�Թ���վ

“Road toads”, “pedal terrorists”, and the “Lycra-wearing latte set” – just some of the derogatory terms used to describe cyclists these days.

Indeed, hatred towards this group of people is now a movement in its own right, and lately the aversion is gathering speed as quickly as the great Lance Armstrong himself.

At AgForce we don’t like to get involved in muck slinging – perhaps because we know what it’s like to be unfairly targeted.

But when it comes to the matter of road tax, I can’t help but wonder why cyclists get to use the roads scot free.

This unfairness is particularly stinging at the moment, given recent discussions over abolishing the reduced rate of road tax for tractors.

Thanks to quick intervention by our strong and united ag advocacy system, the Federal Government has now ruled out any changes to the fuel tax credit scheme.

This marks a clear win for industry, and we applaud Prime Minister Anthony Albanese for supporting our farmers.

Road taxes should be for road users – and that doesn’t include tractors.

However, perhaps there is still a case for cyclists to contribute to the cost of our infrastructure?

Have a quick scan of any news story regarding cyclists and one of the main things that usually jumps out is the torrent of comments calling for them to pay registration.

“They don’t pay rego, so get cyclists off our roads”, “They don’t belong on the roads”, “Stay on the bike paths”, and so on.

Aside from the revenue that could be raised by taxing cyclists, one compelling reason for making them pay road rego must be insurance.

Currently, cyclists are bound to the same road rules as motor vehicles, however, they are not treated the same when it comes to the no-fault insurance that vehicle rego pays for.

Given the tendency they have to ride as if they’re competing in the Tour de France, and the accidents that happen as a result, this should definitely be rectified.

After all, fairness supports togetherness, and working together is the key to success.