This is a draft policy on motorcycles, posted for comment by members and supporters. It is subject to change in response to feedback here and elsewhere.
Draft Policy
The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) believes those who choose to use motorcycles and scooters should not be discouraged by government policies.
The use of motorcycles and scooters is a matter of individual choice. So long as nobody else is likely to be involuntarily harmed by that choice, it is not appropriate for the government to interfere in it.
Motorcycles and scooters represent an economical, convenient and environmentally favourable means of transport that also places fewer demands on roads and other infrastructure.
The LDP will implement the following measures:
1. Ensure that specific facilities for motorcycles and scooters are included in public parking.
2. Reduce taxes, tolls and other charges on motorcycles and scooters to no greater than a quarter that of cars.
3. Allow motorcycles and scooters to use public transport corridors such as bus lanes.
4. Permit motorcycles and scooters to filter between lanes of slow moving traffic.
5. Create refuge areas for motorcycles and scooters in front of cars waiting at intersections, as found in some Asian countries, to facilitate faster traffic flow.
6. Ensure motorcycle and scooter safety is given the same priority as car safety in road design and construction.
7. Encourage voluntary adoption of European CE standards of safety clothing for motorcyclists, accompanied by accurate labelling.
8. Remove obstacles to the establishment of readily accessible rider training courses at moderate cost.
9. Remove any requirement for front number plates.
10. Novice riders will be permitted to travel up to the posted speed limit, to reduce any obstruction they create and to reduce potential for intimidation and danger to themselves.
These measures are additional to the LDP’s policy on traffic laws, which includes:
11. Set speed limits at, or slightly above, the 85th percentile. This would result in an increase of 10-30 km/h in the limit on roads where drivers felt it was safe to travel at such speeds, while perhaps leading to reductions on less safe roads.
12. Give low priority to enforcement of any traffic laws intended to protect road users from themselves while having no impact on innocent victims.
Discussion
Many people choose to ride motorcycles and scooters for the sheer enjoyment they provide. However, there are also many practical reasons for using them.
Modern motorcycles and scooters are fuel efficient, cheap to operate and have low exhaust emissions. They are also almost completely recyclable.
They represent a very efficient means of transport, occupying a quarter or less of the space required by a car and causing far less road wear. They require much less room to park and can utilise areas that are not suitable for cars.
For commuters, motorcycles and scooters represent a highly attractive option. They are not subject to the physical constraints of walking or cycling or the scheduling and over-crowding problems of public transport. They can handle traffic density far better than cars and substantially reduce traffic pressure, particularly when replacing single occupant car journeys.
Despite these advantages, state and federal governments regularly ignore motorcycles and scooters or treat them the same as cars. They are also subjected to regulatory controls based on historical perceptions about safety, noise, bikie gangs and other assumed evils.
Parking for motorcycles and scooters in cities tends to be in chronic short supply. In many cases motorcyclists are expected to use and pay for the same parking facilities as cars, despite requiring much smaller areas. Motorcycles are also more vulnerable to bumping by other vehicles and cannot safely display parking tickets, making certain types of parking unsuitable.
Cars are smaller and lighter than trucks and usually charged less to use motorways. Motorcycles are smaller and lighter than cars but are usually required to pay the same toll as cars. Taxes
Motorcyclists are often not permitted to use public transport lanes, despite the fact that they almost never impede buses and other lane users.
The standards for road safety barriers are based on tests using cars, not motorcycles and scooters. Data on motorcycle safety is seriously deficient.
The safety of motorcycles and scooters is reduced by painting roads with slippery marking paint and using steel plates, hazardous crash barriers, rigid guide posts, light poles, posts and signs close to the roadway. Deteriorating roads are hazardous due to loose surfaces; cracks are repaired with slippery crack sealant; surfaces are grooved without adequate warning and loose gravel is used on sidetracks and repairs.
Europe has an objective system for rating safety clothing that allows motorcyclists to choose clothing suitable for their needs, but clothing that fails the European standard is sold in Australia and motorcyclists cannot identify it due to a lack of accurate labelling.
There are numerous barriers to the establishment of rider trader courses, many the same faced by small businesses anywhere in Australia but regulatory barriers relating to issues such as liability and business licensing affect rider training providers particularly severely. As a result, there is a shortage of accessible, affordable rider training courses. The result is reduced levels of rider expertise and safety.
Front numberplates on motorcycles and scooters are a hazard to riders and bystanders due to protuberances and sharp edges, as well as constituting an unnecessary cost. The motive for reintroducing them is simply to generate revenue from speed cameras.
Limited speeds imposed on learners and, to a lesser extent P riders on freeways, will slow other vehicles, cause frustration and result in antisocial behaviour by driving too close to the learner/P rider, particularly by those in heavy vehicles.
Further Information
Australian Motorcycle Council
http://www.amc.asn.au/
Motorcycle Council of NSW
Australian Transport Council
National Road Safety Action Plan
http://www.atcouncil.gov.au/documents/nrss_actionplan_0708.pdf
Australian Government
Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government
http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/
National Transport Commission
National Marine Safety Committee
Austroads
New South Wales
New South Wales Department of Transport
New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority
Victoria
Victorian Department of Infrastructure
VicRoads
Queensland
Queensland Transport
Queensland Department of Main Roads
South Australia
Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure
Western Australia
The Department for Planning and Infrastructure
Western Australian Department of Main Roads
Tasmania
Tasmanian Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources
Northern Territory
Department of Planning and Infrastructure
Australian Capital Territory
Australian Capital Territory Department of Urban Services
August 10, 2008 at 9:00 pm |
I assume the reason for front number plates was for toll road compliance. Isn’t that reasonable?
And what do you think is the reason for the current rules against lane splitting? Is it a safety thing? Are they worried people will get their mirrors knocked off?
August 10, 2008 at 9:07 pm |
I assume the reason for front number plates was for toll road compliance. Isn’t that reasonable?
No it’s not. And they’re also dangerous.
And what do you think is the reason for the current rules against lane splitting? Is it a safety thing?
Like many other rules, it’s devised by non-motorcyclists based on perceptions of safety. And of course the envy of car drivers who don’t like someone getting through the traffic faster than them.
August 11, 2008 at 10:48 am |
What’s the LDP’s position on compulsory helmets?
I assume, given: “12. Give low priority to enforcement of any traffic laws intended to protect road users from themselves while having no impact on innocent victims.” that the LDP would work to rescind these laws.
August 11, 2008 at 1:27 pm |
David, can you elaborate on why front number plates are unsafe? What’s the situation with front number plate holders these days?
What do you propose as a solution for charging motorcyclists who go on a toll road without an eTag?
August 11, 2008 at 2:50 pm |
Hamish: yes, but there is no real opposition among motorcyclists to helmets. They’re a low priority issue.
Mikel: Follow the AMC and MCNSW links to read about front number plates. Tags and tolls differ by State. There are tags specifically for bikes in NSW. Bike number plates can also be linked to car tags.
August 11, 2008 at 10:07 pm |
I love it.
But AFAIK there are no current requirements for front number planes (so they can’t be removed) – maybe #9 should read:
9. Oppose the reintroduction of front number plates
On tolling – tags for motorcycles are problematic because there is no standard place they could be put (not all bikes have fairings, for example..).
That said technology has advanced to such an extent that tags are not needed – for example Eastlink charges motorcyclists half the car toll by reading the number plates with cameras and matching the numbers with toll accounts.
August 17, 2008 at 8:11 pm |
As medical services have been socialized in Australia, people causing injury to themselves causes a social problem.
Would you support a proposal to make the wearing of seat belts and helmets voluntary. If you can see why doing so is not wise perhaps you policy should talk about a balance of risks and benefits instead of talking in absolutes.
August 18, 2008 at 11:20 am |
Would you support a proposal to make the wearing of seat belts and helmets voluntary.
There is little or no community opposition to seat belts and helmets, therefore these are low priority issues. In a libertarian society they would be voluntary, but in Australia we think the practical approach is to focus law enforcement on behaviour that potentially harms others.
Socialised medicine should not change that. Once you start arguing from that perspective, there is no end to where it might lead. Sex, drinking, drugs, sport, diet, sunbathing and exercise would all be at risk.
August 18, 2008 at 4:44 pm |
Actually, as a part time cyclist, I was just wondering about the idea of sharing bus lanes with motorcycles and scooters.
Would regular bicycles be permitted to use these new-fangled bus lanes in Melbourne? Sometimes I already end up riding on the far far left in these new lanes and buses have no difficulty at all overtaking me safely, so I don’t see why cyclists shouldn’t use them.
August 18, 2008 at 10:06 pm |
Under the uniform road rules, motorcyclists, taxis and emergency vehicles are permitted to use bus lanes. As far as I know, Bus Only lanes in Sydney are the sole exception. Your question therefore relates to whether cyclists should be added to the list.
There is rapid growth in bicycle paths in Sydney but in most cases they are designed to avoid mixing cars and bicycles together. I presume this is due to some sort of safety data, although there is no decent data on motorcycle safety so perhaps not.
Bottom line – I don’t know if it would be a good idea to permit bicycles in the bus lanes. It might be better than riding on the road with cars, but perhaps still dangerous. For me the key question is, who should decide how much danger is acceptable?
August 27, 2008 at 3:26 pm |
Surely the other concern relates to whether bicycles would slow down buses. Given that the intent of bus lanes is to provide buses with a congestion free express way it would seem counter productive to open up bus lanes in a way that slowed buses down again. Perhaps the cyclists would all be fast enough to cause no problems but I wouldn’t bet on it.
August 27, 2008 at 8:50 pm |
I think its fantastic that we are developing a specific motorcycle policy. I have long thought that Libertarian attitudes would strongly resonate with portionsof the motorcycle community.
I find the non mention of footpath parking slightly odd though, this works extremely well in Melbourne, would be popular with motorcyclists and would reflect a libertarian position.
August 27, 2008 at 9:06 pm |
Good suggestion Jarrod. I’ll see what I can do to fix that.
August 28, 2008 at 3:01 pm |
Thanks David.
On the lane splitting issue, is it wise to be condoning dangerous behavior? Splitting stationery traffic is one thing, but splitting moving traffic (even when it’s moving slowly) just takes a tiny amount of misjudgement on the riders part or an erratic lane change from a nearby driver to have the motorcyclist off his bike.
I know the standard argument is that it’s the motorcyclists choice to put himself at risk, and i agree with that in most cases. But I cant agree that this action is in any way victimless. Think of the stress on a motorist who innocently and unavoidably ran over a motorcyclist who fell because he misjudged a splitting attempt. If it were me i dont think that telling myself “But it wasnt my fault” would make the nightmares go away.
September 3, 2008 at 1:38 pm |
> Socialised medicine should not change that. Once you start arguing from that
> perspective, there is no end to where it might lead. Sex, drinking, drugs, sport, diet,
> sunbathing and exercise would all be at risk.
And indeed they all are today. The existence of socialised medicine – usually taken as a metaphysical given – is the basis of a number of arguments against individual choice.
September 6, 2008 at 7:58 am |
Thanks to you
September 9, 2008 at 1:16 pm |
> Thanks to you
Sorry, what?
September 29, 2008 at 11:30 pm |
I think we have many more important issues than the number plate on a motorbike. What about hospitals and the lack of hospitals, staff & beds? just in case someone is injured by a numer plate.
January 18, 2009 at 1:53 am |
Please join the Facebook group of Libertarian bloggers : http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=40644723076
February 18, 2009 at 7:24 pm |
I don.t understand the gizmo’s but I’m n support of all of them. For example: what is needed is an additional plate under some road signs saying “cyclists &/or motorcyclists exempt”..a good example being the NO LEFT HAND TURN.
November 30, 2009 at 4:39 am |
Searching for this for some time now, Thank you.