Bye bye AGF?

[The 2nd Womble]

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/840 ... gistration

Debate over whether riders should be made to register bikes was sparked by cricketer Shane Warne, after he was involved in a road-rage incident with a rider on Tuesday.
A Ninemsn poll today found well over half of readers believe cyclists should have number plates. At 6.30pm more than 75,000 readers had voted in the online poll, with 70 percent backing registration.
Bicycle safety advocacy group, the Amy Gillett Foundation, also backed the cricketer's calls, saying a comprehensive investigation should be undertaken to find out if a scheme was feasible.
But the idea has already been dismissed by VicRoads and Sydney's Roads and Maritime Services body (the RMS) with both saying they have no current plans to introduce a scheme.
An RMS spokesperson told ninemsn establishing and administering a scheme would very expensive.

"Cycling is a relatively cheap way to travel and the financial burden of registrations on cyclists, parents and carers or the wider community could be significant," they said.

The RMS spokesperson said registration could also discourage bike ownership and place hardship on children, who make up the majority of riders.

They said any potential scheme would need Federal Government support and would have to be introduced across Australia.

VicRoads Director of Road User Safety James Holgate agreed that "the administrative costs would be substantial and the benefits would not outweigh those costs".

Mr Holgate said there were significantly more bicycles in circulation than vehicles.

"VicRoads believes the most effective strategy is to improve cooperation between cyclists and other road users to improve road safety for cyclists," Mr Holgate said.
He said VicRoads planned to launch a Safe Cycling campaign in February.
Bicycle Victoria said bike registration had never been successfully implemented anywhere in the world.
Warne called for cyclists to be registered via Twitter after claiming he was harassed be a rider who hit his car when he was driving home from a training session at the MCG on Tuesday.
The sports star alleges the cyclist grabbed on to the back of his car to hitch a ride through traffic lights, and hit the bonnet of his car with his hand.
But the cyclist, who wants to remain anonymous, denied the cricketer's account of the incident in an email to a cycling blog.
The rider claims Warne drove into his bike and damaged it so badly he was unable to ride home."



SCA is thinking seriously about distancing itself perminantly if the AGF is going to continue courting the State Advocate bodies and pandering to the motoring lobbyists. Dumbfounded by their "no opinion"!

[Sydguy]

If all AGF said was they believe a study into bicycle registration would be a good idea then I can't see any issue.

Until something concrete is done in Australia showing that such a system would be a useless waste of tax payers money people will still call for bicycle rego.

Steps, however useless and costly, must be taken to eliminate the counterproductive antichange arguments spouted by halfwits.

Sad fact.

JM

[The 2nd Womble]

It was also mentioned in November

[wombatK]

2nd Womble, you're in detention this afternoon and you're going to have to write the following message
out on the blackboard, 1000 times:

I MUST NEVER BELIEVE ANYTHING WRITTEN BY THE TELECRAP, NINEMSN or its MEDIA FRIENDS.

AGF's position is clarified here: AGF Stance on Bike/Rider registration has not changed one iota.

To clarify, the AGF is not advocating a review of bike/rider registration. We do support legislation changes
which (sic) there is evidence that it will lead to safer bicycling. Bike registration has arguments for and against it,
depending on the scheme, however there is currently not the evidence to our satisfaction that bike
registration should be a priority for government to review.

Cheers

[The 2nd Womble]

I'm privy to previous face to face discussions and other info both direct and indirect for a few months, and the whisper is getting stronger. The idea seems to be that registration will allow for more definitive research into cycling in Oz.
There is a hankering for the powers that be to concider Rego so that the taxayer ultimately foots the bill

[The 2nd Womble]

I admit tht although it seems likely at this stage, there is a bulk of the population that believe it is warranted, and there are ALOT of meetings taking place which many of us are being kept in the dark about, but little gleenings always end up linking back to this subject

[Mulger bill]

The idea seems to be that registration will allow for more definitive research into cycling in Oz.

Bollocks to that idea. Time to get loud, they aint boiling this frog!

[WestcoastPete]

AGF have been doing a great job and I value their presence in cycling debates. I don't think that they actually want cyclists to be registered, but either way, it would be better to engage with them than blow them off.

They've done a lot of good - for us and for road users in general, and I don't want to abandon them.

[The 2nd Womble]

Im merely talking SCA Pete, and also IF they keep pushing for it behind the scenes

[Kenzo]

OOOH, I wonder if we can get personalised plates?

[PawPaw]

This is the email I got back from Tracey Gaudry in response to my response to her form letter, which I posted in the Warney thread.
I don't know how an deep govt investigation of bicycle registration can be deemed an effort towards shared respect.


Thanks for responding and for your very sage comments. All taken on board in the most constructive way. In all humility we don’t always get it right all the time.

The Foundation is, importantly placing its efforts towards realising a culture of shared respect on our roads that includes and transcends rule and regulations. This has been our focus since our inception and it hasn’t changed.

Because of how we came to exist, and importantly what we stand for, our public comment is under heavy scrutiny and we take responsibility for that. We can only take your feedback, and that of others on board and use it to spur us on to ensure that our actions speak louder than words in realising a safer environment.

Thanks again, and please keep the dialogue open.

[rkelsen]

There is a hankering for the powers that be to concider Rego so that the taxayer ultimately foots the bill

Do you understand what size bureaucracy would be required to administer this?

You do realise that the price of car registration doesn't cover the cost of administering it, right? Put simply, none of your car rego is used to fund anything outside the registration office itself. There are many more bikes in this country than there are cars. How big do you want the registration offices to become? Then, if you wanted to use excess registration funds for something, what price would it have to be? FFS, car rego is over $600. Buggered if I'm paying more than that to ride a bike.

That's problem No. 1.

Problem No. 2: Where do you draw the line? Will a 5 year old's Christmas BMX be required to be registered?

Problem No. 3: Many cyclists have cars too. They already pay rego. Admittedly, we are a 1 car family. Still, we have to register it.

[Tracey Gaudry]

Hi Dave/2nd Womble and readers,

Really interesting discussion going on! Dave/2nd Womble, hate to say it, but you ain't playing fair - when I'm offline with colleagues and fellow safety-campaigners I'll talk about anything and everything safety and will debate all perspectives. Of course I talk about registration, as well as legislation as well as enforcement as well as education as well as awareness, as well as A Metre Matters, as well as driver testing, as well as Road Signage..
For the record, the AGF's public position is here: http://www.amygillett.org.au/agf-stance ... gistration. Hope that helps guys. Bike registration has arguments for and against it, no doubt. There is currently not the evidence to our satisfaction that bike registration should be a priority for government to consider. We are not campaigning (publicly or behind the scenes) for a formal review. If a review did happen it would have to be comprehensive. We have people safety initiatives that demand every ounce of our time. I've posted some of those initiatives on another thread in BNA's forum, and they are repeated here:
-Continuing to advocate for legislation on safe overtaking distance to improve bike-rider safety on our roads
-Remembering Amy for a Reason - Schools-based road and bike safety educational program
-Community based bike awareness toolkit for implementation with local councils drawing on ‘A Metre Matters’ and great work done with many local shires and Bike Safe
-Education of young motorists in partnership with motoring organisations
-AustCycle – practical bike safety skills
-Collaboration with Vic Roads as they prepare to launch their bike awareness campaign
-Increasingly working on safety initiatives with other bicycling organisations in a continuation of our galvanisation efforts commenced in 2010.

Would really welcome your feedback and contribution.

Cheers,

Tracey G, CEO AGF

[Kenzo]

Problem No. 3: Many cyclists have cars too. They already pay rego. Admittedly, we are a 1 car family. Still, we have to register it.

I hear you on your other points, but # 3 has no merit seeing as multiple car owners still pay for rego on all the vehicles.
Unlikely as it is... (i.e. I believe it will NEVER happen).. if Rego comes in and it is $10/bike, I personally have four bikes and will pay for all four.... ideally be able to transfer the one 'plate' from one bike to the other.

[Percrime]

As far as that goes I believe everyone who can think thinks that rego and third party personal insurance should be separate (as they are even in Victoria) I do not see why the hell the insurance component should not be on the drivers licence rather than the vehicle /vehicles

[Mulger bill]

As far as that goes I believe everyone who can think thinks that rego and third party personal insurance should be separate (as they are even in Victoria) I do not see why the hell the insurance component should not be on the drivers licence rather than the vehicle /vehicles

Been wondering about that for years. It aint the car driving itself into walls, peds or other road users.

Of course, there's more cars than drivers so methinks a hit in revenue would ensue and you know how addicted to dollars the Vic Govt is.

[jules21]

there will not be rego for cyclists. stop worrying about it.

[il padrone]

As far as that goes I believe everyone who can think thinks that rego and third party personal insurance should be separate (as they are even in Victoria) I do not see why the hell the insurance component should not be on the drivers licence rather than the vehicle /vehicles

Been wondering about that for years. It aint the car driving itself into walls, peds or other road users.

Yes, however Joe Average's 20 yo son driving mum's Barina is going to present somewhat less of a risk to the community than when he is driving dad's Commodore SS Yahoo Ute . The TAC charge goes up and down with (I think) the driver's age as well. Once you list your young kids as drivers your TAC charge will go up (or maybe that's just with your comprehensive insurance ).

[Kenzo]

The TAC charge goes up and down with (I think) the driver's age as well. Once you list your young kids as drivers your TAC charge will go up (or maybe that's just with your comprehensive insurance ).

I can't be bothered figuring out what TAC means, but compulsory third party insurance goes by the age of the owner of the vehicle in NSW. In Qld, age does not come into it.
With comprehensive and third party property insurance, the youngest driver's age is a major rating factor for the premium/price for all the insurance companies.

[Marx]

Seeing how I made up my mind about registration for bicycles ibeing a ridiculous idea, it should have put this issue to bed.
Why are other people’s opinion (who probably don’t ride after all) more important than mine?

If this goes through they’ll have to up the policing, because someone will have to catch me & teach me that lesson…

[il padrone]

I can't be bothered figuring out what TAC means

Victorian Transport Accident Charge, levied by Vicroads and partly funds the the well-known TAC (Transport Accident Commission) - known for their shock & awe ads. Made a very big public impact for many years here.

[edit] Warning - realistic road trauma scenes

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2mf8DtW ... detailpage[/youtube]

but compulsory third party insurance goes by the age of the owner of the vehicle in NSW. In Qld, age does not come into it.

Yep, another word for Compulsory 3rd Party, just that in Victoria it's also 'no fault'.

With comprehensive and third party property insurance, the youngest driver's age is a major rating factor for the premium/price for all the insurance companies.

Ah yes, what I thought.

[Ross]

There is a hankering for the powers that be to concider Rego so that the taxayer ultimately foots the bill

Do you understand what size bureaucracy would be required to administer this?

You do realise that the price of car registration doesn't cover the cost of administering it, right? Put simply, none of your car rego is used to fund anything outside the registration office itself. There are many more bikes in this country than there are cars. How big do you want the registration offices to become? Then, if you wanted to use excess registration funds for something, what price would it have to be? FFS, car rego is over $600. Buggered if I'm paying more than that to ride a bike.

That's problem No. 1.

Most of the cost involved in registering a car (in ACT anyway, I imagine it would be similar in other states) is CTPI. The actual registration is only about $150 or less, the other ~$500 is CTPI. Presumably bicycle rego if implemented would include a CTPI component.

Problem No. 2: Where do you draw the line? Will a 5 year old's Christmas BMX be required to be registered?

Presumably only bikes that are planning to be ridden on the road so probably not little 5yo Johnny's BMX.

Problem No. 3: Many cyclists have cars too. They already pay rego. Admittedly, we are a 1 car family. Still, we have to register it.

Never understood this argument. Lot's of cyclists own motorbikes and trucks as well but as we know each vehicle requires it's own registration so why would bicycles be any different?

[jules21]

Never understood this argument. Lot's of cyclists own motorbikes and trucks as well but as we know each vehicle requires it's own registration so why would bicycles be any different?

because it's widely acknowledged as unfair to charge people for the same cost (3rd party injury insurance), multiple times. just because that unfairness is widespread doesn't justify further expanding it.

[find_bruce]

Under the "user pays" principles, currently in vogue, a road user is meant to contribute to the extent that their vehicle causes wear & tear on the roads - it is the reason given as to why registration in NSW at least is based on the weight of the vehicle (as opposed to 3rd party personal insurance). So a small car pays less than a large car which pays less than a light truck which pays less than a heavy vehicle It was also the reason given for the tax on fuel - the more you drove, the more you used the roads, the more you paid.

Given that almost all bikes weighs less than 20kg, causes approximately no wear on roads, on this principle the contribution to road tax should be approximately zero

[Kenzo]

Never understood this argument. Lot's of cyclists own motorbikes and trucks as well but as we know each vehicle requires it's own registration so why would bicycles be any different?

because it's widely acknowledged as unfair to charge people for the same cost (3rd party injury insurance), multiple times. just because that unfairness is widespread doesn't justify further expanding it.

Just because you pay the CTP, doesn't exclude you from letting someone else use your other car / bicycle.
This is why you need to pay for all insurable vehicles.