For those interested in the 'Big Picture'...
A couple of days ago the Fed Minister for transport, Anthony Albanese release a discussion paper (full paper + executive summary, which is much shorter) titled "Walking, Riding and Access to Public Transport". It's a discussion paper, open for consultation until the end of Dec, but as is the case with these things, it seems very likely to represent how the Feds will make transport money available in the future!
What is interesting is that a quick read suggests that it seeks to reorient Federal transport funding away from more highways and monuments to car-culture towards investments that will have payoffs for what I think of as individual and community resilience - better health outcomes for individuals and communities, minimising the negative impacts of over-reliance on 'passive' transport, emphasising 'active transport' as the first and pre-eminent option in designing transport systems, minimising 'oil vulnerability' etc etc.
It essentially picks up on the prioritisation of 'active transport' I first saw in an Eu. 'Charter on Active Transport' a decade ago, now reformulated as the 'THE PEP' an acronym for “Transport, Health and Environment Pan-European Programme”. THE PEP is a policy, standards and funding model adopted across participating Eu nations and aimed at ensuring a coordinated and consistent effort to realise the enormous economic and social benefits of Active Transport for the European Community as a whole. Similar models has been proposed for Australia, notably by the Heart Foundation in 2010 as “Blueprint for an active Australia”.
I find this a very encouraging initiative, fundamentally because:
1. I now expect that money will be made available for cycling infrastructure within a framework that embraces health and well being and economic fundamentals for a change!
2. Transport investment will no longer simply (or only) be framed within parameters determined by industry priorities (coal mining ports, heavy freight transport etc).
Here's Albanese's media release and the relevant links:
I think we need to have a close look at the goals discussed here because I suspect that in the very near future it will be a 'health and resilience' framework which will determine:
Thanks for posting this. I noted that this information was posted on another site (see here) a few days ago. It might assist people's thinking to see what other comments have been posted and shared already. I thought that the discussion on using public assets (the road) to store private property (car parking) was an interesting point that reflects on the consequences of reduced bicycle safety due to the numbers of vehicles parked on the roads.
Do other people remember the days when it was most unusal for somebody to leave their car parked on the street?
I cannot recall my mum or dad ever leaving the "family" car parked on the street overnight, I suppose all that changed when the kids grew up and got their own cars and there simply was not enough room for them to be parked on-site. The other discussion that I thought was interesting was the ferrying around of children to sporting events and other activities - not sure that I can remember too much of that happening either. When we did Saturday school tennis and basketball, we would meet at school and be taken in a group. I know all things change, but new ways of creating suburbs with integrated transit options may be a welcome approach to Adelaide's ever increasing sprawl.
I note that we have until the end of January to provide comment to this document. It seems that it might be the way to ensure cycling initiatives are written into federal funding policy.
It would be great if Adelaide Cyclist members could offer suggestions and insights.