*Thank you for 2000 signatures!*

This has evolved very quickly, so we have thought more about our key messages for this campaign.

Placing the slowest vehicles at the front of every intersection means other road users have to wait, repetitively, for the same vehicles that take the longest time to cross an intersection, we appreciate it's just 10 seconds or so, but it's 10 seconds or so at EVERY intersection.

This significantly reduces the networks speed and it takes longer to get things done. this includes delivering goods which cyclists are actually quite dependent upon.

Cars that have to stop and start more often, use more fossil fuels, and create delays with considering we want traffic to flow, not to abruptly stop because of unpredictable behaviors like road users jumping on and off footpaths.

This infrastructure is extremely expensive, we're literally spending billions, so it needs to be facilitated, we don't support cyclists swapping between the road, cycle lanes and footpaths just because a light is red and they can't be bothered waiting.

Most road users have noticed increased queuing time and queue length at Intersections due to the installation of yellow hit-sticks which stop other road users cooperating with each other so that access to appropriate lanes occurs earlier. this is also a major source of frustration because, for much of the time, there is no one in the cycle lane that the hit-sticks try to maintain access to.

We want cyclists to communicate, use hand signals and to look behind them and not weave in and out of lanes of traffic, this makes predicting their movement difficult if not impossible.

We don't see any logic in allowing the use of headphones or allowing cyclists not to indicate. We don't agree that cyclists should ride up on the inside of motorists who are turning left, this is dangerous, cars and trucks have blind spots, and the road user at the front of an intersection sometimes physically can not see a cyclist hidden by cars behind a queue of motorists, especially if that cyclist is approaching quickly. this has already resulted in deaths that are automatically blamed on motorists.

We don't see the sense in removing all parking adjacent to cycle lanes, a smart and dynamic road network allows people places to stop ( answering cellphones, dropping people off, picking people up etc) We agree 'Not seeing a cyclist' isn't an excuse as the transport minister has recently said, but drivers don't have x-ray vision yet we bear the liability.

Hence we want cyclists to be visible day and night and place themselves on the road so that they are easy to see and not obscuring themselves just to get to the front of the queue.

We want a communicative and cooperative transport environment where people pay attention, not a them vs us mentality. Safety is not something you can just command, it comes when ALL parties do their bit to be hyper aware of the environment around them. Bikes, like other vehicles need to have correctly aligned lights and functioning brakes, yet there is no such compliance standard for bikes.

There is also no way of identifying a cyclist if they are to cause a crash. We want all road users to take responsibility for their safety. We do not approve of the them and us mentality that is driving a rift between cyclists and other road users. Many of us can not manage our work and personal life using a bike.

We encourage those who can to do so but motorists should not be berated for choosing a mode of transport we know to be safe, comfortable and usable all year round.

The vigilante actions taken by various cycle action groups need to consider safety and legality before ideology Berating people who choose the safety of a hundred years of automotive safety engineering is counter productive to their ideology of enticing more cyclists. Safety comes through paying fastidious attention, not by merely "feeling" safe, in fact the safer one feels the less one may be inclined to pay attention.