Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. J.A. Darley:
That the regulations under the Road Traffic Act 1961 concerning Road Rules—Ancillary and Miscellaneous Provisions, made on 8 October 2015 and laid on the table of this council on 13 October 2015, be disallowed.
(Continued from 28 October 2015.)
The Hon. J.A. DARLEY ( 21:28 :51 ): I rise to conclude the debate on these motions and thank honourable members for their contributions. Whilst I acknowledge that some of the initial fears associated with these regulations have now been allayed, I still hold serious concerns about several issues. I am aware that my motions will fail. However, I will persist nonetheless.
The issue of staying wider of the rider seems to have dissipated and the community seems to have accepted this without much incident. However, the issue of being able to cross double white lines still concerns me greatly. From the time that I was taught to drive (and I have been driving for over 60 years), it was drummed into me that you absolutely do not cross a double white line under any circumstances.
These lines have not just been placed anywhere in a random manner; rather, they have been placed there strategically, after analysis of traffic conditions, to prohibit dangerous manoeuvres. The concept of only crossing double white lines if it is safe to do so is an oxymoron to me because I do not believe there would ever be circumstances when it would be safe, particularly in the Mount Lofty Ranges and the Fleurieu Peninsula.
I note the article in today's Advertiser which outlined the story of a motorcyclist who was hit by an oncoming vehicle which had crossed over white lines to overtake cyclists and give them adequate clearance. I am worried that a similar incident will occur in South Australia. I am concerned for pedestrians who may be intimidated or bowled over by a cyclist on a footpath. I understand there is a need at times for cyclists to ride on the footpath and that many cyclists, especially more serious cyclists, would prefer to ride on the road; however, I believe that some guidance is required. Perhaps imposing a speed limit or rules with regard to passing pedestrians need to be explored, as is done in New South Wales.
Finally, the manner in which this will be policed raises some questions. I received via FOI information from SAPOL as to how they will police these new regulations. The information I received was scant. There is no point in having legislation or regulations if they cannot or will not be policed fairly and effectively. I have requested further information from SAPOL and look forward to receiving it. With that, I thank the chamber for their consideration and commend the motion.