Inquiry Into Motorcycle Safety in Victoria May 1993
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Inquiry into Motorcycle Safety in Victoria May 1993 EMAIL Inquiry into Motorcycle Safety in Victoria May 1993 ● CHAPTER 1 BACKGROUND TO THE REPORT ● CHAPTER 2 MOTORCYCLE USE IN VICTORIA ● CHAPTER 3 MOTORCYCLE CRASHES IN VICTORIA ● CHAPTER 4 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ACCIDENT RISK AND ENGINE CAPACITY ● CHAPTER 5 LIGHT MOTORCYCLES ● CHAPTER 6 MOTORCYCLE RIDER EDUCATION AND TRAINING ● CHAPTER 7 CONSULTATION AND ADVISORY BODIES APPENDICES ● Appendix A ● Appendix B ● Appendix D ● Appendix E ● Appendix F ATTACHMENTS ● ROAD SAFETY COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP ● CHAIRMAN'S PREFACE ● PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES ACT 1968 ● RECOMMENDATIONS http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/parlrsc/1993cycle/mcycle.htm [09/04/2002 11:24:58] Chapter 1 CHAPTER 1 BACKGROUND TO THE REPORT Main Index ● 1.1 INTRODUCTION ● 1.2 PREAMBLE ● 1.3 SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY ● 1.4 CONTEXT OF THE INQUIRY ● 1.5 THE COMMITTEE'S METHODOLOGY ● 1.5.1 Public hearings and inspections ● 1.6 REPORT OUTLINE 1.1 INTRODUCTION This is the First Report of the Road Safety Committee and completes the Inquiry into Motorcycle Safety in Victoria that was commenced in 1990 by the previous Social Development Committee. The Social Development Committee ceased to function and the Inquiry lapsed in August 1992 when the Parliament was dissolved prior to the State Election. Following the election, the Parliamentary Committees Act 1968 was extensively amended and the Road Safety Committee was established. In December 1992 the Governor in Council referred this Inquiry to the Committee for completion. The terms of reference as promulgated are identical to the original terms of reference issued to the Social Development Committee. In March 1992 the Social Development Committee tabled its only report on this Inquiry. This report addressed term of reference 7 which dealt with visibility and conspicuity issues. The report of the Road Safety Committee addresses the remaining terms of reference. 1.2 PREAMBLE The Road Safety Committee is unequivocal in its belief that motorcycling is a perfectly legitimate form of transport. This belief has guided the Committee throughout the conduct of this Inquiry. Motorcycle riders are a clearly identifiable group of road users. They are a particularly noteworthy group of road users in that apart from pedestrians, they are more prone to injury on our roads than other road users. Furthermore, the injuries which are sustained are more likely to be of a severe nature with its http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/parlrsc/1993cycle/ch1.htm (1 of 6) [09/04/2002 11:25:33] Chapter 1 resultant economic consequences for the community as a whole. Fatalities amongst this group of road users are also disproportionately high. Thus motorcycle safety is an important road safety issue and deserving of attention by governments, the community and all road users. Victoria is a community of 4.2 million people. Close to 175 500 motorcycle licences are currently held. That is, there is one motorcycle licence for every 24 people. There are about 72 200 registered motorcycles. [1] About 96% of motorcycle riders are also licensed to drive cars. However, only about 5% of licensed car drivers also hold motorcycle licences. [2] Further, nearly 3 000 motorcycle riders a year in Victoria are involved in casualty crashes; that is crashes which involve either death or injury. [3] This number comprises 14% of all road fatalities and 2.5% of all road injuries in the State. [4] [5] These motorcycle collisions cost the community about $149 million per year.[6] [7] In July 1989, the Motorcycle Riders' Association published Motorcycling is Magic and claimed that: ● The Victorian Government had a negative attitude towards motorcycling and no written policy about motorcycles; and ● Attitude was a major factor in road trauma and road user education could change attitudes. Therefore, VicRoads should adopt a written policy 'to encourage the use of VicRoads rider training facilities'. [8] The Motorcycle Riders' Association also suggested that financial incentives should be introduced to encourage the use of the State's rider training facilities. For example a 30% discount on the Transport Accident Commission charge for one year should apply to riders who produce a certificate from an approved rider training school. In January 1990, the then Minister for Transport, the Hon. J.H. Kennan, MP, committed the Government to referring the issue of motorcycle safety to the then Social Development Committee. The Inquiry into Motorcycle Safety in Victoria was referred to the Social Development Committee by the Governor in Council on 20 November 1990. The terms of reference were drafted after consultation with Mr Damien Codognotto, the President of the Motorcycle Riders' Association. They subsequently gained approval from the then Federal Minister for Land Transport, the Hon. Bob Brown, MHR, who said in evidence: ... I wish to commend the terms of reference adopted for the Committee's Inquiry into motorcycles. They are extremely comprehensive and I would not have added anything to http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/parlrsc/1993cycle/ch1.htm (2 of 6) [09/04/2002 11:25:33] Chapter 1 them. They are couched in such terms as to make it possible for the Committee to consider all the areas members had in mind at the beginning of the inquiries as well as to investigate other matters directed to your attention during the course of the Inquiry. [9] The Committee is aware of the negative attitude of many Victorians to motorcycles and motorcycle riders. It is of the view that this opinion has been engendered by the adverse publicity given to the non- riding behaviour of some motorcycle user groups, occasional irresponsible and frightening riding behaviour, the physical appearance of some motorcycle riders and the relatively small number of motorcycles on the road. This attitude has been reinforced by the natural emphasis of some road safety experts on serious road injury and death without consideration for the economic and social benefits of motorcycle use for those who ride safely. [10] [11] VicRoads also had a stated policy of not implementing any programs that could be construed as encouraging motorcycling. [12] This policy was officially retracted by the Director of Road Safety at VicRoads at a Committee public hearing on 17 February 1993. [13] The Committee is encouraged by this change in policy of VicRoads. 1.3 SCOPE OF THE INQUIRY The terms of reference of the Inquiry into Motorcycle Safety in Victoria are as follows: To inquire into and make recommendations upon motorcycle safety having regard to social and economic issues and in particular to - 1. Report on the motorcycle accident situation in Victoria; 2. Investigate measures to improve the safety of motorcycling on Victorian roads, including the role of information campaigns and public education, and having particular regard to all road users; 3. Investigate ways of reducing the cost to the community of accidents involving motorcycles; 4. Report on the status and effectiveness of motorcycle training programs and licensing practices operating in Victoria including investigating the merit of schemes to encourage participation in rider training, 5. Investigate the relationship between accident risk and engine capacity of motorcycles for Transport Accident Charge purposes; 6. Define a light motorcycle and report on any appropriate changes to existing driver licensing and registration requirements for the safe operation of such vehicles; http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/parlrsc/1993cycle/ch1.htm (3 of 6) [09/04/2002 11:25:33] Chapter 1 7. Investigate the potential of motorcycle conspicuity measures (including the mandatory operation of headlamps during daytime) to reduce the risk of accidents, to identify problems which might arise as a result of such measures,and in this regard to consider recent proposals to introduce an Australian Design Rule requiring daytime operation of headlamps; 8. Report on the efficiency and effectiveness of consultation between relevant Government road safety bodies and representative motorcycle rider and industry groups; 9. Assess the benefits from the creation of an advisory body on motorcycle safety issues and to consider the composition and constitution of such a body. This Report addresses terms of reference 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9. Reference 7 was addressed in the Social Development Committee's First Report of the Inquiry into Motorcycle Safety in Victoria which was tabled in the Parliament on 25 March 1992. The Road Safety Committee could see little benefit in re- examining this term of reference as the Australian Design Rule requiring permanent hard wiring of headlights for all new motorcycles is now in force. It is the Committee's opinion that this particular term of reference could have been excluded from this current Inquiry. 1.4 CONTEXT OF THE INQUIRY This Report is premised on the Committee's stated belief that motorcycles are a legitimate form of transport. Therefore, where possible, the Committee has given priority to developing recommendations which, upon implementation, are likely to reduce the number of motorcycle accidents per kilometre travelled. Further, the Committee understands that over 90% of road crashes are caused by human error. [14] Therefore, in addressing the terms of reference of the Inquiry, the Committee has emphasised the roles of motorcycle riders and other drivers rather than vehicle and environmental factors which can also influence motorcycle safety. 1.5 THE COMMITTEE'S METHODOLOGY The previous Social Development Committee had conducted the Inquiry for nearly two years and had consulted widely with the community as well as with motorcycle users and road safety experts. The Social Development Committee advertised the terms of reference in the major daily press and the motorcycle press, and invited submissions from interested groups and members of the general public. It received a total of 113 submissions, 25 from local government bodies, 11 from state and federal http://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/parlrsc/1993cycle/ch1.htm (4 of 6) [09/04/2002 11:25:34] Chapter 1 government agencies, 24 from non-government agencies and 53 from individuals.