The video show some disturbing footage and the article doesn't make it any better. Although, there is mention of a white helmet campaign & I'm wondering if anyone is already thinking along these lines in ADL or whether we could advance the idea. Happy to assist with leg work towards council(s), etc.
I'll post the text:
Queensland citizens draws to the attention of the House the concern that our civil compensation system for personal injury is fault-based when incidents occur between motorists and vulnerable road users. Thus, in a collision, driver error must be proven. Because the default assumption is that the driver has not contributed to the crash, their insurance company is not automatically liable for compensation. The onus should be on the driver's insurance company to prove that the casualty caused the collision. Presumed liability would only affect civil compensation charging standards, not those of criminal prosecution, where the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" would continue to apply. Vulnerable road users involved in a collision - who have the least potential to cause death or injury, are usually the only casualty and often the only witness other than the motorist - will often be unable to give evidence due to the injuries sustained. We also believe that vulnerable road users, such as children, older people or those with disabilities, should receive full compensation, regardless of their actions. This would align us with many European nations. We believe that the introduction of presumed liability into Queensland civil law has the potential to improve outcomes for vulnerable road users, as well as contributing towards the Government's current Cycling Strategy, helping more Queenslanders enjoy a healthier, safer future.
Your petitioners, therefore, request the House to enact legislation for the reversal of the burden of proof in collisions between motor vehicles and vulnerable road users.
This is Strict Liability Legislation.