What is the key challenge for cycling policy?Posted: August 3, 2011
There’s been a spirited and useful debate in Victoria over the last 12 months about the rights and wrongs of mandatory helmets, but now it’s time to move on to the main game. This column in The Age (and especially the associated comments) by Bojun Björkman-Chiswell, the founder of website Melbourne Cycle Chic, is a reminder that compulsory helmets aren’t the key obstacle to the wider uptake of cycling in Melbourne.
Ms Björkman-Chiswell describes how she was recently hit by a car while cycling in the very city that only days before had been pronounced by Lord Mayor Robert Doyle and Premier Ted Baillieu as a ”bike city”. Melbourne is most definitely not, she avers, a bike city. “It is a city where people who wish to use a fast, free, non-polluting, peaceful and convenient mode of transport are subjected to harassment, culpable driving, injury and death….”.
The shit hit the fan however when she let on, seemingly as an afterthought, that she wasn’t wearing a helmet:
You’ll be pleased to know, Cr Doyle and Mr Baillieu, that despite my accident, my head is fine, but my neck is wrenched, my ankle swollen, my knee strained and my left shoulder, rib cage and thigh bruised, and I don’t wear a helmet.
A string of commenters took her to task for those last five words. As one said: “Great article, but you totally lost all your cred without the helmet. No wonder motorists don’t take you seriously”. And another: “How sad that you won’t protect yourself when you KNOW how idiotic most of the car drivers are”. And this one: “You’re insane if you don’t wear a helmet riding a bike in any Australian city (this isn’t the Netherlands). Plus there is the little matter that it is illegal not to wear a helmet”.
The key issue at the moment for Melburnians interested in cycling isn’t compulsory helmets – that’s a sideshow – it’s safety. While the weight of evidence suggests the exercise disincentive effect of helmets probably outweighs their protective benefits, our starting point is not an ideal world. Melbourne’s streets are dominated by cars. An individual contemplating cycling on the city’s roads has to have very special regard for the dangers of traffic. Cycling might not be as dangerous as people imagine, but it’s the perception of danger that holds prospective cyclists back.
Even if helmets were made discretionary, my feeling is the great bulk of Melbourne’s cyclists would make the rational decision and elect to wear a helmet. Just as importantly, I suspect that the next ‘cohort’ on the verge of taking up cycling (given an appropriate nudge) would also overwhelmingly choose to wear a helmet. Some might prefer not to, but on Melbourne’s roads you need every little advantage you can get.
As Paul Keating might say, compulsory helmets is a second order issue at this time. So let’s move on and give much-needed attention to the current number one issue, improving safety. So far that’s mainly meant providing dedicated infrastructure like bike lanes. More infrastructure is indeed needed – much more – but the task of effectively segregating bicycles and motorised traffic is mammoth.
The reality is cycling can only increase its share of travel significantly in Melbourne if it shares road space with cars, buses, trucks and trams. What’s really needed to make cycling safer is more respect and consideration from drivers.
The core issue is drivers don’t see cyclists as legitimate road users. I don’t think that’s got a lot to do with cyclists not being licensed, bicycles not being registered, riders wearing lycra, or cyclists flouting the road rules. I think its fundamentally because motorists simply see roads as exclusively for their use and cyclists, like pedestrians, don’t belong on them. That’s what drivers have always been told and that’s what they’ve always believed.
What we need now, I think, is a clear and authoritative message from the Government that the roads belong as much to cyclists as they do to drivers of vehicles. The traditional view of motorists about who “owns” the road needs to be drastically reformed. The message needs to emphasise that not only do cyclists have an equal right to the road, their vulnerability means they have a further right to special care and consideration from drivers.
I’d like to see this message promoted strongly in the driver licensing process, in schools and in the media. I’d like to see it underlined by highly visible changes in the law to emphasise drivers’ duty of care toward cyclists. Lawyers might say the law already provides for this – even so, I think there’s a lot to be said for the symbolism of legislation, even if in substance it’s only tinkering at the edges. And of course I’d like to see concerted action by Police to enforce the law when drivers behave carelessly or aggressively toward cyclists.
I imagine a culture where every driver automatically assumes there’s a good chance a cyclist might fall off or do something stupid and makes sure there’s adequate margin to avoid an accident. In reality the probability of an accident is very low, but the consequence is potentially catastrophic. And anyway, it makes the cyclist’s experience less stressful when cars give them a wide berth.
Cyclists have a negligible impact on vehicle speeds at the moment, but if the number of riders increases significantly then this could become a serious issue for motorists. We assume the resulting economic losses are offset or exceeded by the social benefits of cycling. A key challenge however will be to convince motorists that the appropriate speed in a particular situation is defined by the slowest and most vulnerable road user – much as drivers observe 10 kph limits in pedestrian-oriented areas like caravan parks – not by an upper limit.
It can be argued the mandatory helmet law is a key safety issue because it deters some riders and so lessens critical mass. I think it’s a fair argument but I don’t think it’s anywhere near as large a disincentive to cycling as driver behaviour. It’s a fight more likely to be won, I think, when cycling is generally perceived as far safer than it is today.
BOOK GIVEAWAY: follow this link to enter the competition to win a copy of Sophie Cunningham’s fabulous book, Melbourne. Entries close Saturday 13 August.