Miranda Devine

[Cutter]

Even though I know she is a venomous, bitter, bile spewing right wing apparatchik a poor journalist, she still has the power to raise my hackles on the basis that some people might actually agree with her. Its a sad world if that is the case.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/socie...e-for-cars-not-lycra-louts-20091028-hkwr.html

Whoever made up the Roads and Traffic Authority's 1990s slogan ''the road is there to share'' has a lot to answer for. It's a big fat lie. The road is not there to share. Roads are built for cars. Pretending otherwise is unfair to motorists and cyclists alike.

It leads to tragic accidents and violent incidents such as the attack on a 64-year-old bus driver by a cyclist last Friday.

At 5.05am, in the pre-dawn half light a cyclist in his 30s, "dressed like Cadel Evans", says the Transport Workers Union bus industry official Darcy Waller, was riding illegally on the bus only North-West T-way near Seven Hills.


Illustration: Edd Aragon.
You can see from the video footage released by police this week how dangerous the situation is, with the bus travelling at 80km/h in a narrow lane with little tolerance on either side.

The bus had to sound its horn and pull over to the right, into the oncoming lane, to get past the cyclist. When the cyclist caught up with the bus at the next set of traffic lights, he allegedly banged on the side of the bus, and broke the bus driver's side mirror.

This is classic angry cyclist behaviour, as if it's up to the cycling fraternity to forcibly educate the motoring public and instil fear like jackbooted Soviets.

How aggressive do you have to be at 5am, anyway? You never hear of rowers, joggers, swimmers, yoga artists or other dawn fitness devotees attacking people.

You can see from the footage later on, when the bus stops to take on passengers, that the cyclist is full of righteous rage, shouting and pushing his way on to the bus, past a woman paying her fare, to punch the driver in the face.

It wasn't the first time bus drivers have had to contend with irrational cyclists. This cat-and-mouse game has been going on for almost three years, since the T-way was built. The RTA has done nothing to address the problem.

Now Waller says drivers are so fed up they are calling a protest meeting next week. "There's been verbal abuse, drivers spat at, punched through the bus window. The RTA are aware of it but we're bringing it to a head next week.

''Bus drivers don't have a problem with cyclists, but that's a 15-tonne vehicle they're driving around. If you want to use the road you need to respect the road rules and other users. There's a an element of cyclists that don't respect anybody."

Neither motorists nor cyclists ever wanted a civil war. But hostilities were fed by the lies told by the Government and the RTA, which gave cyclists unreasonable expectations and ideas above their station. The former roads minister Carl Scully, a vegetarian cyclist, threw $250 million at the lobby, further fuelling expectations which were dashed by subsequent roads ministers.

Most bike paths turned out to be little more than white paint on a road, with no room for a bike between parked cars and traffic. But they sent a signal to cyclists that motorists were somehow in the wrong.

There was a cycleway promised on the North-West T-way, but the reality turned out to be less than cyclists had in mind, with big gaps, traffic lights and intersections along the way. This caused an outbreak of vandalism and, as we saw last week, civil disobedience by cyclists with an inflated sense of importance.

Attempts to retrofit roads to allow equal access to bikes and pedestrians just makes them more dangerous and simply adds to Sydney's already woeful gridlock. Bikes and pedestrians are allowed on to roads only under the good graces of motorists, and only when they do not pose a traffic hazard.

The ideologues who have fostered the road-sharing lie must think a few dead cyclists and pedestrians are a small price to pay for getting cars off the road, because that is their ultimate aim: to make driving so unpleasant, slow, expensive and fraught with hazards that motorists give up.

So far, all they have done is create a dangerous sense of entitlement among other road users. Harold Scruby and his Pedestrian Council are much to blame for the attitude that far from sharing the road, cars are there under sufferance.

Pedestrians no longer stop and wait for cars to slow before launching themselves on to a zebra crossing. They stride out, like Moses parting the Red Sea, expecting cars to defy the laws of physics. The result is an increase in pedestrian injury.

Oxford Street reportedly has become a late-night killing zone, due to the arrogance of jaywalkers who think it is their god-given right to cross wherever they please. Councils have been forced to erect ugly kerbside fences to protect jaywalkers from themselves.

And that's not to even mention the ridiculous turfing of the Sydney Harbour Bridge on Sunday, which caused traffic pile-ups of two to three hours of delay on the north shore.

This was one of Nathan Rees's most memorable achievements: to close down one of Australia's busiest routes at huge expense to the taxpayer. To lay tens of thousands of metres of kikuyu grass so a few people could have a picnic (with no view) in the middle of the bridge rather than at any number of beautiful natural parklands around Sydney.

The Premier was ecstatic, proclaiming the tourism benefits of attracting people from as far away as, oh, Thornleigh.

''This is Sydney at its very best and another extraordinary event proving we can do anything,'' Rees said. It does prove there is no limit to the bread-and-circuses desperation of the State Government.

But under the Government-sponsored jollity of the day there was a not-so-subtle message: that even the most crucial and iconic roads do not belong to cars.

They can and will be reclaimed for frivolous purposes at any time.

 

[barbarian]

I have my moments with Miranda Devine. Sometimes I agree with her and praise her ability to voice an opinion she knows will be unpopular. Other times I think she crosses the line just for the sake of a headline and filling tomorrow's letters column with objecting opinions.

I think she has a point here, but it doesn't solve any of the current problems. The pedestrian council shits me to tears with some of their propaganda, and cyclists can at times possess a holier-than-thou attitude. But I don't necessarily believe everyone cannot be accomodated on the road, and aggressive car drivers have just as much to answer for as aggressive cyclists or pedestrians.

 

[Cutter]

Well clearly this bloke has been a bit of a knob, but how many car and bus drivers have been killed by cyclists in the last 5 years? A vehicle driver doesnt have to make much of an error to condemn a cyclist to an early grave. Conversely, a cyclist can do pretty much anything without risking the death of a driver. I've been on the end of poor driving whilst on a bike and have felt like doing much as this bloke did. Whilst I didnt do it, I have very little sympathy for the bus driver. Cyclists arent generally irrational idiots attacking vehicle drivers randomly, the bus driver must have done something to raise his ire.

I'd be interested to read anything Miranda says which is at all worthwhile. Her good articles are one in a hundred.

 

[barbarian]

I feel a lot of sympathy for the bus driver. The cyclist was riding in the bus lane. That is illegal. The bus driver was not in the wrong.

And just because it is easier to inflict injury with a car than it is with a bike doesn't somehow make cyclists indiscretions any less wrong or dangerous. Cyclists have died as a result of careless driving, much like motorcyclists. But when you put yourself on a busy road riding a bike with only a small plastic helmet to protect you then bad things are going to occasionally happen, especially as you are travelling at a significantly slower pace to the surrounding traffic. I'm not defending careless driving, rather questioning the choice of some cyclists to ride on highways and busy city roads and then complain when the inevitable accidents occur.

I think cyclists should be allowed to ride on the roads, but I think it should be limited to routes where they can do so without affecting either their own safety or that of the passing traffic, because on some roads there is either not enough space or too much traffic for cyclists to be assured of their safety.

 

[Pfitzy]

I saw this column too, and thought "here we go - the lefty bitch is at it again!". Once I got into it I saw her point and generally agree. There was all this shit a couple of years back about cyclists getting their own lanes to use and what has happened since?

Examples include a bike lane on Kent St which is about as handy as tits on a duck; Bike routes for Sydney that always seem to be broken up by major intersections because it costs too much to put in a cycle tunnel/bridge; and half-arsed attempt at a "cycleway" along the M7, which is little more than a way for service vehicles to get to the many conduits and access points for the electronic infrastructure. The M2 has also been corrupted by this useless 3-lane concept which terminates the bike path at the M3 overpass, forcing cyclists back onto suburban streets which are far more dangerous than the freeways IMHO.

I used to ride the M7 cycleway regularly for exercise and the odd commute. It was bad enough that the steel covers for electrics (lights over the cycleway) and other access were on the lanes themselves (sometimes right in the middle of the riding line for corners), but now its even worse. I rode the section from Quakers to the M4 the other day and its appalling - sections of it are now in complete disrepair because its used by service vehicles that overload it and break it up.

That said, the cyclist in this case was a raving dickhead and I wish the bus driver was a big Samoan lad in order to teach the fwit a lesson. Had I been one of the passengers that day I would have held him until the cops came. There is no call for that.

 

[Ash]

I saw this column too, and thought "here we go - the lefty bitch is at it again!". Once I got into it I saw her point and generally agree. There was all this shit a couple of years back about cyclists getting their own lanes to use and what has happened since?

Uh, surely you're kidding, right? She's a starch raving right wing conservative. She comes from a Liberal family with a strong conservative tradition. And like most staunch conservatives (or the far left too, both extremes are pretty bad), she's a raving loony who believes she is right and everyone else is wrong.

She's not as bad as Ann Coulter, but as she gets older I bet she'll head more into the Ann Coulter territory.

 

[Moses]

I don't disagree with that article, cyclists shit me to tears.

Not all cyclists, just the ones who want to be pampered and have their own lanes etc. Epping road is now an absolute disgrace, I know this as I live in Lane Cove and have to use it daily. There's a big fat cycle lane and no freaking cyclists. I look every day while waiting for a bus and saw one three weeks ago. Yet any hour of the day or night there is a long line of cars merging into the single lane while the cycle lane and the garden lane sit there idle. Harden the fark up and ride on the road, or don't and catch a bus. Or take the backstreets I really don't care.

Then there is "the peliton" who love to excercise their right to ride three abrest on single lane roads, they can go and get farked too. When they start paying rego or tolls then maybe they'd have a right to make claims for roadworks in their favour. Till then they're merely spectators.

At the very least they should be made to put on license plates if they are to ride into the city, make them accountable for riding on footpaths etc.

As for the "pedistrian council of Australia", it's a single bloke who writes lots of letters and seems to be quoted in just about every article on roads.

 

[BillyWebb]

Cyclists piss me off no end.
Well, let me qualify that... most cyclists. There are sure to be some law-abiding considerate ones that I just haven't met yet.

They want to enjoy the rights of motorists and pedestrians all at the same time.
Yet they tend not to obey the laws for either.

And then they whinge and whine about inconsiderate drivers! Pffffffffft!

 

[Pfitzy]

Uh, surely you're kidding, right? She's a starch raving right wing conservative. She comes from a Liberal family with a strong conservative tradition.

I thought the Libs were the left? There you go - wiki tells me otherwise. Still, she's unquestionably nationalist and has a lot socialist leanings when it suits her.

There are sure to be some law-abiding considerate ones that I just haven't met yet.

They're the ones you don't hear about who just get on with their business.

 

[Cutter]

Cyclists may not pay rego, but nor do they contribute to road damage or fumes and the associated respiratory problems. They are less likely to be a drain on public health by virtue of heart disease, diabetes etc and bikes don't produce carbon. Cyclists don't kill pedestrians if they hit them, they don't go through the front of a house when they get out of control. Two cyclists having a head on doesn't have quite the effect of two cars doing the same.

I live in Europe. Cars and cyclists can co-exist. The Italians are mad for their cars and drive like madmen yet are incredibly considerate and careful of cyclists. Cyclists need to have the confidence they have right of way or its too nervewracking to cycle amongst multi tonne missiles.

Having said that, I agree that cyclists should be considerate of other road users. The effect of a cyclist being inconsiderate might be that a car is slowed down for a bit. The effect of a car being inconsiderate is likely to be much more serious.

 

[Cutter]

Uh, surely you're kidding, right? She's a starch raving right wing conservative. She comes from a Liberal family with a strong conservative tradition.

I thought the Libs were the left? There you go - wiki tells me otherwise. Still, she's unquestionably nationalist and has a lot socialist leanings when it suits her.

The Liberals and the liberals are two different animals. The Liberal Party is a strange name for a right wing party though and confuses everyone everywhere else in the world.

Mate if Devine has any socialist leanings she hides it so well that I've never noticed it. She is about as far right as it gets in mainstream Australian journalism.

 

[cyclopath]

Gee, most of you lot have the angry pants on don't you? Not to mention the saddle up on the high horse.
Love all the generalisations about cyclists.
Love the old furphy about "Don't pay rego, blah, blah, blah..." What a load of bollocks.
I own 2 cars for me and my wife, and both are strangely enough, fully registered and insured. I think I contribute my share to the roads coffers. In fact ALL the guys I ever cycle with are the same - 1 bloke has 2 cars and 2 motorbikes.
I have ridden a lot on roads in Melbourne, where mostly it is a harmonious process (or was when I lived there), and Sydney (where it is mostly a fast route to an early grave). The attitude on the roads to cyclists can be feral at times, but the real issue is the lack of infrastructure to accommodate all comers.
I have seen a mate get ridden into the scrub by an 18 wheeler who had 2 lanes to choose from, just 'cos he thought it was a laugh I guess, so don't use this example of a knob cyclist to make a rational argument about the merits of cyclists in general, or indeed the virtues of motorists. Empirical data means diddly.
This vacuous piece just exposes Miranda Devine's pea-sized brain, and how she owns the shock-jock niche in print media.

 

[Gagger]

Cyclists rule.

We also get to wear lycra.

 

[Pfitzy]

bikes don't produce carbon.

Well, except during construction There was an eco-challenge running one year where manufacturing footprint was taken into account - the solar car got whipped on that.

 

[Moses]

bikes don't produce carbon.

Well, except during construction There was an eco-challenge running one year where manufacturing footprint was taken into account - the solar car got whipped on that.

and the extra beans the cyclists have to eat comes back out as methane

 

[Cutter]

I was wondering when the cavalry would turn up.

 

[cyclopath]

I was wondering when the cavalry would turn up.

I would have been here sooner but had to belt up a bus driver first!

 

[Cutter]

She's changed her tune in today's smh.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/going-berko-over-a-bisycho-20091030-hpph.html

You always know when you write about the battle for road supremacy between cyclists and motorists that you will touch a nerve. But the avalanche of email and online comments in response to Thursday's column shows an extraordinary new level of sensitivity.

With one of Australia's most picturesque and convivial bike rides, Sydney to the Gong, on tomorrow, it is time for a fair-minded reappraisal of what has gone wrong in relations between cyclists and motorists, who now see each other as adversaries competing for an increasingly scarce resource.

The bad blood is not just because one feral cyclist dressed like Cadel Evans got himself filmed punching a bus driver on the North-West T-way. It's that somehow Sydney's (and perhaps Melbourne's) tolerance of subprime driving conditions has reached a tipping point.

For motorists worried about losing their licences amid an orgy of fines, speed cameras, school zones, chicanes, speed humps, road closures, infinitely variable speed limits and a dizzying array of new signage, the growing band of entitled cyclists on painfully congested roads is simply the last straw.

"Some cyclists have become … the most obnoxious, aggressive and self-centred people in Sydney," wrote William. "A single cyclist on an inappropriate road often causes a cascade of delays and congestion to multiple people in cars behind them."

There were cyclists like David who wrote to call me a "toilet bowl scum", and the usual missives addressed to "The Retard Miranda Devine".

But there were also cyclists who were sick of the militant among them alienating drivers whose goodwill they need to keep safe on the road. They have even coined a new word in honour of the North-West T-way maniac: bisycho, a "cyclist who goes postal on drivers who don't share the road".

There were people who wrote distressingly of loved ones killed and maimed while riding pushbikes. David Oliver's 39-year-old nephew, a triathlete, was killed while riding near Dapto by a car allegedly driven by an unlicensed driver. He leaves a widow and toddler son.

Others described the hostility of motorists: "I've been hit in the back with a drink bottle thrown from a passing car while riding in a designated bike lane," wrote Fletcher. "I've been yelled at by a guy hanging out the car as [it] sped past at 100km/h in a 60 zone. On the Old Pacific Highway a guy in a four-wheel-drive missed me by two centimetres while holding his mobile phone to his ear. I was almost killed by a P-plater overtaking a car over double yellow lines. I've had cars deliberately swerve at me."

Of course such behaviour is intolerable, even criminal.

But what some cyclists don't understand is that they have squandered the goodwill even of decent motorists with such belligerent antics as the Critical Mass bike ride at peak hour on one Friday a month, designed for maximum commuter inconvenience. The fact that police condone the disruption has only fuelled public resentment.

And while shooting the messenger may play well on a cycling blog, the public has drawn its own conclusions.

"How many of you cyclists think you have a god-given right to ride four abreast on the Pacific Highway on the weekends without the SLIGHTEST regard for any other road user?" wrote Chris.

"I've had several nasty experiences with cyclists on King Street, Newtown," wrote John. "Cyclists feel they have the right to aggressively attack motorists and perform acts of malicious damage to their vehicles on a regular basis."

Baz wrote: "Every morning and afternoon I have to pass cyclists riding on a roadway when a perfectly acceptable bike path is only two metres [away]. Then when I pull up at the next set of lights they pass me again and ride through the red lights only to cause another traffic jam further along. I am now forced to leave 15 minutes earlier to make up for time lost due to inconsiderate cyclists."

For those correspondents who demanded to know my bike riding habits, I once was keen enough to tackle Sydney to the Gong, but when my bike was stolen from my garage it took me a year to notice that it was missing.

We cowards can't help a sneaking admiration for the two-wheeled warriors who risk life and limb in the unequal battle of the road. But they seem not to realise how terrifying it is for a motorist to come upon them on a busy road.

The reality is that cycling in Sydney is risky at the best of times but borders on suicidal on busy arterial roads during our lengthening peak hours.

The solution is not to make motorists' lives more miserable with utopian attempts to re-engineer our lifestyles, but to encourage commonsense and courtesy on both sides.

The good news is that sensible cyclists are beginning to accept responsibility for their behaviour.

In Toronto, Canada, cycling groups recently launched a campaign of solidarity with motorists after a bike courier was killed during a road rage altercation. They hand out thank-you notes to drivers who are thoughtful and courteous to cyclists.

In Australia the website Cycliquette, which was launched this month by the Canada-born "average cyclist" Wade Wallace, is another example of the new, conciliatory approach.

"Cyclists need to clean up [their act] in order to coexist with motorists so that we're respected on the roads," writes Wallace.

"As it stands, there are too many of us (myself included) who ride in massive bunches, abuse our rights and act like a bunch of hoons."

The Amy Gillett Foundation, named after the elite Australian cyclist who was killed while training in Germany in 2005, is another endeavour to "promote a safe and harmonious relationship of shared respect" between cyclists and motorists.

As with everything in life, courtesy goes a long way.

devinemiranda@hotmail.com

 

[Joe Mac]

Here is an interesting article from the smh about Amsterdam and bikes. I cycled there from London on the weekend it was one of the few times I have felt relaxed on my bike and not worried about being hit by a car. The roads are empty which I think any driver would love. The majority of traffic is in the bike lanes separated from the roads. So the cyclists need not fear the cars and the drivers (especially bus drivers) can drive without worrying about us cyclists. I know Amsterdam is flat and small relative to Sydney but with the governments inability to create any sort of public transport system in Sydney, Cycle lanes, especially in the city would benefit everyone.

I hear Clover is trying to put them in, anyone here experienced them? Any good?

For a country that is so sport obsessed, I cant understand why Sydney people hate cycling so much.







Those struggling to agree on a cycling policy for Sydney should perhaps look to Amsterdam, writes Paola Totaro.

THE Dutch have long been known as a free-wheeling nation, open to foreigners, cool about sex and drugs and wedded to a relaxed and healthy lifestyle.

Now Amsterdam's citizens have managed the unthinkable for a major Western city: they do more two-wheeling than driving, abandoning their cars for bikes.

It may seem a pipedream for car-dominated Sydney, but statistics compiled by the Dutch capital's municipal authority show that in the city centre, 57 per cent of all movement is done by bicycle. Even in new suburbs and on ring roads, close to 40 per cent of all trips are taken on two wheels.

Advertisement: Story continues below
The congestion that paralyses Sydney's centre each day has been relegated to history in the Netherlands capital. Thirty years of strategic spending and pro-bike policies have led to car speeds being lowered to 30km/h, parking spaces removed and replaced with trees and the cost of the remaining street bays set at a prohibitive €5 ($7) an hour.

Every day 350,000 bikes take to Amsterdam's roads. Like a scene from a Dr Seuss book, odd two-wheeled contraptions whizz by, laden with children and shopping. Old people as well as small children cycle and it is not uncommon to see Amsterdammers riding one-handed as they talk on mobile phones or hold an umbrella in pouring rain.

And yet not one of them wears a helmet.

Unlike Sydney, where debate over the efficacy of helmets rages, Dutch authorities believe the best way to encourage safety is to invest in bike-friendly infrastructure and to discourage cars. Pedestrians, bikes and cars are separated, speeds are low and safety is examined at school.

But despite the high ratio of bike use, the country has the lowest accident rate in Europe for cyclists. Seven riders die annually and about 100 are seriously injured.

Ria Hilhorst, the transport policy adviser to the City of Amsterdam, says Dutch people "would not like the feeling" of riding with a helmet.

"We know that if that were imposed on people, they would not ride their bikes,'' she said. ''We believe that the best way to promote safety for cyclists is to build infrastructure to keep them safe.''

Pascal van den Noort, the executive director of Velo Mondial, a Dutch sustainable mobility organisation , says cycling is a part of Dutch culture.

"It is a daily means of transport: work, school, shopping, leisure,'' van den Noort said.

"Ninety per cent of Amsterdam's roads and streets are bicycle-friendly routes. There are 400 kilometres of bike lanes separated from other traffic. The goals are to keep the city accessible, healthy, safe and liveable. Cycling improves the quality of life and road safety."

The city's cycling infrastructure is impressive: the cycle-and-pedestrian Nescio Bridge, which spans the busy Rijn Canal, is the country's longest and links the residents of the IJburg district, a newly built eastern suburb, with the ''mainland''. Cyclists can also use a ferry between Central Station and the north of the city free of charge and there are 230,000 unguarded bike parking spots and 13,000 with security in the city. All are strategically placed and feed into public transport, creating park-and-ride hubs.

Hilhorst said the first time bike use exceeded cars - but only just - was in late 2008. This achievement, one they plan to exceed, took almost 30 years of strategic policy decisions - many of them initially politically unpopular - as well as continuing investment.

"Over the past 20 years, we removed a lot of parking spaces for cars, planting trees to stop parking, [putting] poles and other things in the way. We raised the cost of parking," she said.

"We have invested money in public transport, in creating safe parking for bicycles around stations and all over the city."

The sheer volume of bikes is striking. The city of 757,000 people is home to 550,000 cycles - more than twice the number of private cars (218,000). The city is also physically perfect for bikes, with flat topography, relatively short distances and streets very narrow for cars.

The downside is that the city is also the European capital for bike theft and about 10 per cent of all bikes go missing each year. Police now have their own cycle beats, a city inspector has been appointed to monitor the trade in second-hand bikes and track illegal sales, and free engraving is available.

400 km of bike lanes separated from other traffic.


90% of roads/streets are ''bicycle-friendly'' routes.


38% trips are done by bike, 37 per cent by public transport and 25 per cent by car.


2m kilometres are done daily by bike in the city.


66% travel 'frequently' on public transport
57% of all trips are done by bike in the city centre.

 

[Sully]

The Netherlands have been Cycle mad for a very long time. Their Cycle infrastructure decades ahead of modt other countries. But more importantly they have respect and tolerence of each other. Something sadly missing on many levels in Australian society. All that is need is a change of attitude from cyclists and drivers and most of our problems would disappear. Unfortunately I can't see it happening anytime soon.

I still hate Lycra