Chris Kenny: New cycling laws make perfect sense – but ID laws are over the top

THE “metre matters” cycling laws now in place in South Australia and other states are a win for safety. Compulsory ID laws for NSW cyclists, however, are a win for the nanny state.

SA seems to have struck a better mix with the cycling laws than other states, writes Chris Kenny.

Onya bike, mate, get off the road. Most motorists know the frustration of encountering cyclists riding two abreast taking up a whole lane.

We might be forced to brake hard or swerve and are shocked and worried they’ve put themselves in danger. Some drivers get into a rage and are furious the cyclists are even on the road, figuring it belongs to cars alone.

Others will be annoyed and just wonder why the cyclists aren’t riding in single file, close to the gutter and out of the way.

The truth is, until you get on a bike and cycle in traffic, you can’t understand the situation. When you cycle close to the left of the road and try to stay out of the way of the traffic, too many cars pretend you are not even there, and skip past you at more than 60 kph, just centimetres away - leaving no room for error.

So it is safer to be obtrusive, to ride in pairs or larger groups and claim the lane. You have as much right to the road as a car, you figure, and this way the cars will see you, have to slow down and overtake you properly – as if you were a car going a little slower than the others.

That’s the theory anyway. But still there are horrible accidents. Groups of cyclists have been mown down, others have been hit and killed, and there have been countless incidents of road rage directed at cyclists.

Last weekend I was at a Sydney bike park with my kids, where little roads, intersections and traffic lights are set up so children can start to understand the rules. Surprisingly, there was a group of adults in the park in a formal lesson, learning how to ride safely around city streets in a group. That’s how frantic the roads have become for cyclists.

Across the country now, state governments are introducing new laws. Much of the momentum for this has come from the Amy Gillett Foundation – a cycling safety organisation set up in memory of the Australian cyclist killed while training in Germany.

As a rule, the rampant introduction of new laws – nanny state laws – drives me nuts. And legislating to give cyclists a metre of clear space from passing cars should hardly seem necessary.

But clearly drivers haven’t been getting the message, and the new laws in South Australia, ACT and NSW are justified to make sure they do. (Other states, including Victoria, are also looking at changes).

I can’t imagine too many people will be prosecuted over the minimum distance laws but they are there to make sure drivers are aware. Give riders a metre – give them more if you can.

Allowing cyclists to ride on the footpath is another sensible step. For cars and bikes to mingle safely on the roads requires a bit of common sense from drivers and cyclists; likewise on the footpaths where cyclists, in particular, need to be careful about speed, awareness and blind corners.

But, especially if you are not in a hurry or on a serious training ride, the idea of bicycles getting physical separation from cars on the footpaths makes a lot of sense.

In NSW the new laws have made it compulsory for cyclists over 18 years of age to carry identification, which is over the top. Supposedly this is to ensure police know who you are if they want to warn or prosecute you – it is about treating cyclists like drivers.

If you can’t ride a bike without ID it won’t be long before people have to carry ID on them at all times – one step closer to a police state. Alternatively, perhaps if we are pulled over on our bikes we can just say we are under 18!

SA seems to have struck a better mix with the cycling laws, and has also done a pretty good job designating bike lanes on major routes. More separate bike paths, like the ones along the Torrens Linear Park and alongside the Southern Expressway are the ideal solution but the routes aren’t always there and the costs are high.

Mind you, the way some cyclists weave in and out of traffic at high speed, no laws are going to protect them. Not even if all drivers are as patient and careful as we should be.

As for me, I’ve sold my road bike and will soon buy something a little sturdier and slower, so I can keep my cycling as much as possible to footpaths and off-road tracks. Better to control your own risks rather than place your trust in drivers.