Two Wheels Good, Four Wheels Baaaaad.

Yes, that was a completely recontextualised Animal Farm reference. Blame George Orwell. While we're blaming George Orwell, Australian politics is growing ever more excellent/ridiculous regards the transport debate. After we managed to accidentally elect a member of the Motoring Enthusiasts Party and a bicycle infrastructure hating MAMIL at the last federal skirmish it was only a matter of time before this happened:

Note the terrible stock-photo entirely failing to illustrate the issue.
But hey! THE BEACH!

Thanks for mentioning terrorism straight up, dude. I'm not sure even an obviously facetious reference to being a terrorist is entirely helpful to Australian perception of cyclists but whatever gets the click-through, AMIRITE?! Just kidding, this article does actually address the important issue of Car Vs Everyone Else culture in Australia. Namely the bizarre campaign by some newspapers and current affairs programmes to encourage enmity between people behind the wheel and people on pedals. Enmity resulting in serious injury or death. Can you imagine if you picked up a newspaper and read an article encouraging you to fight anyone you see waiting for a train? Or an article claiming that people who walk think they're better than you? Yet this is the kind of rhetoric lately published in a sustained effort to - what, exactly? Dismantle bicycle infrastructure? Spill blood on the suburban streets?

With headlines like: Police blitz on arrogant Sydney cyclists who push the law (Actual headline) or Cyclists making a fool of our bike laws (Again, actual headline) the framing of the Australian transport debate is downright irresponsible. These headlines are poking motorists in the chest and saying, "A cyclist is laughing at you RIGHT NOW - what are you gonna do about it?" as though all cyclists are deliberately provocative. As though Australian cyclists are not also (mostly) car drivers. As though getting on a bike is an act of deliberate douche-baggery rather than a mode of transport. When was the last time you saw the headline Police blitz on arrogant motorists who flout speed limits? Bad motorists and bad cyclists happen every day. I'm betting there's even a large crossover in that particular Venn diagram (Show me a dickhead on 2 wheels and I'll show you dickhead on 4). But even if a motorist breaks enough laws to warrant a headline, I'm also betting there was a lack of character judgement in that headline. And if the issue is a problem group of recurrent law breakers within the group of people designated as 'motorists', I'm betting the more likely headline is: Police accused of revenue raising through speeding fine blitz.

Just as irrelevant as the one above but at least it's not a stock-photo.

Look. People who deliberately 'push' road rules are all arrogant douche-bags in that moment, regardless of whether they're on rollerblades, bicycles or driving cars. Even if they are upstanding citizens in every other situation. That's because every single one of us believes that MY journey is more important, MY time is most precious and if I break the law it's because I HAD A GOOD REASON. See also: It was safer/I was tricked/I didn't have a choice. We're all to blame, not just George Orwell. The Australian specific problem is that we are so collectively in love with cars as an extension of ourselves (and ourselves are never wrong, remember) that we just don't view laws broken while driving as 'really' breaking the law. Ask your friends how many speeding fines they've had in their driving careers. Go ahead.

Do you see the problem? The question should not be 'How many speeding fines have you had?' it should be 'Have you ever had a speeding fine?' But we take it as given that motorists will break the law. And that it's sort of okay. I personally don't subscribe to that attitude but then I'm not a motorist so many would discount my opinion. "It was safer/I was tricked/I didn't have a choice," my driving friends and family say to me.  I don't know about driving but I'm sure I've heard that argument before. Perhaps being made by 'arrogant' cyclists? I don't think people on two wheels should ignore road rules. Even if prominent bicycle bloggers with books out sometimes do. I don't believe riding a bicycle is a renegade action that ought to be packed with danger and excitement and directly challenging larger vehicles for your 'right' to the road. So perhaps a cyclists party is exactly what we need. So long as they focus on integration rather than competition between modes of transport. It looks hopeful:

Omar Khalifa, who is launching the new political party, says “a motorist’s best friend is often a cyclist.” They ease congestion, lessen fuel demand and free up parking spaces. It’s irresponsible to promote bad feeling between motorists and cyclists. We need to co-exist harmoniously – no good can come of any campaign that seeks to do otherwise.

 Now that's the kind of sentiment I'd vote for.

Democracy on Wheels.

Earlier this month we Australians lived the dream (or Libertarian's nightmare) of compulsory voting and headed to our local polling place for a federal election. As it was a pleasant early spring day, Ginger and I decided to bicycle - thus revealing to our fellow democracy unenthusiasts that we are Commie-Pinko Tree-hugging Bicycle-Riding Left-Wing Voters. Or so you'd be justified in believing.

Pictured: Lefty Posers exercising...their democratic rights, YEAH!

And you'd be mostly correct. But post election, the way bicycles are perceived in Oz may be about to change. Dramatically. And terribly. You see Australia is a nation as full of political apathy as we are beer and BBQs (mean average). We knew we didn't want the Current Guy anymore but beyond that decision it was collectively agreed that we didn't much care for anybody else either. So as a nation we turned, proud and strong and said, "So I guess you win?" to the Other Guy. And the Other Guy is this guy:

This Guy.

"Brilliant!" you might exclaim, "Sure he's a Roadie but he's a cyclist Prime Minister! This is a step towards a bicycle infrastructure renaissance, a cleaner and greener future, a serious look at where Australia's obsession with cars might cause problems down the track!"

But you'd be ignorant and foolish because This Guy is also:

This Guy.

And:

This Guy.

That's right. We didn't give the top job to a garden variety Roadie, we gave it to a TRIATHLETE. The only reason This Guy rides a bicycle is to prove how much faster he is than other guys. He has no interest in sustainable/alternative transport or bicycle infrastructure or even the environment. In fact he's only been in charge a matter of days and he's already dismantled Australia's climate commission. He's also promised to extend highways across the country and help mining companies expand into World Heritage Areas. This Guy doesn't care about cycling unless it can be used to win at things or prove how brave you are by riding with cars.

Although This Guy likes to affirm his masculinity by staging photo opportunities at all kinds of sporting events, unfortunately an iconic bike image encapsulating This Guy's general attitude and deliberately testosterone-centric world view emerged during the election campaign:

Yeah.

Added to all the other times he appeared on a bicycle, he is now inexorably tied to (road)cycling. This means that when This Guy inevitably upsets the country he will be remembered as 'That douche-hole on a bicycle' and contribute to the already swelling hatred of cyclists in Australia. I'm referring to the many Facebook groups about running over cyclists with your car (complete with actual photos from horrific crashes), the articles written by well known sports figures and journalists condemning cyclists for being cyclists and of course the general dominance of the automobile in the national psyche.

Worse still, due to the quirks of the Australian system we have managed to elect (albeit to a less important position than Prime Minister) a rogue private citizen running under the banner of 'The Motoring Enthusiasts Party'. Their entire policy platform is 'We like cars. But like car-liking people are a persecuted group and so you should just let us drive our cars through everywhere and on top of everything at whatever speed we please because CARS WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CARS?!'

So with these post-election problems in mind I'll be very surprised if the next three years deliver any positives to the bicycle users of Australia. But that's compulsory democracy for you.

For the Record: I am actually pro-compulsory voting. Take THAT, Libertarians.

Pashley Picnic.

Before high-tailing it across the Tasman, Ginger and I had the rare opportunity of using bicycle transportation during the middle of the day without the 6 litres of sweat which usually accompanies anything more strenuous than getting up from the sofa during a Perth summer. There was a 'Jazz Picnic' being held by the river, less than three kilometres from our house, at Bayswater Riverside Gardens. Usually we would walk that distance but it was breezy and bright outside and perfect for a Saturday morning bicycle. It was also a lot easier to bring food if we cycled. So, Jazz Picnic. Deciding that sounded suitably pretentious an event to bicycle towards, we slathered ourselves in several layers of sunscreen and set off into the unseasonably cool late morning. After the requisite posing on the front lawn, obviously.

When your belt matches your handbag so perfectly, you have no choice but to record it for posterity.

This was my first time with a heavy weight in the Pashley's rear basket, and I was interested to see if it affected the handling. I asked Ginger to ride his 3 speed cruiser rather than his road bike, just in case I was a lot slower. I strapped sun hats, a large IKEA insulated bag full of multiple large drinks (The heavier portion of the load), fruit salad and cold rice salad into the basket, put an enormous handbag in the front basket and proceeded down a fairly major road. Fortunately, the usually intimidating road was abnormally quiet. It was still warm but a lovely sea breeze was drifting from the coast and preventing sweat from forming. The Pashley steamrolled over the uneven surfaces in typical fashion and I realised that I couldn't actually feel the load, I wasn't even in a lower gear. The great thing about the heft of the Pashley is that even a microscopic downwards slope can keep you rolling for a long time. It's the initial collecting of inertia that could be perceived as taxing. Once we arrived (the entrance is 'Official' bike path and runs through a Bird Sanctuary) we were pleased to see a few other bicycles around but raised an eyebrow at the council decision to allow cars IN the park. What was usually a green open space quite removed from the road, full of exercise equipment, BBQs and right next to the Bird Sanctuary had transformed into an ugly car park. This was extra-stupid for the fact that there were real car parks right next to the gardens and they weren't even half full. Sadly, people took the opportunity to park 20 metres closer to the bouncy castle. I wonder how much the lawn rehabilitation cost afterward?

You can see Ginger's back wheel on the left, it's already parked in the bike rack next to the real car park.

This is the same spot from a different angle (as we were getting ready to leave).
I am next to the bike rack and one of three car parks, yet you
can see the cars blotting the lawn behind the tents.

Having been regulars to the gardens on foot several times a week for exercise, Ginger and I had never consciously looked for bicycle parking but we eventually found an older style rack near the public toilets. We were the first bicycles to use the lone rack but just after we locked up, a woman arrived on a hybrid bicycle towing a bike trailer full of her smiling offspring. The trailer had bench seats, a pennant shaped safety flag streaming behind, a solid awning top and enclosed fly-screen sides, the kind which makes me wish they had been available when I was a child as they look like the very best way to experience the neighbourhood. Somewhat bizarrely, the woman was decked out in full lycra with logos included. Her children were wearing everyday clothes and not sports specific fabrics for their ride in the trailer. I looked around for some kind of roadie gathering but she was alone. Perhaps she was planning to unhitch the children and leave them to be raised by birds so that she could finally live her dream life of sweaty hybrid cycling? I can't believe that she really thought she HAD to wear that simply because she was on a bicycle but if by some black magic that was the case, I hope she was encouraged by the ordinary clothes of the few other cyclists in the park. We exchanged smiles in the way bicyclists do, acknowledging our stubborn freakishness.

Note almost empty car parks in the distance as well as right next to this bicycle rack.

There was a community policing station set up next to the bicycle rack so we felt totally at ease about leaving our bikes and wandering around on foot. There was a jazz band on a stage, some market stalls and plenty of entertainment for the children. I purchased a pair of vintage, costume jewellery clip-on earrings from a second hand stall because they were identical to a pair my maternal grandmother wore when she was alive and I was already feeling nostalgic thanks to the bicycling and summer breezes. Ginger bought a hat for a costume party we were attending later in the season. We sat in the shade of a tent to eat and drink while the band played to a mostly disinterested audience. Somebody from the council was distributing free watermelon slices, a lovely idea for a summer day. The temperature was starting to climb so we decided to make our way home before the sunscreen sweated off to uselessness.

As most of the people had driven, the area outside of the cluster of tents and cars was deserted and we had the bike paths and bird sanctuary to ourselves, enjoying the leafy shade and heron sightings. I do wonder why there was a such an unusually high rate of car transportation for a small, local outing; Bayswater events are generally full of local area residents who live within walking distance. I surmise it was because of the emphasis on children's entertainment in the promotional materials. The people of Perth seem to find transporting their children to be a herculean task requiring the latest in equine absent horsepower, as confirmed by half of the park by our house being filled with cars for the tiny Carols by Candlelight later that summer. Obviously the bicycle trailer industry needs some serious advertising.

View from a Pashley. The Bird Sanctuary.

The Ginger-crested Wanker in its native habitat.

You've got a fast car, I've got trouble proving my identity.

By now, we know that 100% adult car ownership is not a sensible solution for our growing population. We know that if we're going to work towards sustainable cities, there needs to be a radical shift in personal transport attitudes both at an individual and especially at a government level. I'm not sure what that thinking would look like but I can identify a major contributor to our current failure: Photo ID.

When was the last time you had to provide photo identification? At a night club? A bank? Signing a mobile phone contract? Posting a package overseas? How about collecting a money transfer? Chances are, you did not whip out your passport in response to this request because if you have one, carrying your passport around with you is both impractical and potential trouble. The amount of bureaucracy one wades through to get a passport is not likely to encourage one to use it for something as routine as going to the pub. So you used your driver's licence. Now. What would you do if you didn't have a driver's licence?

I can tell you.

You'd spend your time convincing officials that your government approved identity card, obtained from the same government department that issues the majority a driver's licence, was not something you made in photoshop. Australia has avenues for people to obtain alternative photo identification, each state has a different card design just like each state has a different licence. At 19, I applied for a Western Australian Proof of Age Card so that I could enter nightclubs and pubs. I had to provide many forms of non-photo identification and photos signed by a Justice of the Peace or appropriate official, along with a fee for the licencing centre. Duly, I collected my card which contained my image, my signature, name and date of birth. It had all the usual security holograms you'd find on a driver's licence but nothing else. No address. No card number. No organ donation information. No expiry date. I thought it was short sighted. It seemed to imply that the WA attitude to alternative photo ID is an assumption that you are young and want to get drunk but haven't got around to driving yet. That's why it's even called a 'Proof of Age' card and not 'Identification Card.' As WA is a state with a very high level of car ownership and a strong car culture, it made sense that they would not take life-long non-drivers into account. In fact, WA is a state so enamoured of the car that I would sometimes find myself having to convince civil servants or bouncers that my ID was legitimate and even provided by the licencing centre. They could not conceive of a world where people didn't drive.

Now that I live in Tasmania, I am finding the backwards attitude of WA towards non-drivers is causing me all sorts of irritation. I had assumed that every state had an expiry free 'Proof of Age' card, though I'd started wondering what would happen as I began to act out a reverse Dorian Gray with my teenaged photo. I was asked to provide photo ID three times last week so I presented my trusty old card. This was how I discovered that 'Proof of Age' cards have been replaced by a more sensible card in Tasmania and New South Wales. One that works exactly like a driver's licence apart from authorising you to get behind the wheel of a car. One that has a card number, must be renewed every 5 years and even includes your address. Though my WA card is legal, I will be applying for a Tasmanian one but in the meantime it got me thinking about social attitudes towards these things. If you suggested the national introduction of an official, photo 'Identity Card' with all of your personal information and required every citizen by law to hold one, people would be outraged. Yet I've never heard a single licence holder complain about giving the government the same level of information and control in exchange for driving a car. It seems our love affair with automobiles has provided a neat work-around for the government to monitor the populace. We even pay for it ourselves.

Perhaps the radical shift in thinking would look something like abolishing the distinction between Driver's Licence and Other Photo Identity? One identity card; but also stating whether or not the holder is entitled to drive. You've already given the government that amount of control, why not streamline the process and include everyone so that people can choose to be car free in the future?

Killing Us Softly.

It was with no small share of vested interest that I clicked upon the link for 'How Not to Kill a Cyclist', thinking that approaching the issue from the car driver's worst case scenario might be a great way to advance the discourse on sharing the road. I was immediately disappointed. Amongst a lot of sensible remarks I was confronted by what I think is a very unhelpful addition to the mêlée,

"…there are also many things bike riders would like drivers to know… that “cyclists” and “pedestrians on bicycles” are two distinct groups, or that we know we look ridiculous in bike shorts.…"
(Emphasis mine, obviously. And you certainly do.)

 Later in the article, the author goes on to describe what he probably considers 'real' cyclists, as

"…travelling at a high velocity, and chock full o’ adrenaline…"

and so that is why you shouldn't randomly honk your horn at them out of pure annoyance. Not because it's discourteous, an abuse of the horn and generally a dick-move to make loud noises in public spaces - but because 'real' cyclists are constantly in a 'fight or flight' mode and might bolt from their state of cat-like readiness into oncoming traffic!

Here's the thing about Real Cyclists™ Vs 'Pedestrians on bicycles': As somebody who has spent her entire life at leisure to observe the driving style of friends, family and strangers without a layer of personal ideology for what I think is the 'correct' way to drive (i.e "Exactly how I would do it," as most drivers think) I can tell you that a large portion of car drivers are 'Pedestrians in Cars'. They don't really 'understand' their vehicle and its consequences, they use speed limits as a vague guide, they don't ever consider that they might be at fault, they text or phone or do their make-up or read maps or try to drink scalding hot coffee or smoke or do any manner of things inside their car that in an ideal world would be confined to their lounge rooms. Even drivers who are not spilling lattes on their groins can be unpredictable 'Pedestrians in cars', darting about in a way that does not technically break the law but makes the road more dangerous for everyone around them. Why? Because they are not professional car drivers. Nor do the majority of them drive cars as a sport or take a defensive driving course or learn how to drive as a fleet. They scrape through their driving test and then THAT'S IT FOR LIFE. Now we are supposed to classify them as 'Real' drivers, even if they spend their entire career on the road failing to advance their skills or increase their confidence and racking up speeding fines because they believe that breaking the law in their car somehow 'doesn't count'. So how do other drivers, how would a professional or top amateur racer treat these, the weaker of their brethren? How would current Formula One World Champion Sebastian Vettel, a man who is such a 'Real Driver' that people pay him to do it, treat YOU and your lack of equal skill on the road? Would he tell other road users that you are the cause of all driving related problems? Would he burn rubber rings around you as he passed you on the freeway? No. He would take you and the varying style of people around him into account.

A cyclist does not have to be speed matching the average car, wearing lycra or "chock full o’ adrenaline" to obey the rules of the road and cycle courteously anymore than weaker drivers have to sit on the speed limit and drive aggressively to be acceptable to other car drivers. What we all have to do is be predictable as possible and make sure everybody knows the rules. If you drive a car, you should already be able to transfer those rules across to cycling and indeed, the majority of cyclists are actually 'drivers' first, cyclists second. It's rare to find somebody who is pure pedestrian/cyclist so the idea that a pedestrian mindset is to blame becomes even less relevant to the debate. To be fair, the article spoke about predictability and cars following the rules as usual when a cyclist is near - but the testosterone fueled 'us and them' mentality hidden within that casual quote is actively damaging to our transport evolution. Ultimately, all cyclists are only as safe as the largest vehicles around them. Yes, the occasional impatient car driver will spend their entire time complaining that not everyone is as fast or nimble as they - heck, they'll probably even honk their horn at other road users as they overtake and then speed off to get to the next red light before everyone else. But does the civilised transport world cater exclusively to the 'Professionals'? Or are we all just trying to get somewhere in one piece?

In the end, the only kind of pedestrians we should worry about? Every single person we see, regardless of what they're driving or riding. We were all born with squashy pedestrian bodies and fragile pedestrian skulls and it doesn't matter how good we are at pretending to be invincible.

Australian Car Culture.

When I say that Australia is a car-centric society, I am not overstating it. For decades our national identity has been tied to cars - From the 'classic Aussie argument' of Holden Vs Ford being played out over barbecues and beers; to fathers and sons with little to discuss except how the car is driving; Australians are obsessed with automobiles. They are mass consumers of everything car related - Particularly things which they feel 'personalise' their cars inside and out. In Perth, personal number plates are a common sight and there is less restriction on the number of letters you can have than in say, Sydney. It's not uncommon to see things like a Lancer Evo (I had to Google that, I nearly wrote Nissan Evo) with plates reading ENVEEME or even dilapidated, first car Toyota hatchbacks with names and birth years serving as fair warning to anybody wanting to avoid youthfully precipitous motorists. Interest groups, sports teams, town councils and charities all offer affiliated number plates to the public. It's easy to spot an animal lover by their RSPCA number plate or a Collingwood supporter by theirs.

Cars have become key components of Australian's own definition of identity, particularly in Perth. There's a real sense as you approach driving age that like losing your virginity, one is merely existing until they pop that cherry. As I mentioned before, the word Freedom gets thrown around constantly when most Australians talk about cars. Which they do. Constantly. Cars are not seen as a privilege or transportation. Transport is what people do on public buses and trains. No, cars are seen as a right and consequently anybody not enamoured of cars is a threat to their very sense of normalcy and self. Look through the photo collection of your average Australian family and you will find photographs of cars. I've spent half of my life watching people 'readjust' their perception of me when I say I have never driven a car. They conclude I must either be disabled or some kind of anarchist. Here, you are your car. To reveal that you voluntarily have no car is akin to screaming, "I AM THE ENIGMA!" before vanishing in a puff of smoke mid-conversation. Why are Australians (Perth in particular) this way? This passion did not manifest fully formed, it developed over time and I think I understand the reasoning behind it.

The sheer scale of Australia, the harsh conditions and especially in Perth, the isolation - has helped create a national car mythology. Much like America built its national identity on the mythos of the frontier (I'm referring specifically to the parts of their national identity that butt up against other national identities, like - America: International Sheriff, gunslinger for hire, straight talkin' and sharp shootin'.), the currently dominant Australian cultural identity (by which I mean mostly white, mostly middle and working class men) was built on a foundation of the Bushranger/Explorer myth - the outlaw, the reckless lone adventurer, wandering the vast spaces between pockets of civilisation. There's a strange paradox of rebellion tied to the absolute conformity of car-ownership in Australia. The car has replaced the journeyman's horse yet he still likes to think of himself as straddling the margins despite the ubiquity of car ownership. The very act of travelling is displaying a 'true blue' spirit and exhibiting your toughness and independence as an Australian. Even though most of us are no longer travelling through harsh terrain, the untamed heart of the country looms large in our consciousness, implying every trip is an adventure through adversity.

Australia is a country that in the 1970s began producing and strongly identified with the 'Mad Max' films. The first movie of the series essentially posed the question, "What would happen if we ran out of petrol and cars ruined the world?!" and replied with, "The answer is MORE CARS!" By the end of the 20th century, the family car household had become the 'one car per occupant' household. At the dawn of the 21st Century, Japanese car culture (again, via cinema) began to seep into the Australian consciousness and cars as expression of youth identity had a resurgence. My first years of night-clubbing and pubbing were punctuated by the booming sound systems, rear spoilers and neon lights of Japanese influenced, credit purchased cars cruising the inner city streets. Then something different happened. Gen-Y abandoned road trips in favour of international flights and there - they fell in love with 'The City'.

Globalisation, travel and internet access fed our inferiority complex (Our cities were not 'city' enough! Other people were living cooler lives!) and combined with a period of expansion and overall economic growth (more cafés, apartments, city developments) to make an entire generation long for the idea of urban life. As a nation often struggling to reconcile cultural identity, we're prone to copying others, especially if they seem to offer something more sophisticated than our embarrassingly agrarian past. (There's nothing wrong with agriculture or country living - indeed, they are essential, but younger Australians have actively rejected it for a couple of generations now. A different can of worms for a blog not dedicated to bicycles.) It makes my life easier, as a 'Confirmed Pedestrian', that these shifts are taking place. Whereas 10 years ago I was having to justify my culturally odd disinterest to strangers at technical college parties, now the revelation I have never been behind the wheel of a car usually provokes interest rather than disbelief. Cars are still a big part of Australian culture but a quiet revolution is taking place. The giant 'Holden' shop which at the millennium sprung from the city centre of Perth, selling car branded g-strings along with the Playboy seat covers and fluffy dice was swiftly, brutally replaced not a year later by an Apple retailer. The car shop never reopened within the boundaries of the city shopping district, the car lifestyle accessories being firmly pushed out to the suburbs where car culture still thrives even as bicycle and pedestrian pathways form around them. Slowly, the city becomes a place less for cars and more for people.