Evaluation of the Queensland Minimum Passing Distance Road Rule

The two-year trial of the Queensland minimum passing distance (MPD) road rule began on 7 April 2014. The rule requires motor vehicles to provide cyclists a minimum lateral passing distance of one metre when overtaking cyclists in a speed zone of 60 km/h or less, and 1.5 metres when the speed limit is greater than 60 km/h. This document summarises the evaluation of the effectiveness of the new rule in terms of its: 1. practical implementation; 2. impact on road users’ attitudes and perceptions; and 3. road safety benefits. The Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland (CARRS-Q) developed the evaluation framework (Haworth, Schramm, Kiata-Holland, Vallmuur, Watson & Debnath; 2014) for the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR) and was later commissioned to undertake the evaluation. The evaluation included the following components: • Review of correspondence received by TMR; • Interviews and focus groups with Queensland Police Service (QPS) officers; • Road user survey; • Observational study; and • Crash, injury and infringement data analysis.

The development and preliminary evaluation of an education intervention to prevent driveway run-over incidents

Objective While driveway run-over incidents continue to be a cause of serious injury and deaths among young children in Australia, few empirically evaluated educational interventions have been developed which address these incidents. Addressing this gap, this study describes the development and evaluation of a paper-based driveway safety intervention targeting caregivers of children aged 5 years or younger. Design Cross-sectional survey. Method and setting Informed by previous research, the intervention targeted key caregiver safety behaviours that address driveway risks. To assess the impact of the intervention, 137 Queensland (Australia) caregivers (95.0% women; mean age = 34.97 years) were recruited. After receiving the intervention, changes to a number of outcomes such as caregiver risk perception, safety knowledge and behavioural intentions were measured. Results Findings indicated that the intervention had increased general and specific situational risk awareness and safety knowledge among a substantial proportion of participants. Close to one-quarter of the sample strongly agreed that the intervention had increased these outcomes. In addition, 71.6% of the sample reported that they intended to make changes to their routine in and around the driveway, as a result of reading the intervention material and a further, quarter of the participants strongly agreed that the information provided would be a help both to themselves (26.5%) and other caregivers (33.8%) to keep their children safe in the driveway. Conclusion: While the educational intervention requires further validation, findings from this study suggest that intervention content and format increases driveway safety.

Understanding urban rail travel for improved patronage forecasting

Improved forecasting of urban rail patronage is essential for effective policy development and efficient planning for new rail infrastructure. Past modelling and forecasting of urban rail patronage has been based on legacy modelling approaches and often conducted at the general level of public transport demand, rather than being specific to urban rail. This project canvassed current Australian practice and international best practice to develop and estimate time series and cross-sectional models of rail patronage for Australian mainland state capital cities. This involved the implementation of a large online survey of rail riders and non-riders for each of the state capital cities, thereby resulting in a comprehensive database of respondent socio-economic profiles, travel experience, attitudes to rail and other modes of travel, together with stated preference responses to a wide range of urban travel scenarios. Estimation of the models provided a demonstration of their ability to provide information on the major influences on the urban rail travel decision. Rail fares, congestion and rail service supply all have a strong influence on rail patronage, while a number of less significant factors such as fuel price and access to a motor vehicle are also influential. Of note, too, is the relative homogeneity of rail user profiles across the state capitals. Rail users tended to have higher incomes and education levels. They are also younger and more likely to be in full-time employment than non-rail users. The project analysis reported here represents only a small proportion of what could be accomplished utilising the survey database. More comprehensive investigation was beyond the scope of the project and has been left for future work.

Transport-related fatalities and injuries leading to hospitalisation in pre-school children

Pre-school children grow and develop rapidly with age and their changing capabilities are reflected in the ways in which they are injured. Using coded and textual descriptions of transport-related injuries in children under five years of age from the Queensland Injury Surveillance Unit (QISU) this paper profiles the modes of such injuries by single year of age. The QISU collects information on all injury presentations to emergency department in hospitals throughout Queensland using both coded information and textual description. Almost all transport-related injuries in children under one year are due to motor vehicle crashes but these become proportionately less common thereafter, while injuries while cycling become proportionately more common with age. Slow-speed vehicle runovers peak at age one year but occur at all ages in the range. Bicycle-related fatalities are rare in this age group. If bicycle-related injuries are excluded, the profiles of fatal and non-fatal injuries are broadly similar. Comparison with a Queensland hospital series suggests that these results are broadly representative.

Traversing the space between threats and violence: A review of threat assessment guidelines

While the majority of violent threats – defined as an expression of intent to do harm or act out violently against someone or something – do not progress to actual violence, a small proportion of threateners do go on to enact violence. Most researchers argue that violence risk assessments are inadequate for assessing threats of violence, which raises the question: how should a threat assessment (TA) be conducted? To begin to understand available frameworks for assessing threats, a systematic review of TA research literature was conducted. Most TA literature pertains to a specific domain (schools, public figure threats, workplaces) and target audience (clinicians, school personnel, law enforcement). TA guidelines are typically based on literature reviews with some based on empirical measures and others having no strong evidential basis. The most common concepts in TA are exploration of the threatener's mental health, the motivation for the threat and the presence of any plans. Rather than advocating for the development of a protocol for conducting TA, this article outlines the common areas of inquiry in assessing threats and highlights the limitations of current TA guidelines.

Child sexual abuse and access to justice for civil claims: Time to reform the Limitation of Actions Act 1974 (Qld)

In 2015, Victoria passed laws removing the time limit in which a survivor of child sexual abuse can commence a civil claim for personal injury. The law applies also to physical abuse, and to psychological injury arising from those forms of abuse. In 2016, New South Wales made almost identical legal reforms. These reforms were partly motivated by the recommendations of inquiries into institutional child abuse. Of particular relevance is that the Australian Royal Commission Into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse recommended in 2015 that all States and Territories remove their time limits for civil claims. This presentation explores the problems with standard time limits when applied to child sexual abuse cases (whether occurring within or beyond institutions), the scientific, ethical and legal justifications for lifting the time limits, and solutions for future law reform.