fbpx

Your member's fee helps us take actions on your behalf. HELP make a difference!

Update Regarding Lane Filtering

– (addressing some comments and grievances)

When the MRAWA announced the upcoming lane filtering laws, many were upset, as were the MRAWA committee and members about ‘Freeways’ being excluded.

As far as the ban on lane filtering on freeways is concerned, we were totally blindsided and shocked by this clause. Our stance was like many, what is the difference between Roe Highway for example, and the Freeway?

In our subsequent Facebook post we recommended (quote) ‘send emails to the Road Safety Commission and the Minister letting them know your thought on this matter. (State Election next month) Email addresses below.’

And it worked, the RSC initiated a meeting with the MRAWA President Jeff Thomas and Safety Officer Dave Wright

====================================

LANE FILTERING REGULATION UPDATE:

The President Jeff Thomas and Safety Officer Dave Wright from the Motorcycle Riders Association of WA held a productive meeting on Monday 8th February 2021 with the Road Safety Commissioner, Adrian Warner and Assistant Commissioner Paul Zanetti from the WA Police Force who has responsibility for the State Traffic Branch of Police, this followed a request for the meeting from the MRAWA and emails from many concerned motorcycle riders, regarding the proposed legislation changes to lane filtering in WA freeways.

The Minister for Road Safety is sympathetic to the concerns we have raised on behalf of motorcycle riders regarding the restriction on lane filtering on freeways but given the upcoming general election, the Government is required to assume a ‘caretaker’ role, which limits the actions and decisions a government can take in this period. The Minister has asked the Road Safety Commission to prepare further options for consideration after the election result is clear and a new government has been formed.

As a next step we are meeting with representatives from the Road Safety Commission and WA Police to discuss the new regulations in more detail, with a view to identifying the specific changes that we want presented to the Minister for Road Safety for consideration as soon as possible after the election.”

Motorcycle Riders Association of WA Inc.

Jeff Thomas President

Dave Wright Safety Officer

====================================

The points discussed were –

– Remove ‘freeway’ as an exclusion zone of permissible lane filtering

Once the new government is formed after the election, we will continue to lobby the clauses we do not agree with.

One thing on the agenda is – Remove the ‘between heavy vehicles’ clause.

We responded on Facebook that it was currently illegal to lane filter, that was Secretary Peter Butler’s understanding at the time, because over the years riders have been charged with various offences relating to lane filtering. Our apologies for misquoting the actual current legislation in our initial social media responses.

Rick Gill stated in his response “the mistake we made was to try and cloak it as good news”. The exclusion of freeways was not good news, we can own that, our bad.

Some say we should have left the lane filtering as it was, leave it as a ‘grey’ area. We do not agree.

Over the years there has been hundreds of requests to ratify lane filtering as legal, and hundreds of people charged with various offences relating to lane filtering.

Why bring it into line with others states some asked?

Because eventually the states will adopt uniform regulations, and we believe we could help set the standard for that.

Some say the speed limit of 30kmh with lane filtering is too low, we don’t agree, our stance is for safety reasons. We know that some of our members would rather see it at 40 or 50 kmh, and as individuals we think those speeds are acceptable, but we also know the greater the speed variance between the bike to the car, the greater the risk of an accident and injury. (We didn’t say this out loud but here’s the reality, the police are unlikely to be able to gauge minor speed variances anyway, a bike in such close proximity to other vehicles, but riding safe and respectful is just common sense, and courteous.)

We also need to be mindful to foster the relationship between car drivers and bikers. Lane splitting at high speed just scares drivers, creates a negative attitude, and puts everyone at risk.

It has been suggested in other motorcycle groups the MRAWA should consult more with the bigger biker fraternity.

Respectfully, we do communicate.

Case in point, we did a survey in October 2020 asking motorcyclists for their input onto the issues surrounding motorcyclists. We sent email campaigns, we publicised on Facebook, we asked people to share, and we had a fairly good response with 442 survey submissions.

Of those 442 submissions only 37% provided their correct email address. It was great we had the response we did, but if people give us bogus emails like ‘someone@somewhere.com.au’ then we can’t keep people up to date. Your freedom of choice, but respectfully, don’t complain when you don’t know what is going on.

We then held an open Forum as a part of Motorcycle Safety Week October 2020.

We invited that entire list, 442 people (less bogus emails), PLUS our complete database, AND to Facebook, AND to various Facebook groups, and we had 70 people attend. Only 70! Yup, so clearly people want to have their say and input (sarcasm intended).

All our meetings have minutes, we have various monthly reports, all are publicised, both on our website, and as an email broadcast, and on social media, so we are totally transparent.

So, as has been suggested we should do, we already do, we have been communicating these discussions with the wider public and properly disclosing their representation to the government bodies involved.

It was stated in other social post threads that we should, and we quote ‘there are plenty of talented guys in and around the community that can help with various issues’, and ‘Use some of that RSC money (if you can) to host events and get togethers to discuss these issues, advertise them with plenty of notice and try to reach a broad audience. You might just get what you need and the community will benefit too.’

Yes, we agree, and all of the above was funded by the RSC by way of a grant, so yes, we need more people to put their hand up to attend and contribute.

In regard to RSC sponsorship, they’re actually sponsoring you, as a biker.

These grants the MRAWA apply for, are to further the cause for safety for bikers. To get these grants, the application process is arduous, we have to show how the funds are to be used, we have to then prove what we used that grant for as well, and any unused monies are returned. Can you imagine the amount of effort this takes? It’s quite insulting, and showing a total lack of understanding to say ‘backroom deals have gone on’. We personally have no monetary gain.

Did you see the very recent video Dave Wright did, regarding the 7 biker deaths in January 2021?

( https://youtu.be/eldJKt3HN14 )

That was initiated and funded by the RSC! Why? Because they are concerned about the rate of deaths in the biking fraternity. I’ll repeat that, the RSC initiated that video, and financed it. Think what that took, Dave Wright took time out of his day, no monetary gain, to do this video. Why? Coz he gives a shit!

There is no ‘collusion’ and to think that really shows a clear lack of understanding on how funding and the system works.  The word ‘partnership’ simply means ‘grant’. To think there is any conspiracy is tin foil hat conspiracy stuff.

And do we always agree with the RSC, no!

Case in point, the recent ruling by the RSC on motorbikes using bus lanes, after what was a 3 year trial. You have no idea how upset we were when the RSC blindsided us with opposing the ‘Motorbike use of bus lanes’. They cited research they had as a basis for that, of which we do not agree. We thought it was a slam dunk for approval, especially given that it’s already approved in the east.

So when this was announced on the RSC Facebook wall, there was a torrent of social media posts slamming the RSC for that, a big outrage, and we voiced our strong opinion on that too. But what changed? Nothing.

What are the general biker fraternity now doing about it? Nothing.

What is the MRAWA doing about it? Something.

We are going through the research they have used as the basis for shutting it down. Our intention is to find issue with that and have that ruling overturned. A work in progress, as it seems to be with bureaucracy.

This work takes stamina, and diligence. All bikers, regardless of whether you agree on all points, should at least acknowledge those who have served on the MRAWA, it is time consuming, sometimes frustrating, and mostly a thankless job, and quite disheartening when you get slammed with personal jibes. We understand the frustration, we share that frustration, but to make personal attacks, just not appropriate.

We have seen it before, at the next meeting, we will have a few extra people turn up, state their case like they are the resident experts, and we’ll likely never hear from them again, but they’ll be the first to bleet if something happens that they don’t like or agree with.

For others to suggest we are lacking because we did not attend their meetings to tell them what is happening is preposterous. We are all volunteers, busy lives, already taking time out to try and make a difference. You know we exist, just support us by being a paid member, or attend an MRA meeting.

We have seen suggestions of ‘ride on parliament’ or ‘ride on the freeway as one big group’ suggestions. That would simply get people offside with bikers, all the bikers go home feeling good about themselves, and nothing changes, yet they continue to complain.

The only suggestion we have is to join as one in a proactive group and learn how to challenge the current laws and status in an ordered manner.

If people feel to start their own group, we encourage you, but good luck with sustaining that. The reality is people start with good intentions of committing, but life gets in the way, people get disillusioned, sidetracked, or they simply do not know how to, and the power of the group fades.

MRAWA has existed for 20+ years, and we have a stellar group of riders, yes, we ride, and are advocates for a better voice for riders, and trying to get bureaucracy to listen.

There were derogatory comments made about the MRAWA having low membership numbers. The 130+ members are actual paid members. Does not mean we are any less committed.

– We have 1300+ people following us on Facebook

– We have connections with the majority of influencers in motorcycling

– We have connections with the various government agencies that influence the government

We would like to acknowledge the riders and friends that invested time into sending the emails to Road Safety Commission and the Minister.

It just shows the power of the collective.

MRAWA is a non-profit organisation that serves & represents the interests of Western Australian motorcyclists.

The MRAWA is a dedicated group of volunteers who fight for better outcomes for all motorcycle riders. We work with, and lobby, Federal and State Government agencies as well as local councils on behalf of all riders in Western Australia.

Our catch cry is ‘Let Those Who Ride Decide’.

The more members we have, the more we participate, the bigger our voice will be.

If you have any issues that need pursuing, please come to a general meeting, and raise that, or just contact us.

We would like to acknowledge the RSC and Minister for being so responsive, and receptive to all bikers, and being open to amending this new legislation.

If you want a voice, join a group that really does have biker’s interest at heart.

All said and done, we are all bikers, we love riding, and we all just want to get home safely.

Share the Knowledge

MRAWA Ambassador

MRAWA is a non-profit organisation that serves & represents the interests of Western Australian motorcyclists. Become a Member: Your member's fee help us take actions on your behalf. HELP make a difference for ALL riders in WA! Be part of the peak motorcycle body working with Federal and State Government agencies as well as local councils on behalf of all riders in WA.

5 thoughts on “Update Regarding Lane Filtering”

  1. “Some say we should have left the lane filtering as it was, leave it as a ‘grey’ area. We do not agree.”
    “Over the years there has been hundreds of requests to ratify lane filtering as legal, and hundreds of people charged with various offences relating to lane filtering.”

    It’s a little disappointing to read this response. I understand that MRAWA went into this with good intentions, but the unwanted outcome is a direct result of the MRAWA getting involved and pushing for these in the first place. I believe it was raised in the last meeting, a direct question of whether these new laws would have even been a thing had the MRAWA not started pushing for them, and the answer as a resounding no, it was not likely.

    There were ways to do this legally, and fundamentally it was not illegal to start with, it’s good that that misinformation has been acknowledged. However that misinformation is exactly what the MRAWA should have been challenging. Rather than pushing for laws to make something “legal” that was not actually illegal to start with, but rather educate all those people who were asking for it. Pushing back on them to say “hey actually it’s not illegal, you got done because you did x”.

    It grows tiring hearing people go on about “oh I got done for splitting”, which as there was no law to make it illegal, just isn’t the case, you got pinged for breaking other laws/regulations. More often than not, people got done for not passing the attitude test, or riding like a muppet in the first place. So you can understand why most of us were not happy with the new laws, as all it has done is take away our options.

    “Why bring it into line with others states some asked?”
    “Because eventually the states will adopt uniform regulations, and we believe we could help set the standard for that.”

    It’s great to say that, but the reality is we ended up with what was basically a carbon copy of the east coast, and then made worse. How often do you hear the old trope “would you jump off a cliff just because all your friends did?”, how is it any different here? Just because the east coast has some laws, does it mean we need them here? Should we not evaluate whether adding new laws is based on facts, evidence and statistics to show that adding them has value? So far it seems like we continue to get new laws purely based on “oh well because they did it over there”, surely that’s a terrible way to do things? Would it not be the MRAWA’s place to push back on those sorts of regulations to say “hey we don’t actually need those laws, because their is no evidence that they improved safety”, or is that asking too much of the MRAWA?

    “It has been suggested in other motorcycle groups the MRAWA should consult more with the bigger biker fraternity”
    “Respectfully, we do communicate.”

    The truth is, and as was raised in the last MRAWA meeting, the approach the MRAWA have is dated. The number of members relies heavily on some of the committee members associations with one or two very large/very specific clubs to bolster the numbers. As in terms of direct membership to the greater public, it’s not even a half a percent of the number of registered bikes in WA. Given the last issues with Facebook and misinformation/handling of the situation, it’s a clear example of why you no longer reach those you need to support you. It’s 2021, you need to engage in Facebook properly, Twitter, Instagram etc. You cannot ignore those anymore, and it’s clear that no one there is doing that job as it was mentioned in the meeting that you either don’t understand it, or that you just don’t know what groups are there. Just take one look and compare the social media presence of the MRAWA and the RTRA, the RTRA guys do a great job, and as a bit of a giggle on the side, even they denounced the MRAWA’s achievements with the lane splitting law..

    “In regard to RSC sponsorship, they’re actually sponsoring you, as a biker.”

    Lets be real here, no one likes the RSC, and time and time again they push for the same old trope across all categories of road usage. They are for the most part stacked against us, not for us. Just look at the situation as you even mentioned with the bus lanes. The RSC couldn’t care less as long as no one challenges their authority, and they keep themselves in power. And hell, look at this situation with the lane splitting laws, does that not clearly illustrate that they are not here to help, that there is no partnership, to have been blindsided twice now? Come on guys, I know that funding is a requirement, but the reality is the RSC truly don’t care, their basis for changing laws/regulations is flawed, as they cherry pick evidence to fit their narrative, not just in regards to the bus lane debacle, but in everything they do.

    “So when this was announced on the RSC Facebook wall, there was a torrent of social media posts slamming the RSC for that, a big outrage, and we voiced our strong opinion on that too. But what changed? Nothing.”
    “What are the general biker fraternity now doing about it? Nothing.”
    “What is the MRAWA doing about it? Something.”
    “We are going through the research they have used as the basis for shutting it down. Our intention is to find issue with that and have that ruling overturned. A work in progress, as it seems to be with bureaucracy.”

    The problem is, the general community have become jaded and disinterested, because it looks like no one really cares. Why bother doing anything when the perception is that those in charge are the old guard, antiquated, and out of touch, that refuse to listen to anything, look at real evidence, and instead pick and choose only the information that matches what they believe. Add into that the toxic mix of the average Facebook group, where most seem to lack critical thinking, take for example the sheer number of people posting that lane splitting was illegal when it wasn’t, and you start to understand what you are up against, and thus why nobody cares anymore. Because it’s not about evidence or fact anymore, it’s about who is the loudest, who can spread the most misinformation, and sadly this is the age we live in.

    “Our catch cry is ‘Let Those Who Ride Decide’.”

    And doesn’t that just demonstrate the whole problem. That majority that ride, that thought splitting was illegal, asking the MRAWA to push for “legal” lane splitting laws. I’m all for letting those that ride decide, but at the same time, if those that ride are wrong, it’s the job of the MRAWA to clear up the confusion, e.g. in the context of splitting, telling people it’s not actually illegal, and that there is a high risk if pushed for, we may end up with all these laws from the east coast which people don’t want.

    1. Hey Ross,

      That was an epic response. We stated our case in our post, so on some points we’re just going to have to agree to disagree.

      The easiest way for me to address some of your points is to copy/paste them here, and address or clarify each point.

      ===

      “Some say we should have left the lane filtering as it was, leave it as a ‘grey’ area. We do not agree.”
      “Over the years there has been hundreds of requests to ratify lane filtering as legal, and hundreds of people charged with various offences relating to lane filtering.”

      It’s a little disappointing to read this response. I understand that MRAWA went into this with good intentions, but the unwanted outcome is a direct result of the MRAWA getting involved and pushing for these in the first place. I believe it was raised in the last meeting, a direct question of whether these new laws would have even been a thing had the MRAWA not started pushing for them, and the answer as a resounding no, it was not likely.

      There were ways to do this legally, and fundamentally it was not illegal to start with, it’s good that that misinformation has been acknowledged. However that misinformation is exactly what the MRAWA should have been challenging. Rather than pushing for laws to make something “legal” that was not actually illegal to start with, but rather educate all those people who were asking for it. Pushing back on them to say “hey actually it’s not illegal, you got done because you did x”.

      It grows tiring hearing people go on about “oh I got done for splitting”, which as there was no law to make it illegal, just isn’t the case, you got pinged for breaking other laws/regulations. More often than not, people got done for not passing the attitude test, or riding like a muppet in the first place. So you can understand why most of us were not happy with the new laws, as all it has done is take away our options.

      We do not agree. If the RSC hadn’t blindsided us, this would all be mute. And now the election is done, and parliament returns, we’ll be working to have the ‘freeeway’ exclusion removed.

      ===

      “Why bring it into line with others states some asked?”
      “Because eventually the states will adopt uniform regulations, and we believe we could help set the standard for that.”

      It’s great to say that, but the reality is we ended up with what was basically a carbon copy of the east coast, and then made worse. How often do you hear the old trope “would you jump off a cliff just because all your friends did?”, how is it any different here? Just because the east coast has some laws, does it mean we need them here? Should we not evaluate whether adding new laws is based on facts, evidence and statistics to show that adding them has value? So far it seems like we continue to get new laws purely based on “oh well because they did it over there”, surely that’s a terrible way to do things? Would it not be the MRAWA’s place to push back on those sorts of regulations to say “hey we don’t actually need those laws, because their is no evidence that they improved safety”, or is that asking too much of the MRAWA?

      That is not what we said at all Ross “oh well because they did it over there”. It seems like your response is just argumentative.

      We stated categorically “Because eventually the states will adopt uniform regulations, and we believe we could help set the standard for that.”

      ===

      “In regard to RSC sponsorship, they’re actually sponsoring you, as a biker.”

      Lets be real here, no one likes the RSC, and time and time again they push for the same old trope across all categories of road usage. They are for the most part stacked against us, not for us. Just look at the situation as you even mentioned with the bus lanes. The RSC couldn’t care less as long as no one challenges their authority, and they keep themselves in power. And hell, look at this situation with the lane splitting laws, does that not clearly illustrate that they are not here to help, that there is no partnership, to have been blindsided twice now? Come on guys, I know that funding is a requirement, but the reality is the RSC truly don’t care, their basis for changing laws/regulations is flawed, as they cherry pick evidence to fit their narrative, not just in regards to the bus lane debacle, but in everything they do.

      The reality is the RSC is the body that advises the goverment on road safety. Your point here is what? Do you actually have a solution to propose?

      ===

      “So when this was announced on the RSC Facebook wall, there was a torrent of social media posts slamming the RSC for that, a big outrage, and we voiced our strong opinion on that too. But what changed? Nothing.”
      “What are the general biker fraternity now doing about it? Nothing.”
      “What is the MRAWA doing about it? Something.”
      “We are going through the research they have used as the basis for shutting it down. Our intention is to find issue with that and have that ruling overturned. A work in progress, as it seems to be with bureaucracy.”

      The problem is, the general community have become jaded and disinterested, because it looks like no one really cares. Why bother doing anything when the perception is that those in charge are the old guard, antiquated, and out of touch, that refuse to listen to anything, look at real evidence, and instead pick and choose only the information that matches what they believe. Add into that the toxic mix of the average Facebook group, where most seem to lack critical thinking, take for example the sheer number of people posting that lane splitting was illegal when it wasn’t, and you start to understand what you are up against, and thus why nobody cares anymore. Because it’s not about evidence or fact anymore, it’s about who is the loudest, who can spread the most misinformation, and sadly this is the age we live in.

      Ross, again, I’m not really sure what solution your suggesting here. I could state here that the MRA people do care, and you would then argue that point, to what end?

      Again, I can only reiterate what was stated in the post.

      If people feel to start their own group, we encourage you, but good luck with sustaining that. The reality is people start with good intentions of committing, but life gets in the way, people get disillusioned, sidetracked, or they simply do not know how to, and the power of the group fades.

      ===

      Ross, it’d be good to harness your passion for bikers rights. It’s up to you whether your join us in that, or start your own group, but either way, I think we’d agree that making a positive influence and actually causing change is the end goal.

  2. “There were derogatory comments made about the MRAWA having low membership numbers. The 130+ members are actual paid members. Does not mean we are any less committed.
    – We have 1300+ people following us on Facebook
    – We have connections with the majority of influencers in motorcycling
    – We have connections with the various government agencies that influence the government”

    1300 people following isn’t that useful, you need members, people who care and want to engage. There are two large Facebook based groups that between them have almost 4500 members. Not people just following, actual members. Granted like everything only a percentage will be active. But this just goes to show what is out there, and where the MRAWA should be engaging to get more members, to work with the new communities. Just look at the MRAWA group itself on Facebook, 209 members…

    I’d love to know more about the influencers you refer to, I’ve yet to see anything MRAWA related come through anything that I follow.. as to be a bit blunt, the MRAWA comes across more like a government organisation, than a community organisation to support riders. Up until this mess of the lane splitting laws, barely knew the MRAWA existed as anything more than that.

    And the connections with government, I’d like to believe, I really would, but it seems more like we come across as a thorn in their side rather than having actual influence and a partnership. You could argue that as a thorn we challenge them, but I just don’t see the MRAWA as it is today, having any real clout. And at the same time, is that the right approach, having been blind sided now multiple times? There doesn’t appear to be either a relationship of any substance, or clout (from numbers) to drive proper change. Looking at it from the outside, it’s like the MRAWA gets told one thing to keep the MRAWA happy, and then they just do whatever they want when it comes to actually implementing new laws/regulations.

    1. Hey Ross,

      Glad you got to one of our meetings. Your comment that the “MRAWA comes across more like a government organisation, than a community organisation to support riders”.

      You’ve now attended a meeting, you’ve now met some of the committee members, I’m surprised you still have that attitude. These are just random people who want to make a difference, we don’t see anyone else putting their hand up?

      I joined MRAWA 6 years ago, I wanted to support an organisation that had bikers best interest at heart. I only became an active member and put my hand up to contribute on the committee a year and a half ago. I don’t know of any other organisation that is

      Some of the frustrations you vent, we share, but not sure why you’re still directing all that at us? You’ve now vented across multiple platforms, isn’t it time to just move on and as a collective and see how we can work together to actually make a difference?

  3. Ross Fawcett

    “We do not agree. If the RSC hadn’t blindsided us, this would all be mute. And now the election is done, and parliament returns, we’ll be working to have the ‘freeway’ exclusion removed.”

    My position is we didn’t need the changes at all. That if anything what we had before was more akin to a common sense approach, in that the individual circumstances would dictate a positive or negative outcome following an interaction with police. So I personally would like to the the majority of it thrown out. Perfect world it becomes simply a case of that lane splitting is defined as legal, and the definition itself in place, but that the circumstances in which it is legal be left more open ended, such as it’s legal to do so long as it is safe to do so. Just like we have overtaking rules that mention that it was safe to do so. An example would be, that it’s probably not safe to split between two b-doubles, but a passenger car in one lane, and a heavy truck in the other, not that unsafe. Yes leaving it open to interpretation does create a grey area, but that’s kind of the point, allowing freedom both ways, for riders to ride in a manner they believe is safe, whilst still allowing police to intervene when clearly unsafe, at which point, argue to the judge on how safe it was to split between the b-doubles…

    “Some of the frustrations you vent, we share, but not sure why you’re still directing all that at us? You’ve now vented across multiple platforms, isn’t it time to just move on and as a collective and see how we can work together to actually make a difference?”

    At the end of the day, it’s going to come with the territory. The MRAWA as stated were the driving force behind the change, it was framed as a good thing, and blindsided or not, the outcome has upset people. The initial blowback from the community, the numerous posts around the place, whether you like it or not, it at least gets the message out there “hey people, this is what happened, these are the new laws”. As it still seems like many don’t know what the new laws are, or what the old situation was, hell we now see posts of interactions with police claiming that it’s already illegal down the freeway. For laws that were meant to clarify things, they certainly seem to have created more mess.

    “You’ve now attended a meeting, you’ve now met some of the committee members, I’m surprised you still have that attitude. These are just random people who want to make a difference, we don’t see anyone else putting their hand up?”

    And I am also a member for the next three years. I can only hope that out of this blowback with the community, that we can see more people join, and leverage larger numbers to help drive change that is positive. In terms of perception, it’s hard to put a finger on exactly what it is, whether it’s the social media presence, or the marketing strategy as a whole, it doesn’t connect with me. I ride dirt also, and would compare the MRAWA to the RTRA, and the view I have of them is more of fellow dirt bike riders. I haven’t got a good answer for you on this, maybe the approach all just feels a bit dated?

    “Ross, again, I’m not really sure what solution your suggesting here. I could state here that the MRA people do care, and you would then argue that point, to what end?”

    I’m sure they do, they wouldn’t be there if they didn’t. And maybe it is an issue of perception, there are so many other groups across social media that the MRAWA could be actively involved with, both to clarify the legality of things, engage with the new generation of riders, and to drive membership. The overall response to this whole issue felt like a huge mis-step, love it or hate it, social media is where the engagement is.

    “The reality is the RSC is the body that advises the government on road safety. Your point here is what? Do you actually have a solution to propose?”

    And the MRAWA are taking the brunt of it, for the decisions or “advice” the RSC have given in regards to what the laws became. Ideally I’d like to see the RSC or the government in general, present credible data and evidence to back the need to make changes. I know that’s going to be a struggle, but this is where the MRAWA and any other lobbying body fits, to push them on it.

    “That is not what we said at all Ross “oh well because they did it over there”. It seems like your response is just argumentative.”
    “We stated categorically “Because eventually the states will adopt uniform regulations, and we believe we could help set the standard for that.””

    But that’s kind of the point, just because other states adopt a uniform set of regulations, doesn’t necessarily mean we have to. Isn’t that the exact example of doing things just because others are? Maybe it is being argumentative, but isn’t that the point? There is a push from somewhere to have uniform regulations, that’s all well and good, so the argument back is, what value does this bring to WA riders? Is this change required? In the context of what the laws were in WA, does this change improve safety? Does removing the grey area improve the liability issues?

    “Ross, it’d be good to harness your passion for bikers rights. It’s up to you whether your join us in that, or start your own group, but either way, I think we’d agree that making a positive influence and actually causing change is the end goal.”

    I will admit, at the moment it’s hard not to be angry at the situation, as changes were made that many of us feel were not in our best interest, and the driving force was the MRAWA. But I do honestly believe the MRAWA can be a positive force within the community, and drive change that benefits us all. That if anything, hopefully this brings a renewed enthusiasm from other riders to join and drive that change. I’d like to see the MRAWA engage more with the many new riding groups that exist, though I do see that this will have its own challenges. And push people more to write/contact their representative minister, or the commission, drive people to get their voice heard, so it’s not just the MRAWA talking on behalf, but many more voices.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top