|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Talkback one eyed lunatics.
"F Murtz" wrote in message eb.com... Pelican wrote: "F Murtz" wrote in message ... I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year. He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side. He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything". His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro jackets with number on the back. We would then be the only place in the world with it. It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding. He has a bee in his bonnet about insurance associated with license,which would in my opinion eventually make the license fee expensive which is the case of all mandated insurance since the beginning of time. He would be better served to get government paid cover for the minute cases of third party claims against bicycles.(every so often a bicycle knocks some one down injuring and even killing where the victim has no cover and can not identify the culprit) It is not worth registration just for revenge against the rider,it is better to cover the third party through special govt.paid insurance and would be much cheaper than an other licensing monolith. It would mean that I would never ride again as it is rare that I do and would not be worth it (I sometimes take train with bicycle to the city or places like Gosford for use at the other end) There are quite a few proposals floating around. For example, this one - http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226738618261. It's a democracy, so feel free to make your views heard. Write to the Minister, and have your say. For what it's worth, I don't like your idea of a government scheme. I would much prefer a private scheme by the insurance industry, if possible, backed by law making it compulsory for bike riders, or bikes, to be registered in a way that makes it self-funding. The simpler, the better. No such animal as the simpler the better once it starts The small cost of third party claims paid by government would be nothing against the overall cost of compulsory licensing and insurance for all bike riders, a complete new industry with the insurers licking their lips at the new windfall, which would increase as it takes hold, the same as it did for all mandated insurance cover, compulsory auto third party compulsory building insurance etc, loads more govt staff to run licensing etc. You are over-exaggerating the problem. The law already provides a remedy for cyclists with personal or property injuries. The law already provides a remedy for others with personal or property injuries which are the fault of cyclists, but the consequences might be difficult where a cyclist doesn't have funds. That problem can arise in many situations, of course. All that is apparently being considered is a measure to ensure that those injured by cyclists have an effective remedy eg by there being some sort of fund of contributions by cyclists. That need not involve licensing, registration of bikes, annual payments etc etc. It's not an anti-biking measure. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Talkback one eyed lunatics | F Murtz[_2_] | Australia | 2 | May 15th 15 07:57 AM |
lunatics or heroes? | Zebee Johnstone | Australia | 3 | June 18th 08 03:38 AM |
ABC 774 talkback etc | cfsmtb | Australia | 3 | May 16th 06 04:36 AM |
Clarkson pie-eyed | Just zis Guy, you know? | UK | 219 | September 28th 05 07:08 AM |
RR: Get away from me you lazy eyed freak | Jimbo(san) | Mountain Biking | 1 | December 2nd 03 01:47 PM |