Highlighting implications for rail trail tourism and regional communities
The Brisbane Valley Rail Trail Users Association welcomes the Queensland Parliament’s Inquiry into E‑Mobility Safety and Use and supports the overarching goal of improving public safety. However, several recommendations—if applied without nuance—risk unintended and significant consequences for rail trail tourism, regional economies, and the thousands of Queenslanders and interstate visitors who use the BVRT each year.
The BVRT is not a suburban footpath or a city commuter corridor. It is a 161‑km regional tourism asset, attracting cyclists, e‑bike users, walkers, horse riders, families, and international visitors. Any regulatory changes need to reflect this unique context.
1. Rail Trails Are Tourism Infrastructure, Not Urban Footpaths
Many recommendations in the report are framed around urban safety issues—particularly e‑scooter crashes, pedestrian conflicts, and high‑speed riding in dense environments.
These concerns are valid in cities, but they do not translate directly to rail trails, where:
- Pedestrian density is extremely low
- Path widths are generous
- Sight lines are long
- Users are predominantly recreational, not commuting
- Legal E‑bikes are overwhelmingly used by older riders, tourists, and people (including children) with mobility limitations and disabilities,
Applying urban‑centric rules to regional tourism trails risks undermining the very purpose of these assets.
2. Proposed Licensing Requirements Could Severely Damage Rail Trail Tourism
The recommendation that all e‑bike and PMD riders hold a Class C Learner Licence (PrepL) is deeply concerning for tourism.
This would disproportionately affect:
- Interstate and international visitors who do not hold a Queensland licence
- Older riders who rely on e‑bikes for accessibility
- Families travelling together
- Commercial tour operators
- Bike hire businesses in Wulkuraka, Esk, and Blackbutt.
Requiring a Queensland-specific licence for a recreational holiday activity is unprecedented in Australia and would:
- Reduce visitation from overseas and interstate
- Reduce overnight stays
- Reduce spending in small towns
- Create confusion and compliance uncertainty
- Place Queensland at a competitive disadvantage compared to NSW, Victoria, and New Zealand
This recommendation must be reconsidered, or rail trails must be exempted.
3. Raising the Minimum Riding Age to 16 Will Exclude Families
Rail trails are one of the safest environments for children to ride.
They are:
- Off‑road
- Low‑speed
- Well‑maintained
- Free of motor vehicles
Families are a major tourism segment on the BVRT.
Prohibiting children under 16 from riding legal e‑bikes—even low‑powered, speed‑limited models—would:
- Exclude families with younger children
- Reduce multi‑day tourism
- Impact accommodation, cafés, and local businesses
- Undermine the BVRT’s reputation as a family‑friendly destination
A more balanced approach would be:
- Allow legal e‑bikes for children 12+ with parental supervision
- Maintain higher age limits for urban environments
Rail trails are not the setting where the inquiry’s tragic case studies occurred.
4. Battery Safety Reforms Are Welcome—But Must Not Burden Tourism Operators
The BVRTUA supports:
- Stronger import controls
- Mandatory battery safety standards
- Better disposal pathways
- Public education on charging and storage
However, small regional businesses—bike hire shops, tour operators, accommodation providers—must not be saddled with:
- Complex compliance burdens
- Costly certification requirements
- Ambiguous enforcement risks
Support, guidance, and transitional arrangements are essential.
5. Enforcement Powers Must Be Proportionate and Context‑Sensitive
The recommendation to allow immediate seizure and destruction of non‑compliant and illegal devices is understandable in high‑risk urban settings.
But on rail trails:
- Riders are overwhelmingly compliant
- Illegal high‑powered devices are rare
- Enforcement presence is minimal
- Visitors may be unfamiliar with Queensland‑specific rules
We urge the government to ensure:
- Education precedes enforcement
- Rail trail users are not unfairly targeted
- Visitors are not penalised for honest misunderstandings
6. Rail Trails Need Their Own Regulatory Category
The BVRTUA strongly recommends that the Queensland Government establish a distinct regulatory framework for rail trails, recognising their:
- Tourism function
- Regional economic importance
- Low‑risk environment
- Mixed‑use nature
- Accessibility role for older riders and people with disabilities
This could include:
- Different age rules
- Exemptions from licensing requirements
- Clear signage and education tailored to recreational settings
Rail trails are unique. The law should reflect that.
Conclusion: Safety Matters—But So Does Regional Queensland
The BVRTUA supports the inquiry’s intent to improve safety.
But reforms must be fit for purpose, evidence‑based, and sensitive to regional tourism realities.
The Brisbane Valley Rail Trail is a major economic driver for the Ipswich, Somerset, South Burnett, and Toowoomba regions.
Over‑regulation risks:
- Reducing visitation
- Damaging small businesses
- Undermining community investment
- Limiting accessibility
- Weakening Queensland’s position as a cycling tourism destination
We call on the Queensland Government to work collaboratively with rail trail organisations, councils, tourism operators, and regional communities to ensure that safety reforms strengthen—not weaken—the future of rail trail tourism.
Paul Heymans, President
Brisbane Valley Rail Trail Users Association Inc.
