 2014.”

It should be no problems. For a start we’ll need a few more litres of white paint and to get SAPOL to suspend the blitz on bikes without bells, and perhaps control or eliminate any vehicles substantially incompatible with vulnerable road-users (ie the axles of evil).

Seriously though, I feel that statewide, we need laws that prioritise cycling and treat seriously any interference with cyclists by motorists. For the city, a 40kph limit would be the most important policy measure.

I have some confidence that Jay Weatherill and Pat Conlon will improve conditions substantially, and I also believe that Stephen Yarwood and the ACC hold promise for progress including a 40kph speed limit.

Cyclists should engage with and support these people so we can exploit our fabulous weather and terrain and truly become “The Cycling State”. It is just a matter of time, ultimately.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by MARK FERGUSON (SPARTACUS) on May 19, 2012 at 11:37

Queen Adelaide was actually German and before she married King William her name was pronounced Adel-ida!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heather on May 19, 2012 at 13:28

Andrew, thanks for considering the post to add a detailed response.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by stephen on May 21, 2012 at 2:08

Apparently SA has somewhat poor road safety compared with other states and one of the lowest rates of cycling by state. But that is not to say we have a problem it's still very safe and it's surprising how few people do ride obviously I would too if they offered a medical helmet exemption.

If they want to rebrand I would suggest they support some helmet freedom instead of the current helmet facisim.
Bring forward the plan to have helmet exemptions proposed by Stephen Yarwood allot sooner - 

http://www.cyclingresourcecentre.org.au/news/yarwood_aims_to_loosen...

The thing about holding off is that the longer they do it the longer it will be before any gains in safety and other health benefits are realised isn't 20 years of failure long enough !.
I know Stephen.Yarwood is working with people who don't ride and just think cycling is always dangerous thus the delay. In AU ~180 pedestrians killed every year by cars but they actually have less chance of being hit or killed if they were riding instead. !
What is is with people WHY is it somehow a national crisis if a cyclists does not wear a helmet even though it is will make little difference in serious accidents - cyclists don't hurt anyone they don't pollute cause CO2 or traffic congestion, yet we single it out for special laws and discourage people from riding.
Yet we don't seem to mind the hundreds of people killed by cars or even be concerned that cars are the primary cause of road traffic fatalities.
Instead we single out and punish a small minority of people who are not hurting anyone with a restrictive and uncomfortable,and inconvenient requirement to wear a helmet no mater what or when even if not even near a road. !

The SA government seem far more eager to spend millions (842million ) on just one roadway like this.
http://www.infrastructure.sa.gov.au/south_road_upgrade/northsouthco...
Rather than bike infrastructure. 
And they have police on bikes whose purpose is to collect revenue from people riding who don't wear helmets - that effort and tax payers money should be spent on constructing cycle ways rather then deterring people from riding who are in fact very safe.

Jay Weatherall would appear to be working on some pre election spin with zero substance.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heather on May 21, 2012 at 9:16

A media article at http://www.indaily.com.au/?iid=62849&sr=0#folio=2 includes these words:
The compulsory wearing of bicycle helmets should be scrapped once city streets are made safer for cyclists, Adelaide’s Lord Mayor Stephen Yarwood says . . . it should be something we are aiming towards in 10 years,” he told Indaily.

Stephen, investigate helmet design. I have replaced my Bell helmet with a Fox Flux which is designed to expel hot air. Also try something like Chill Down Bodycooler, available from a work safety shop. Soak the necktie with gel in water, then use for evaporative cooling.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by stephen on May 22, 2012 at 0:38

Heather I have tried or considered these types of things they are awkward , uncomfortable and distracting and probably unhygienic once used a few times.

My own body's evaporative cooling would work most effectively unhindered - Before I start peddling i am cold and these devices would make anyone uncomfortable on a cold morning with dripping water or having to put on a clammy vest.
I hardly want to go somewhere like the local shops and in addition to a helmet be lumbered with a water soaked neck tie or have to wear an uncomfortable gel filled vest just to use a bike.
The DTEI and wowser minister Conlon whose hobby is power tripping and tormenting cyclists have no consideration of the problems that this law causes.
The massive disparity between the number of male to female riders in AU is just one indication of the great deterrent effect this law has.
The upside down disparity between normal travel- utility cycling and sports cycling is an even clearer example of how it discourages this safe and useful type of cycling.
It is no wonder the streets of adelaide are lined with parked cars. This law make's the alternative impractical and subject grown adults to the nanny state doctrine of bullying adults to wear helmets as if they are children.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heather on May 21, 2012 at 10:03

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/consol_reg/rtrampr1999707/s7....
ROAD TRAFFIC (ROAD RULES--ANCILLARY AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) REGULATIONS 1999 - REG 7

7—General power of Minister to grant exemptions
(1) The Minister may, by notice in writing or notice published in the Gazette, exempt—
(a) a person or class of persons; or
(b) a vehicle or class of vehicles,
from a specified provision of the Rules, unconditionally or subject to specified conditions.
(2) The Minister may, by notice in writing or notice published in the Gazette, vary or revoke an exemption under this regulation.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by stephen on May 26, 2012 at 14:38

I can assure you that the minister is intent on not providing any exemptions for anyone no matter what - i have tried several times.

I have also been pulled over by the police at times and last time spent 5 minutes explaining them the reason i don't wear a helmet and then still have to walk till they are out of sight to protect myself from this programmed discrimination. This is the situation the police won't generally prosecute because they think they will loose but the minister leaves me in a situation without a exemption where i could get dragged before the courts which i am reluctant but now resolved to do if they want to issue an infringement.

Being made to feel like i am some kind of anomaly in a neither here nor there situation is unfair when they could simply issue an exemption and resolve this with just one signature.

A person can get a recognised seatbelt exemption directly from any GP if they are pregnant or have some issue with wearing a seatbelt.
To get a helmet exemption in SA is like running a gauntlet if not actually impossible - I had received information that somewhere between 0 and 5 exemptions have ever been granted in the entire time the law has been in place. !
In WA they have a recognised exemption prcedure which does not require the ministers explicit authorisation.
In the Eastern states they have directly issued GP exemptions.

In SA we have nothing - the minister Conlon and the DTEI will throw up every barrier including using their own incompetence to deny anyone an exemption.

I dread having to mount a legal defence with the cost, stress and time this matter would involve so I rarely ride and limit my bike usage to a few routes which are less likely to be noticed by police, I would otherwise be doing far more.

To rebrand SA a bike state one of the first people I would look at getting rid of would be the Minister P.Conlon lets just hope next election he looses his seat - even if it were never filled again that would be an improvement on the present situation with him there.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by heather on May 26, 2012 at 21:40

Can you find a pro bono anti-discrimination lawyer (basis will be health/disability) who will write a legalese letter to the Minister? When negative reply in writing, consider taking it to the media and Equal Opportunity. Would cost less than a court case.

If you succeed, then no more hijacking of AC discussions re helmets.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page