1 metre rule

Equipment and On Road Behaviour, Laws and Rules. Cycling Promotion and Advocacy

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby sumgy » Thu Mar 20, 2014 1:54 pm

high_tea wrote:You may be right about the fine, and I haven't seen the exact change. It does sound like the penalty is being watered down from what is proposed, though.

Demerit points, btw, are mandatory - see whatever the driver licencing regulation is called for details.


I thought (but could be wrong) that demerit points and fines are linked.
User avatar
sumgy
 
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:58 pm

by BNA » Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:29 pm

BNA
 

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby Aushiker » Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:29 pm

high_tea wrote:You may be right about the fine, and I haven't seen the exact change. It does sound like the penalty is being watered down from what is proposed, though.

Demerit points, btw, are mandatory - see whatever the driver licencing regulation is called for details.


My understanding is the fine/demerit points are in the mid-range of speeding fines which if correct sounds reasonable to me. We are not talking about actually hitting someone here. If that occurs you would expect more serious charges to be laid.

Andrew
"Pedal-pounding pounce" - D. Fluellen - West Australian 13/1/14
Image
User avatar
Aushiker
 
Posts: 20120
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby high_tea » Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:36 pm

sumgy wrote:
high_tea wrote:You may be right about the fine, and I haven't seen the exact change. It does sound like the penalty is being watered down from what is proposed, though.

Demerit points, btw, are mandatory - see whatever the driver licencing regulation is called for details.


I thought (but could be wrong) that demerit points and fines are linked.


Not as I read the Transport Operations (Road Use Management - Driver Licensing) Regulation 2010(Qld). Sch 3 lays out the demerit points for each offence, and it's independent of the both fine amount and maximum penalty. I'd imagine that bigger fines generally go with more demerit points, but there's no formal association.
high_tea
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby oxonabike » Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:40 pm

And here is the press release

Minister for Transport and Main Roads The Honourable Scott Emerson

Queensland leads on cycle safety

Queensland will provide the safest environment for road cyclists becoming the first state to introduce a minimum distance for passing cyclists from next month.

Transport and Main Roads Minister Scott Emerson said the two-year trial of the new laws would encourage better sharing of the road between motorists and cyclists.

“Tragically 13 cyclists were killed on Queensland roads in 2013, so action was needed,” Mr Emerson said.

“The LNP Government is delivering safer roads through better planning, but we also need to improve the way that motorists and cyclists interact on our roads.

“From April 7, motorists will need to give a minimum of one metre when passing cyclists, and a minimum of a metre-and-a-half where the speed limit is over 60kph.

“The trial of the new rules will improve cyclists’ safety and ensure there is enough space between a motorist and the rider.

“The new rules will also allow motorists to cross centre lines and painted traffic islands to pass cyclists when safe to do so.”

Mr Emerson said at the same time, fines for cyclist doing the wrong thing would be increased to the same level as those imposed by motorists.

“Up until now there have been different fines for motorists and cyclists for the same offence. For example, the fine for entering a level crossing with a train approaching will increase from $110 to $330, the same as for motorists,” he said.

“No matter the number of wheels, whether two, four or more, the rules are the same and now the fines are too.”

These are the first recommendations to be actioned of the 68 recommendations made by the Transport, Housing and Local Government Committee.

Other recommendations made by the Committee are still being considered by the Government.



Sent from my HTC Velocity 4G using Tapatalk
Image
User avatar
oxonabike
 
Posts: 230
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 12:47 pm
Location: Cairns, QLD

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby high_tea » Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:47 pm

Aushiker wrote:
high_tea wrote:You may be right about the fine, and I haven't seen the exact change. It does sound like the penalty is being watered down from what is proposed, though.

Demerit points, btw, are mandatory - see whatever the driver licencing regulation is called for details.


My understanding is the fine/demerit points are in the mid-range of speeding fines which if correct sounds reasonable to me. We are not talking about actually hitting someone here. If that occurs you would expect more serious charges to be laid.

Andrew


Depends on what you call mid-range. The reported new penalty is roughly comparable with that for speed 13-20k over ($220/3).

My point is that the penalty sounds like it'll be a lot lower than what the inquiry proposed. Till we see the actual change, I admit this is just speculation.
high_tea
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby InTheWoods » Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:31 pm

I'm only speculating but is it possible the $330/3 points is the on the spot penalty, and there is a heavier fine & points loss possible if it goes to court (eg. actually hitting the cyclist). Although that should be a dangerous driving charge but anyway.
Image
User avatar
InTheWoods
 
Posts: 1433
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:34 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby Aushiker » Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:52 pm

InTheWoods wrote:I'm only speculating but is it possible the $330/3 points is the on the spot penalty, and there is a heavier fine & points loss possible if it goes to court (eg. actually hitting the cyclist).


I have seen that suggested but my understanding from the regulations here in WA the penalty is as prescribed in the regulation. Might have that wrong but.

Andrew
"Pedal-pounding pounce" - D. Fluellen - West Australian 13/1/14
Image
User avatar
Aushiker
 
Posts: 20120
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 1:55 pm
Location: Fremantle, WA

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby high_tea » Thu Mar 20, 2014 3:55 pm

InTheWoods wrote:I'm only speculating but is it possible the $330/3 points is the on the spot penalty, and there is a heavier fine & points loss possible if it goes to court (eg. actually hitting the cyclist). Although that should be a dangerous driving charge but anyway.

That is exactly right wrt the fine. Points, though, are a different matter.

The other thing that I find striking is that the ticket price is comparable with things like, e.g. fail to give way, which gave a max fine of around $2.2K. Like I said earlier, this os just speculation on my part.
high_tea
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby high_tea » Thu Mar 20, 2014 4:09 pm

Aushiker wrote:
InTheWoods wrote:I'm only speculating but is it possible the $330/3 points is the on the spot penalty, and there is a heavier fine & points loss possible if it goes to court (eg. actually hitting the cyclist).


I have seen that suggested but my understanding from the regulations here in WA the penalty is as prescribed in the regulation. Might have that wrong but.

Andrew


Oh no, time to discuss rules of statutory interpretation.

Deep breath.

A penalty is presumed to be a maximum, as sumgy correctly alluded to earlier, unless the contrary intention appears. In Qld, this is dictated by Part 11 of the Acts Interpretation Act.

Generally when you get a ticket, the fine is significantly less than that maximum. I expect this is to encourage people to pay rather than go to court.
high_tea
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby high_tea » Thu Mar 20, 2014 6:51 pm

high_tea
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby Paul B » Thu Mar 20, 2014 7:04 pm

Image
Paul B
 
Posts: 543
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2012 10:51 pm
Location: Hobart

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby myforwik » Mon Mar 24, 2014 11:00 pm

I think I will be staying off the road for a little bit when these rules come in.

Just look at the comments.... people calling for 1 week 'amnesty' period in which they can 'freely' mow-down cyclists.

Also I very much expect this not to be advertised at all. Just a sweep it under the rug technicality.

I have 70km/hr roads on my commute. I will get 100+ cars a day coming within 1.5m. There is no way they are going to move over - as they won't be able to fit in the lane and its a busy two lane road.

It will be interesting to see if this is enforced, my guess is that police won't give a crap unless a collision occurs.

Also people are shockingly useless at judging distances so tiny in their cars. I have had drivers dismiss their close pass out-right claiming they were miles away when they missed me by under 1 foot.

The big problem I have with these laws is they actually do nothing to promote the fact that bicycles are allowed to be in a lane and 'occupy' the line of traffic. Cars basically continue on 'their' line of traffic and treat a cyclist as merely an obstacle.
myforwik
 
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:08 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby human909 » Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:04 am

myforwik wrote:There is no way they are going to move over - as they won't be able to fit in the lane and its a busy two lane road.

Pssst. Take the lane.
human909
 
Posts: 4785
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:48 am

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby high_tea » Tue Mar 25, 2014 9:08 am

human909 wrote:
myforwik wrote:There is no way they are going to move over - as they won't be able to fit in the lane and its a busy two lane road.

Pssst. Take the lane.


A dicey tactic in Brisbane, IME. There is a small but vocal minority of motorist who engage in stupid, dangerous behaviour and taking the lane often doesn't help. The police are compketely apathetic, just to make matters worse.

I sure hope these new laws will help, but I have my doubts.
high_tea
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby sumgy » Tue Mar 25, 2014 9:18 am

Please stop calling this a new law.
It is not.
It is a refinement of an existing rule that says that you must overtake safely.
Adding a distance simply provides clarity.
In QLD it is actually a watering down of the rule that says that you must change lanes to overtake another vehicle.
In essence cyclists are actually compromising for drivers.
Not the other way around.

Spread the word.
User avatar
sumgy
 
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:58 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby dungee » Tue Mar 25, 2014 9:27 am

high_tea wrote:
human909 wrote:
myforwik wrote:There is no way they are going to move over - as they won't be able to fit in the lane and its a busy two lane road.

Pssst. Take the lane.


A dicey tactic in Brisbane, IME. There is a small but vocal minority of motorist who engage in stupid, dangerous behaviour and taking the lane often doesn't help. The police are compketely apathetic, just to make matters worse.

I sure hope these new laws will help, but I have my doubts.


+1, I fully support the law but from my experience QLD has the most aggressive and nasty drivers on the east coast.
Image
User avatar
dungee
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 7:14 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby myforwik » Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:49 pm

According to the information sheet given out by Queensland Transport, the 1/1.5m applies even if the cyclist is in a biycle lane, and presumably applies even if the cyclist is in the shoulder.

This is good new, because it means we are no longer forced to claim the lane - we can ride shoulder and they have to leave 1.5m. This is the safest - so long as most people obey the road rules.

Unless there is a mass advertising campaign in the next week... I still think this is going to be hillarious.

My guess is that police will treat this like all other road rules: They won't accept video evidence (unless there is a crash) and will only fine people who they actually catch themselves.
myforwik
 
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:08 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby sumgy » Wed Mar 26, 2014 5:40 am

The shoulder is not road.
The road stops at the white line.
User avatar
sumgy
 
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:58 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby trailgumby » Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:41 am

Shoulder is a road related area. Therefore included in the scope of the rule.

Sent from my android thingy using Crapatalk
"People have a right to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Evidence must be located, not created, and opinions not backed by evidence cannot be given much weight." -- James W Loewen

http://www.facebook.com/Drive2WorkDay
User avatar
trailgumby
 
Posts: 10272
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 4:30 pm
Location: Northern Beaches, Sydney

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby il padrone » Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:43 am

myforwik wrote:This is good new, because it means we are no longer forced to claim the lane - we can ride shoulder and they have to leave 1.5m. This is the safest - so long as most people obey the road rules.

I can assure you this will not happen. Even in Melbourne's more considerate traffic (?) this will not happen, even should such a rule be introduced here. If you want space to be given, ride where you should be - on the road, in the lane.

You are on a bicycle. Bicycle = vehicle. We are not some second-class of citizen.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18295
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby sumgy » Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:47 am

trailgumby wrote:Shoulder is a road related area. Therefore included in the scope of the rule.

Sent from my android thingy using Crapatalk


In QLD the road rules state that we are to ride as far left on the road as possible. Shoulder is not on the road.
I have confirmed this.
User avatar
sumgy
 
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:58 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby high_tea » Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:05 am

sumgy wrote:
trailgumby wrote:Shoulder is a road related area. Therefore included in the scope of the rule.

Sent from my android thingy using Crapatalk


In QLD the road rules state that we are to ride as far left on the road as possible. Shoulder is not on the road.
I have confirmed this.


With who? and has the exact text come out?
high_tea
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby sumgy » Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:12 am

high_tea wrote:
With who? and has the exact text come out?


I am talking about under the existing road rules as outlined on the TMR web page, and no the exact text of the new rules is not out yet (allegedly by the end of the week, but I am doubtful).

Keeping left and overtaking (s129, s131, s141, s151)
You must:

ride as near as is safely possible to the far left side of the road

The shoulder is not the road.
User avatar
sumgy
 
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:58 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby sumgy » Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:15 am

To the right of this line is the road.

Image
User avatar
sumgy
 
Posts: 1421
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:58 pm

Re: 1 metre rule

Postby high_tea » Wed Mar 26, 2014 9:32 am

From the QRRs:
11 Regulation applies to vehicles and road users on roads and road-related areas
(1) This regulation applies to vehicles and road users on roads and road-related areas.
(2) A reference in this regulation (except in this division) to a road includes a reference to a road-related area, unless otherwise expressly stated in this regulation.


Which I believe is what trailgumby was referring to.
high_tea
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:10 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Cycling Safety and Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit