Mraa Off On Wrong Track
The Age
Friday July 1, 1994
THE Motorcycle Riders' Association of Australia (MRAA) has been the most active and successful organisation in favor of protecting motorcyclists' rights in Australia for close to the past two decades.
However, this success has not been without cost.
The association, formerly the MRA and later the Victorian branch of the MRA as the organisation grew, has for the past 10 years or so been riven by almost sectarian infighting and splits. This has led to a decline in its membership and hence its strength.
The MRAA has battled on and had some successes, the most notable of recent times being the Victorian inquiry into motorcycle safety. Among other things, the inquiry recommended that federal legislation requiring the daytime use of headlights not be incorporated into state law.
Perhaps one of the turning points in the history of the association (then the MRA Victoria) was its campaign against the Victorian Government's changes to third-party insurance. Simply, the MRA opposed the scrapping of lump-sum payments to injured motorcyclists.
While this was a noble idea, such payments could not be financially sustained. The alternative of payments linked to costs and previous income, while less attractive to injured people, was financially viable and was made law.
The leadership of the MRA decided to directly campaign against this changed legislation by targeting marginal Government seats, in the same manner as some fringe political groups. At that time, the view was expressed here that this was a bad idea because it would liken the MRA to fringe political groups, raise questions about its political impartiality and would alienate MRA members who for other reasons supported the Government.
Despite some misdirected vitriol at the time, the MRA campaign fizzled. Since then there has been a change of government and the insurance legislation remains (although it may change pending privatisation plans).
Since the change of government, however, the MRAA has been silent on this issue. This again raises questions about the impartiality of the association in matters involving mainstream party politics. The association, after all, represents motorcyclists, not a political ideology.
Having examined the logic of the Federal Government's lights-on legislation, as an ``expert witness" I opposed its introduction at state level at the Victorian inquiry. I also supported representations being made to the relevant minister and the federal Office of Road Safety on the matter.
However, the association is now backing a campaign to target marginal electorates held by the federal Labor Party. This appears to be a reversion to the type of campaign which previously raised so many doubts about the motives of the MRA (Vic). It is also worth noting that the campaign is not supported by the broad-based Australian Motorcycle Council.
As before, by engaging in fringe political tactics, the MRAA will not achieve its gaol of changing the legislation and will further divide its already weakened support base.
It is no doubt frustrating to devote so much time and effort to achieve so little in real terms and, when a life is devoted to such a cause, it can appear to take on huge proportions. But the fact remains, as before, that motorcycling is mainly a marginal (though thoroughly enjoyable) leisure pursuit.
The lights-on issue is not one over which elections are fought, nor it is likely to override the more fundamental political concerns of voters - motorcyclists or otherwise. Again, this decision by the MRAA raises questions about its impartiality in party politics.
© 1994 The Age
Share This