If you dig deep enough into this article you see this sweeping assertion in the headline is based on a few hundred crashes in South Australia. And rather than say the cars were at fault, the report says in most cases the cyclists were found to be not at fault. Which I don't believe is the same thing, legally.

And if it is it undermines the central thesis of the piece, which is that car drivers should be assumed to be at fault and have to prove their innocence.

If it's so dangerous to be a cyclist, we should probably make bicycles illegal outside designated bike paths.