News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Ute owners caught in safety crossfire 

Ute owners caught in safety crossfire

15 Mar, 2010 08:06 AM
NEW child restraint laws have been slammed for not taking into account the restrictions they place on families relying on a ute to get around.

But the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) say a single cab ute is not considered a family car.

The new national child restraint laws came into effect in NSW on March 1 and require all children under seven years of age to be secured in an approved child restraint or booster seat when travelling in a vehicle, including single-cab utes.

Kathleen Gamble said the new laws place an unfair burden on farming families and trades people.

“I can appreciate the laws are about safety but no parent would put their children in a situation where they are at risk,” Mrs Gamble said.

“It is just not practical or safe to expect a grown man to squeeze into a single cab ute with two young children in booster seats, it is uncomfortable and, in my mind, unsafe.

“I am all for laws to ensure safety but a law is only good if it works.”

With two children, Erin, 5, and Owen, 10, Mrs Gamble said she often relies on her husband, Paul, to get them to school on his way to work in his ute.

“If these laws do become permanent this is just logistically not going to work,” she said.

“In a country area like the Southern Highlands we are not going to be the only ones affected, and I really don’t think most people are aware of the impact these laws will have and that there is no exception made for utes.”

Mrs Gamble has already raised her concerns with State MP Pru Goward, the RTA and local police in the hope she can have the laws quashed before the transitional phase ends on June 30.

“I really want to get a petition started because I think locals need to be made aware and hopefully we can stop these laws before they become permanent,” Mrs Gamble said.

Under the new laws, all children up to the age of seven years must be correctly restrained in an approved child restraint, suitable for their size and age.

All children under four years must be transported in the rear seat of a motor vehicle with two or more rows.

A child between the ages of four and seven can only travel in the front passenger seat of a vehicle if all available seating positions in the rear seat have been occupied by a child under four years in a child restraint.

An RTA spokesperson said drivers of vehicles like utes and vans who do not have enough room for children to travel safely and legally in child restraints should not transport those children.

“A single cab ute is a vehicle generally used to transport up to two people and would not generally be considered to be a ‘family car’,” the spokesperson said.

The RTA spokesperson said for single cab utes (utes with one row of seats) children of any age can be transported in the front seat as long as they are in a child restraint or booster seat that is suitable for their age.

The restraints that are required for children under four years of age need to be anchored. Anchors can be installed at a restraint fitting station if the ute is not fitted with one.

A child in a rearward facing restraint should not be placed in the front a vehicle where there is an air bag.

“Motorists have an obligation to ensure that all passengers and especially children are safely and legally restrained,” the RTA spokesperson said.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
"Mrs Gamble has already raised her concerns with State MP Pru Goward, the RTA and local police in the hope she can have the laws quashed before the transitional phase ends on June 30." You've got to be joking. You want to have the laws removed because they inconvenienced a small minority of drivers that use a ute to transport children? What about the safety of the children that belong to the other 99 per cent of the population. Remove the laws and you're placing them back at risk. There are parents out there who, without these new laws, wouldn't bother with child safety. It took years of hard work to even get these laws implemented in the first place and it seems unbelievable someone would want to move backwards and remove them due to a matter of convenience. Honestly is it not clear that your children's safety should be a priority over the vehicle you elect to use to transport them in? I would imagine most parents are just fine with accepting laws that promote the safety of their children.
Posted by Disbelief, 21/03/2010 3:37:12 PM, on Southern Highland News

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.

Most popular articles


ama


Southern Highland News







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...