Commenting on the story: End of the road threat for city e-scooters as council puts foot down

These e-scooters are an absolute menace to pedestrians and vehicular traffic. I can’t count the number of times I see riders on a daily basis scootering along not wearing the helmet they’re supposed to use for their own safety.

Then there’s the number of riders carrying a passenger in complete disregard for the regulations, with neither rider or passenger wearing a helmet.

The silent nature of these motorised vehicles (with no covering third party insurance and no third-party property insurance), means pedestrians can’t hear the machines coming up from behind.

Ban them. Make the people who use them exercise by walking – one of the best exercises they can do for their own health. – Ray Goulter

I think it’s time everyone caught up with the time and allows the everyone to use e-scooters to get around.

People keep complaining about the lack of transport, too much traffic and no parking and yet we restrict the use of alternatives that can help with all of these issues. Not to mention the reduction of pollution in the city. – Mark Jones

The Lord Mayor is spot on: e-scooters are dangerous and an eyesore. They add nothing to the city and are a serious hazard to pedestrians.

There is no point in seeking legislation to manage and regulate the use of scooters; legislation has to be enforced, and is the Government likely to employ a team of officers to police the use of these scooters? I don’t think so.

I agree with the Deputy lord Mayor: the trial has gone on for too long – extending it is a waste of time and only increases the risk of a serious accident. – Barbara Fergusson

Commenting on the story: Firm under tax scandal pressure amid ‘explosion’ of public service outsourcing

It is a curious thing that university research groups, experts in consulting, evaluation, legal matters, tax, research and much more are often excluded from Commonwealth Panel arrangements, yet the “big four” are so often not excluded.

Ministers of all levels of government often voice concerns about ‘glossy publications’ that don’t answer the critical questions posed by a specific tender or a government agency. It is my experience as a university based consultant/researcher that high levels of expertise exist within the universities to bring together expert consulting/review/evaluation/advice and to do so in a thoroughly independent manner.

Perhaps the universities need to grasp the opportunity presented by the PwC scandal and more aggressively promote the expertise that so often resides in their staff. – Michael O’Neil

Commenting on the opinion piece: The community impact of kneejerk lawmaking

Another first for South Australia! Unlike the more enlightened states and territories of the Commonwealth including Victoria, Queensland and the ACT, South Australia doesn’t have a human rights act.

This lack of action on this by successive governments has a flow on effect to the mistreatment of the aged, the infirm and those individuals living with disabilities.

It is easy to see why having witnessed the obscene haste with which the the government with the help of the Liberal opposition rushed through the Lower House this cynical and uber-populist, anti-protest legislation bill calling it The Summary Offences (Obstruction of Public Places) Amendment Bill 2023.

Unsurprisingly the Bill  was passed absent a jot of scrutiny or debate.

Under Australian federal legislation even without a national human rights charter, citizen’s human rights are better off than in SA. Under  the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 all new Bills and even disallowable legislative instruments must be accompanied by a Statement of Compatibility. It assesses the compatibility of the legislation with the rights and freedoms recognised in the 7 core international human rights treaties that Australia has ratified.

Like the two states and one territory mentioned, South Australia has a Labor government, but ‘what’s in a name’?

Historically, labour parties have championed  human rights and the creation of rights charters thorough luminaries like Susan Ryan, Gareth Evans and Barry Jones.

In SA, we are seeing the polar opposite occur ,where the government seems more interested in the theatre of ‘bread and circuses’ rather than protecting fundamental human rights and democratic freedoms.

As one Twitter follower so aptly put it, no great social movement has ever advanced by sitting there quietly and meekly.

One might think with all we know about global warming, the democratic ‘right to protest’ over the climate change destruction of our world is something worth protecting, not criminalising. – Gilbert Aitken