Taxi drivers, cyclists want to use busway

[rainman]

From RNZ (http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/latest/200802051913/taxi_drivers,_cyclists_want_to_use_busway):


Auckland taxi drivers and cyclists want to use a new busway beside the northern motorway on the North Shore in Auckland.

The six-kilometre busway was tested for the first time on Monday in rush-hour traffic from Constellation Drive to the Auckland harbour bridge. But taxis and bicycles are not allowed to use it.

The Taxi Federation says it made a submission for taxis to be allowed to use the busway, but was unsuccessful.

Executive director Tim Reddish says many people with special needs use taxis because buses are not a viable option.

Cycle Action Auckland has long advocated for designated cycle lanes to get to and from the North Shore.

Chairman Bevan Woodward hopes funding will instead allow a trial of bus racks installed on the buses.

Transit New Zealand says it will review operation of the busway to see whether there should be any changes to the rules governing which vehicles are permitted to use it.

The $300 million busway was officially opened on Saturday and became fully operational on Sunday.

About 70 buses an hour travel on the busway to the Auckland CBD during peak times.

Passengers can get on or off at four stations - with a park-and-ride station at Constellation Drive.

The Auckland Regional Council believes it will entice more commuters onto public transport. It's predicted that it will take over 2000 vehicles off the northern motorway during rush-hour.

And once again no mention of motorcycles, which would be far more practical to share the buslane than pushbikes. I'm assuming they didn't even bother to phone BRONZ for comment.

Contact address is news@radionz.co.nz if you want to email them a (calm, rational, and reasoned, of course) response to their poor reporting!

[steved]

I agree that taxi drivers have zero case. Assuming that the bus lanes don't have much space on the side, then bicycles would be dangerous on the bus-way.

Motorbikes don't need it with the ability to filter. The northern motorway is reasonably wide yeah?

[Cruisin' Craig]

The police have been granted permission to use it on priority one jobs, the inspector told everyone this week. My boss is ringing transit tomorrow about us using it for priority one jobs as well. Will be a big time saver for us in peak hour. Taxi drivers can fuck off, i hate those terrorists of the streets, and as for cyclists, when those whinging cunts stop for red lights and start obeying the traffic rules (we are road users too.. bullshit) then maybe they can be considered, otherwise they can fuck off too.

I agree about the Taxi's. They're just wanting things to be more efficient for them so they can make more money, as opposed to their suggestion having anything to do with increasing the efficiency of our roads.

On the other hand, more people on bicycles means less traffic congestion, less parking difficulties, less pollution, less global warming and longer before we hit peak oil. I say we should be making cycling as attractive as possible as a form of transport. Also it can be a big safety advantage to separate them from the normal flow of traffic. If it is safe to do so, I think they should be able to use the new busway.

[rainman]

Motorbikes don't need it with the ability to filter. The northern motorway is reasonably wide yeah?

Yeah, but filtering/splitting being legally questionable under some circumstances (don't want to start another debate on this - plenty on here already), it would be a nice option and probably safer too.

[jafar]

What a waste of $300 million, you still have to get all that traffic over the car strangled spanner & with a maximum of 5 lanes open during rush hour your farting against thunder.:laugh:
When are they going to start on another harbour bridge??:shutup:
Too little & far to late :spanking:

[mowgli]

Taxi drivers can fuck off, i hate those terrorists of the streets, and as for cyclists, when those whinging cunts stop for red lights and start obeying the traffic rules (we are road users too.. bullshit) then maybe they can be considered, otherwise they can fuck off too.

+1 cyclists are a menace :oi-grr:

[Badcat]

didn't i hear that they said bikes could use it in the proposal stage - then changed their minds?

[swbarnett]

didn't i hear that they said bikes could use it in the proposal stage - then changed their minds?
They've lied to us at every stage. First it was "High occupancy vehicles" including private cars and motorcycles and now nothing. Last I heard was that when it eventually connects with a southern bus way via a dedicated lane on the bridge we might be able to use it (different council or some such political nonsense).

[swbarnett]

+1 cyclists are a menace :oi-grr:
I used to commute by bicycle (Mairangi Bay to the CBD) and the menace was cages. The problem is that the racing set think they are a law unto themselves and the animosity this creates is hurled back at everyone on a bike regardless of their behaviour at the time.

I stopped commuting by bicycle when I swore at a teacher that I thought ordered the school crossing signs out when I had passed the diamond. This is how pissed off I was getting with the treatment I was receiving from cages. If the busway was opened to bicycles (if there's room) I might be persuaded to try it again.

[Big Dog]

They've lied to us at every stage. First it was "High occupancy vehicles" including private cars and motorcycles and now nothing. Last I heard was that when it eventually connects with a southern bus way via a dedicated lane on the bridge we might be able to use it (different council or some such political nonsense).

Just another reason I am moving out of this backwater.

[NighthawkNZ]

I believe motocyclists have a zero case for use of the bus lane... and why should they need it... don't believe they should be allowed on a bus lane... same with push bikes and taxis...

[Big Dog]

I believe motocyclists have a zero case for use of the bus lane... and why should they need it... don't believe they should be allowed on a bus lane... same with push bikes and taxis...Easy to say from Dunedin.

[Number One]

Yeah, but filtering/splitting being legally questionable under some circumstances (don't want to start another debate on this - plenty on here already), it would be a nice option and probably safer too.

+1.

As for Taxis using the lane...that suits me when I'm stuck up that way in a taxi trying to get to the airport to come home...but with all the taxis on the road wouldn't it just end up congested aswell?

[xwhatsit]

I believe motocyclists have a zero case for use of the bus lane... and why should they need it... don't believe they should be allowed on a bus lane... same with push bikes and taxis...

You often seem to have these funny ideas. I remember a similar opinion you put forward about parking on the footpath. As Big Dog says, that's easy to say from Dunedin.


That strip of motorway is relatively easy to split down, it's a modern piece of motorway with nice wide lanes. However, when the traffic is doing 5-10kph, I'm not particularly comfortable doing the 80kph you could do in the bus-way. In addition, the bus-way would in most circumstances be a fair bit safer than splitting anyway. Splitting is safer than remaining in normal lane position in many situations, but riding in normal position when there's no cars around at all is better still.

[more_fasterer]

If taxi's had the right to use it they'd just park up at the bus stations, completely clogging up the flow just like they do outside any bar / restaurant area on a friday night.

There is at present a proposal for a walkway & cycleway to be built under the harbour bridge's main span, IMHO it would be easy to create a cycleway the full length of the northern on the oppsite side from the busway - similar to what is in place on the north-western.

It'd be great for bikes & HOV's to use the busway, but considering how ineffective it's proving for buses, I certainly don't think that'll solve any congestion issues.

[vifferman]

It'd be great for bikes & HOV's to use the busway, but considering how ineffective it's proving for buses, I certainly don't think that'll solve any congestion issues.
That raises a very good point. When we were in Kalifornicatia, the freeways had HOV lanes, which we made good use of. Instead of the buslanes, Transit should have built an HOV lane each way down the motorway. The buslanes are a waste of resources (land AND money), as they are unused most of the time. Most of the vehicles on the road have only one occupant, so a better way to reduce traffic would be to get people to car-pool, rather than use buses, which most D'Aucklanders seem to agree are not an option.

It's always struck me as really mental that so many people travel from to work at about the same time as their neighbours, many going to the same area. My wife travelled by bus for 7 years, and whenever she had to take the car, she'd pick up people she knew from the bus who worked near her or on the way to her work, and then use the transit lane. Not that hard to do.

I know the guy across the road from me works somewhere near me, and travels the same route at about the same time, but I'm not giving him a lift on my bike. He's even older than me, and might have a coronary and fall off.

[Swoop]

If vehicles other than busses use the busway, there will be problems.
*Cyclists really need to be seperated from moving traffic, such as seen on the NW motorway.
* Taxis are merely looking at an easy way to earn more money without aiding mas public transport.
* Private cars "high-occupancy" or not, will send a message to other cagers that they can drive there at will.
Make a seperate lane from the existing ones' (the right hand lane?) for HOV's.
* Bikes make the most sense to be allowed. High-occupancy, environmentally friendlier, and will not hold up the busses! Small scooters may pose a problem if they are unable to keep up to the required speed, but can easily be hosed off of the front of the busses. So no worries there.


I believe motocyclists have a zero case for use of the bus lane... and why should they need it... don't believe they should be allowed on a bus lane... same with push bikes and taxis...
Quiet!
Bloody south islanders don't know what traffic is!:lol:

[fireball]

it is a whole lot of political wank:tugger: if you ask me......
mind you being an election year go moan to an MP.....

just ban cars altogether...... :yeah:

[fredie]

motobikes are allowed in bus lanes here .an cabs . hire car . :wari:

[Skyryder]

The whole idea of buslanes is to reduce traffic flows and vehicle usage at peak times like going to and from the workplace. The general population is not going to buy a bike and commute two wheels motorised or not. That only leaves the public transport system. Unless there is a viable energy alternative the car and solo occupant will become a thing of the past at peak times. It won't happen over night but bus lanes are the start of this process.

Passenger usage on busses has been rising for some time and not showing any signs of slowing down.

Skyryder

[Rockbuddy]

cyclists should have no rights to use the road let alone the bus lanes until they start paying road user charges like the rest of the road users

[bugjuice]

my 2¢;

don't think bycyclysists should use it, cos they're slow. And when they get to a hill, they go slower. And some get off. And then others catch up and try to get around them. Then a bus comes at 80kph and *squash*. We have messy bycyclysists stuck on the front of buses.

as for rhamadharma cabs, tons will start using them, and then it'll get clogged when one breaks down or crashes and not as many people will be on the buses, which means they'll loose their money and point of building the system in the first place. so I can see why they said no to them too.

as for motored bycyclysists, I think we should (cos I ride one too), since we take up next to no room, if Suzuki's break down (and lets face it, they do), then they can squeeze to the side of the road, and riders have a better idea of road safety (usually) to keep out of the way until help comes. But there's an issue in itself, getting the bike out of the busway system. Also think that we should really really try to obey the 80kph limit since we would be guests. If you want to go faster, then use the motorway and not abuse the system.

I can see from the owners' point of view why they've said no to everyone. It's kind of selfish in a way, but in doing so, they are minimizing their hassles. I mean, their buses have already proven to break all the time, so the last thing they want is more people clogging it up and causing accidents.

dunno now.. hate filtering in heavy traffic (kinda hate it all together, but if i must), and it's slow by comparison to an empty stretch, so it would be nice to be taken out of some danger. I know we chose that 'life style', but still.. a lil help would be nice

[swbarnett]

cyclists should have no rights to use the road let alone the bus lanes until they start paying road user charges like the rest of the road users
Cyclists cause virtually no wear and tear so there's nothing to charge them for. Besides, cage drivers don't pay road user charges, only trucks and such.

[Rockbuddy]

Cyclists cause virtually no wear and tear so there's nothing to charge them for. Besides, cage drivers don't pay road user charges, only trucks and such.
I pay hundreds of dollars so that i can use my cage and bikes on the road some of it goes to the acc some to transit nz, if cyclists use our roads they inturn should pay some to acc and transit, obviously it would be a smaller amount, and until they do they have no right to comment about other paying road users

[swbarnett]

I pay hundreds of dollars so that i can use my cage and bikes on the road some of it goes to the acc some to transit nz, if cyclists use our roads they inturn should pay some to acc and transit, obviously it would be a smaller amount, and until they do they have no right to comment
about other paying road users
I thought we were talking about road user charges.

Agreed that cyclists should pay ACC etc. like the rest of us. In Switzerland you had to pay $5/year that gave you third party insurance to the tune of Fr2million (no ACC over there, compulsary health insurance).

[grusomhat]

Cyclists cause virtually no wear and tear so there's nothing to charge them for. Besides, cage drivers don't pay road user charges, only trucks and such.

They don't pay RUC the same way as Deisel vehicles but they are charged it as part of the price of petrol.

[swbarnett]

They don't pay RUC the same way as Deisel vehicles but they are charged it as part of the price of petrol.
And how much of that goes towards the roads?

Besides, we pay less than cars and trucks through petrol because we use less. Same applies to bicycles.

I think cyclists need a break because they use the single most environmentally sound form of transport over anything more than walking distance. As bikers we expect breaks because we contribute less to environmental issues, congestion etc. It only stands to reason that we extend the same courtesy to cyclists.

[grusomhat]

And how much of that goes towards the roads?

Besides, we pay less than cars and trucks through petrol because we use less. Same applies to bicycles.

I think cyclists need a break because they use the single most environmentally sound form of transport over anything more than walking distance. As bikers we expect breaks because we contribute less to environmental issues, congestion etc. It only stands to reason that we extend the same courtesy to cyclists.
I don't know but I'd say a decent amount. I know that around 47% of petrol price is tax. I can't remember exact figure but it's almost half. So I'd say that at least 10% of that is RUC's

I agree that cyclist should be left alone and alowed to continue using the roads at no cost as they aren't doing any damage to the roads. If everyone in NZ started biking then the roads would last a lot longer and normal taxes would probably cover the roading. Which would be very minimal. So cyclists should never have to pay to use the roads no matter what percentage of people are cycling.

[HTFU]

And how much of that goes towards the roads?

Besides, we pay less than cars and trucks through petrol because we use less. Same applies to bicycles.

I think cyclists need a break because they use the single most environmentally sound form of transport over anything more than walking distance. As bikers we expect breaks because we contribute less to environmental issues, congestion etc. It only stands to reason that we extend the same courtesy to cyclists.

Agree.

Cyclists pay for it in replacement tubes and puncture repair kits. Anyone that has commuted by pushy knows how much glass the City councils and Transit are not sweeping off the roads.

[bugjuice]

the other thing, is bycyclysists don't actually need roads to ride on..

[Ixion]

Well, I don't reckon psyclists should be allowed to use it, cos they wear lycra. Which is a crime against humainity. And also bits of them get stuck between the knobs on my tyres.

And cages certainly shouldn't be able to use it, especially taxis , because it would cause chaos. The taxis will be performing U turns all over the bus way.

And buses shouldn't be allowed to use it, because they are too slow and cause too much smokey pollution. They are already a right pain in the neck on the ordinary buslanes, holding everybody up (well, everybody on a bike). I'm constantly getting stuck behind one of them.

[Swoop]

I think cyclists need a break because they use the single most environmentally sound form of transport over anything more than walking distance.
But the "carbon footprint" that they leave, with all the petroleum products that go into making thier lycra clothing, is massive!

cyclist should be left alone and alowed to continue using the roads at no cost as they aren't doing any damage to the roads.
Correct, they do not do any damage to the roads, BUT their behaviour on the road causes much angst - especially when they do not obey road rules and ride side by side or in large groups.

[grusomhat]

Correct, they do not do any damage to the roads, BUT their behaviour on the road causes much angst - especially when they do not obey road rules and ride side by side or in large groups.

Many, many cars don't obey the road rules and some Motorbikers are just as bad. So what's the difference?

[jcupit69]

Well, I don't reckon psyclists should be allowed to use it, cos they wear lycra. Which is a crime against humainity. And also bits of them get stuck between the knobs on my tyres.

And cages certainly shouldn't be able to use it, especially taxis , because it would cause chaos. The taxis will be performing U turns all over the bus way.

And buses shouldn't be allowed to use it, because they are too slow and cause too much smokey pollution. They are already a right pain in the neck on the ordinary buslanes, holding everybody up (well, everybody on a bike). I'm constantly getting stuck behind one of them.

Give this man a medal! :clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:


But the "carbon footprint" that they leave, with all the petroleum products that go into making thier lycra clothing, is massive!

Correct, they do not do any damage to the roads, BUT their behaviour on the road causes much angst - especially when they do not obey road rules and ride side by side or in large groups.

Flying threw red lights, driving up on the pavements, riding all over the road way below the speed limit for no good reason....pisses the hell outa me :angry2:

[pzkpfw]

Flying threw red lights, driving up on the pavements, riding all over the road way below the speed limit for no good reason....pisses the hell outa me :angry2:

Down here on a road called the "old hutt motorway" we have a cycle lane on just one side of the road, meant to be used in both directions by cyclists.

I admit it's a crappy cycle lane, because it's really just a wide footpath, and cars going in and out of businesses don't look for bikes when they cross the path.

But I still hate the cyclists that insist on using the road, on the non-cycle-path side. There's just no room for them, and the cars just can't give them their "bubble".

Last week there was a fucker using it on a reclining bicycle - with a body on it! The cars were having to stop as they got behind him, as the lanes (2 of 'em) were not wide enough to let the cars in the 1st lane get past him, without using some of the 2nd lane.

Inconsiderate twat who probably thinks he has every right to use the road blaa blaa blaa (that he didn't pay to use, on his bike...).

[swbarnett]

Inconsiderate twat who probably thinks he has every right to use the road blaa blaa blaa (that he didn't pay to use, on his bike...).
Well isn't that the pot calling the kettle a more movy shade of pinky russet.

We complain all the time about roads that aren't built for the needs of motorcyclists - cheesecutters, road snakes, manhole covers etc...

The roads in NZ cities just aren't designed for cyclists, blame the town planners, not the cyclists.

And to those that want to remove cyclists from our roads - what's next? As soon as we allow cyclists to be removed someone will feel justified in calling for the removal of motorcycles.

And by the way, pedestrians don't directly pay for the roads either. Are you saying that we should stop putting in crossings because they haven't paid for them? How inconsiderate of pedestrians for stopping traffic.

[Soul.Trader]

Agreed that cyclists should pay ACC etc. like the rest of us. In Switzerland you had to pay $5/year that gave you third party insurance to the tune of Fr2million (no ACC over there, compulsary health insurance).

Compulsory health insurance is EXACTLY what ACC is.

edit: Though I should qualify, it's no general health insurance, rather accident insurance.

[pzkpfw]

What a bunch of twaddle.


Well isn't that the pot calling the kettle a more movy shade of pinky russet.

We complain all the time about roads that aren't built for the needs of motorcyclists - cheesecutters, road snakes, manhole covers etc...

Don't give me that pot/kettle thing. You have no idea what my opinions are on those other issues.

For one thing, I've kept out of the cheescutter debate, for another, I pay for my use of the roads and therefore have a reason (perhaps not a right) to expect a certain standard out of them.



The roads in NZ cities just aren't designed for cyclists, blame the town planners, not the cyclists.

As I pointed out, there is a cycle lane in that area - it's not great (as I also pointed out) - but he still could have used it.

Besides, he's the dork in the body-kitted recumbant bike. Should we suffer every fool who pops up with their own unusual and annoying conveyance?



And by the way, pedestrians don't directly pay for the roads either. Are you saying that we should stop putting in crossings because they haven't paid for them? How inconsiderate of pedestrians for stopping traffic.

That's now the kind of liberal wishy-washyness that leads to the "if I kill the muderer I'm just a murderer too" kind of thinking.

There are lots of pedestrians. I'm one too sometimes. They also need a choice to cross the roads.

I was complaining about the one loner looney on his unusal bike getting in everyones way.

It was dangerous, as rush hour traffic had to find a way past him.

Burn him!

[Swoop]

Many, many cars don't obey the road rules and some Motorbikers are just as bad. So what's the difference?
The difference is that powered transport requires the operator to undergo licencing and testing to operate said vehicles. There is also the registration and roadworthiness of those vehicles to consider.
LCTP's throw their lycra bodybag on, then head out to do whatever they please on the roads. It isn't like the ecilops will give them demerits or remove their licence if they are caught being a twat.

Compulsory health insurance is EXACTLY what ACC is.
I would rather call it a compulsory lotto ticket. The way in which some people get treated by ACC varies considerably.
A proper medical insurance would allow prompt treatment in a world class hospital.
NZ's health system is comparable with some 3rd world countries at times.

[swbarnett]

Don't give me that pot/kettle thing. You have no idea what my opinions are on those other issues.
Forgive me for over generalising and ascribing opinions to you that you do not hold. When I wrote that I was thinking of past debates and not you personally.


I pay for my use of the roads and therefore have a reason (perhaps not a right) to expect a certain standard out of them.
Quite right. We all pay to varying degrees through our taxes (even most cyclists, or at least their parents).


As I pointed out, there is a cycle lane in that area - it's not great (as I also pointed out) - but he still could have used it.
Point taken.


That's now the kind of liberal wishy-washyness that leads to the "if I kill the muderer I'm just a murderer too" kind of thinking.
Sorry, I don't see the connection.

[DingoZ]

The police have been granted permission to use it on priority one jobs, the inspector told everyone this week. My boss is ringing transit tomorrow about us using it for priority one jobs as well. Will be a big time saver for us in peak hour. Taxi drivers can fuck off, i hate those terrorists of the streets, and as for cyclists, when those whinging cunts stop for red lights and start obeying the traffic rules (we are road users too.. bullshit) then maybe they can be considered, otherwise they can fuck off too.

Very well stated and emergency Response Services should get Access before taxis or cyclists...

[grusomhat]

Flying threw red lights, driving up on the pavements, riding all over the road way below the speed limit for no good reason....pisses the hell outa me :angry2:

Yeah so what. Other than the riding all over the road. That's the benefit cyclist have of beeing a cyclist, just like motorbikes and their filtering. As long as they aren't causing a danger when they go though the red lights then them doing that is just a time saver. And you expect them to ride the speed limit? :bleh:

[Soul.Trader]

Wow, I'd have thought people on a motorcycling forum would be more tolerant of cyclists. So what if they skip onto the footpath to get around something sometimes? It doesn't affect you any more than your traffic-filtering affects other road users. Why do some people here have a serious axe to grind with cyclists? Was you mother raped by a bicycle once?

[pzkpfw]

Sorry, I don't see the connection.

I think I was trying to talk about over-generalisation (or something similar to that that I can't name). That is, your comparison of nether cyclists nor pedestrians paying (directly) for roads, and asking if I therefore want them treated the same way (burned).

(In doing it, I popped in my own axe-to-grind.)

Probably a bit obscure.

Cyclists and pedestrians are different cases. Pedestrians generally don't use the shoulder of "main roads" to walk on. And someone walking down the footpath wearing a refridgerator box would be annoying too.

Cheers,

[Squiggles]

And how much of that goes towards the roads?

Besides, we pay less than cars and trucks through petrol because we use less. Same applies to bicycles.

I think cyclists need a break because they use the single most environmentally sound form of transport over anything more than walking distance. As bikers we expect breaks because we contribute less to environmental issues, congestion etc. It only stands to reason that we extend the same courtesy to cyclists.

I find myself agreeing with this 100%, bus lanes with cyclists in them are pretty killer for the cyclists, much prefer they had their own lane. 80k down the side in rushhour is just retarded.

[Winter]

Taxi drivers have yet to prove to the NZ population that they can actually drive safely and sensibly whilst adhering to the road rules.

Untill the time they can do so, no way in hell should they be let on the busway. Even then why should they? No different to having one person in a car - a taxi is not public transport. Infact - We'd be much better off kicking 50% of the taxi's off the road all together.



Motorbikes should use the busway - the facts are pretty plain, pretty simple.

We would be 100% safer commuting on the busway.
We would in no way impeede the buses on their route.
It may encourage some people to abandon their cages and commute by the more enviromentally friendly motorcycle.
We would be 100% safer commuting on the busway.


Cyclist would be a hazard on the busway - as people above have pointed out.
Too slow, Too Unaware of whats going on around them and they would cause hold ups to bus traffic.

As someone else mentioned, a Cycleway on the other side of the motorway - just like the norwesten is what they need.

[Soul.Trader]

What about ACC levies??? I went to three seperate bike crashes (no cars involved.. just pile ups of these cretins) on Tamaki drv in one morning !!! How much ACC have these guys paid ?? Zilch... thats what, and these are recorded as road traffic crashes because they happened on the road, not a dedicated track (where it would come under sport).

Every cyclist I know (myself included) also owns a motor vehicle of some sort. I think any reasonable person would agree that the benefits of encouraging cycling far outweight the fact they dont pay precious ACC levies.

[Ixion]

Every cyclist I know (myself included) also owns a motor vehicle of some sort. I think any reasonable person would agree that the benefits of encouraging cycling far outweight the fact they dont pay precious ACC levies.


I'm eminently reasonable, and I don't agree.

[Soul.Trader]

On what grounds?

[jcupit69]

Found an interesting article thats sorta on this topic....about why motorbikes should be able to use the bus lanes

http://cars.uk.msn.com/Motorbikes/Bikes.aspx?cp-documentid=7527637

Its from msn.co.uk but atleast its getting out there.

[bugjuice]

Every cyclist I know (myself included) also owns a motor vehicle of some sort. I think any reasonable person would agree that the benefits of encouraging cycling far outweight the fact they dont pay precious ACC levies.
kids don't.. and are even less aware.. then what?

the junctions/stops between are miles apart anyway. Once you're on that thing, that's it for quite a while. If you were on a push bike, it'd take forever, and once you start, you surely can't think to be stopping

[klingon]

I have a pedal-bike, a motorbike and a car. I pay ACC levies on the motorbike and car. There is only one of me so I can only use one vehicle at a time. I think I've paid (more than) my fair share, and if I want to go out and ride my push bike on the road I should be allowed to.

As a motorbike rider I feel some empathy for other vulnerable road users and take special care to allow room for bike riders and pedestrians. This does not make me a wishy-washy liberal.

[Fooman]

What about ACC levies??? I went to three seperate bike crashes (no cars involved.. just pile ups of these cretins) on Tamaki drv in one morning !!! How much ACC have these guys paid ?? Zilch... thats what, and these are recorded as road traffic crashes because they happened on the road, not a dedicated track (where it would come under sport).

Everyone who pays income tax pays ACC levies. See: http://www.ird.govt.nz/income-tax-individual/different-income-taxed/salaries-wages/acc/

Cheers,
FM

[Badjelly]

As a motorbike rider I feel some empathy for other vulnerable road users and take special care to allow room for bike riders and pedestrians. This does not make me a wishy-washy liberal.
So you're a wishy-washy redneck then?

[klingon]

So you're a wishy-washy redneck then?

Yeah... my neck's all red from being wishy-washed :p

[TOTO]

what I'm thinking is that if police can use it only on priority 1 jobs than they can not police it, and even if they saw you on it , they are going to a priority 1 job so they wont bother with you. I volunteer to be the first outlaw to use the new bussway. I dont need to use it anyway , but I may do it just for the experience.

Private TOTO will report back ... :rockon: