NSW fine revenue figures
A News Limited investigation has found the NSW Government made $312 million in revenue from motorists in the last financial year. Six years ago the figure was less than half that, at $118 million.
Speed and red light cameras, police-issued speeding fines, parking fines and general traffic offences have all contributed to the figure, as well as rising fine costs.
In the six year period, the number of licensed drivers rose by almost half a million, from 3.6 million to 4.03 million. Despite the increase in road users, last year’s road toll was the state’s lowest since World War II, with 445 deaths.
Roads Minister Eric Roozendaal credited the tough law enforcement as the reason for the low road toll, saying the number “shows our strategies are working.”
NRMA Motoring & Services President Alan Evans disagreed, saying that the low road toll was thanks to “better drivers, better cars and better roads.”
Are the heavy penalties saving lives? Are the figures a reflection of our driving ability? Or are motorists just being bullied?
February 14th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
The point of speed cameras is that IF YOU DON’T SPEED YOU WON’T BE FINED - how much simpler do they have to make it people? I have been driving for over 25 years and still have all my points. On my driving record is a speeding fine for 1986. I drive a fair bit, so if I can do it, so can you - stop whinging when you get fined, stick to the speed limit and you won’t be fined! It’s not rocket science!
February 14th, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Speed limits should be based on the 85th percentile speed, as advocated by the National Motorists Association Australia. Using nominal limits frustrates motorists, with inevitable consequences.
February 14th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
If the issue was NOT about revinue raising, then every school zone would have clear variable speed signs. Such signs are still “in trial mode” all these years later. With all the visual clutter/ visual pollution that the RTA allows on roadways it’s easy to find onesself in a school zone without knowing it. And what if my watch is wrong. What if I don’t have kids and am unaware of the school holiday dates. Not good enough. It should be about stopping accidents and injury…….. not raising money and keeping up appearences. (by the way , I’ve been driving 30 years and I’ve got all my points too. I also regularly attend motor vehicle accidents in my employment. The myopic speed and fines approach is just too convenient)
February 14th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
Unfortunately this government (Carr/ Iemma) is a one trick pony when it comes to road safety. Quite simply, their strategy is to identify any particular type of driving behaviour that MIGHT have a causal relationship to road trauma and introduce a monetary and points penalty. If a penaly already exists then they simply increase it - again and again.
The old chestnut trotted out time after time to defend the strategy on the monetary side - “Don’t speed and you won’t be fined” - just doesn’t stand up to any impartial analysis. Taken to it’s logical conclusion they are asking the NSW public to swallow the notion that James Packer (we all know of him, don’t we? Well known and VERY wealthy Eastern Suburbs resident) is somehow motivated to restrain himself from putting his foot down in his Aston Martin, Porsche etc. for fear of a FINE!! A monetary penalty!! I am sure the threat of incurring a “heavy” fine has him quaking in his boots!! NOT! I just don’t buy it, and anyone who does is either unbelievably naive, incredibly gullible or hasn’t really taken the time to think it through.
My personal experience is that I have been fined (although I have all my points at present) and the actual monetary penalty, and the ongoing “fear” of incurring another such penalty, has virtually zero impact on my driving behaviour. The reality is that I am relatively fortunate and earn a good income. If fined I will bitch about it to my friends, wait for a couple of reminder notices, write the cheque and be done with it. Real impact is zero - it won’t mean that I can’t pay the electricity bill or that I won’t be able to go out to a restaurant for dinner.
The sad thing here is that the same can’t be said of others I know at my place of work who are less well placed than I am from a monetary perspective. I know of a part-time working mum trying to get back on her feet after a separation who has been fined for the same offence that I have been - same so-called “danger to the public etc. etc.” - and the need to pay the fine has meant that she has gone without basics for a number of weeks - she really was punished by the monetary fine in a most prejudicial way compared to me - or James Packer, should he be fined for the same offence.
And let us not forget the fact that these policies have been put in place and justified by a LABOR government. I am sure readers are familiar with who I am talking about - they are the people who have as a fundamental tenet of their party platform the premise that they will look after the interests of the little people, the battlers, the workers, those less able to have their interests represented and considered by those in power. And in return for support from these people to get elected they introduce and enforce one of the most incredibly aggressive, discriminatory, regressive taxes ever invented. And “spin” it to the public as a “safety initiative”. As I said, I don’t buy it.
As for the points component of the penalty system, this government, who would have you believe that it has a “strong stance” on general law and order issues of a criminal nature (such as assault, rape, murder, break and enter etc.), has created the situation where the points penalty for certain offences can now be NINE times what they were when they first came to power. NINE TIMES!!! What they HAVEN’T done is increase the penalties for the previously mentioned criminal offences by anything like that. Another example of “spin” to the public, wrapped up as a safety initiative. And, when you take the time to subject the situation to an impartial, dispassionate analysis, the strategy is found wanting.
What really rubs salt into the wound is that there is no sign of initiative, foresight or vision for the future - it just looks like more of the same. The reality is that there are numerous strategies that could be implemented to address the issue of road trauma, but there seems to be little move to introduce them because, one has to assume, they might actually cost money and could be electorally unpopular.
The most logical strategy is to introduce a system that creates a reasonable probability that the holder of a license can actually drive - because the present system doesn’t!!
My mother was born in 1930, got her license in 1948 and is required to be re-tested in 2015! What a joke! The road and regulatory environment is constantly evolving and there needs to be a system that ensures that possession of a license is a reasonable indicator that the holder has adequate vision, knowledge of the current rules and the requisite motor skills to competently navigate their way around:
1) Vision. The current test is inadequate, conducted in a stationery, standing position, under flourescent light, reading stationery letters, usually reflected in a high-mounted mirror. Hardly a realistic representation of the on-road environment. No tests should be conducted by the RTA. All tests should be conducted by duly authorised optometrists, who would issue a certificate to be presented to the RTA (paper or on-line in the same way as a green slip is managed) attesting that the applicant has passed the “driver sight test”, which would check for night blindness, depth perception, capacity to see in low light / high glare situations, the ability to perceive relative motion etc. A side benefit would be the improvement in the general optical health of the population as regular checking would pick up developing issues earlier, allowing a wider range of treatment options and maintaining higher standards of vision in the general community. BUT!!! To implement this policy would be viewed by the present government as a COST, not an INVESTMENT, and as a consequence probably wouldn’t make it out of the party room before it was euthanased.
2) Knowledge of the current road rules. Quite simply, the rules have changed just a bit between 1948 and now, let alone 2015 when my mother is scheduled to come up for her next test! The reality is that most drivers are fundamentally ignorant of the majority of the detail of the rules as they are today. If you don’t believe me go to the RTA web site, revise the rules on roundabouts and then go to the nearest roundabout!! It’s more like Rafferty’s rules than road rules. The requirement to demonstrate an effective working knowledge of the current road rules should be mandatory every time a license in renewed. The expense wouldn’t be huge, but no doubt such a policy would join it’s “vision” counterpart, dead on the party room floor, a victim of the emotion of COST against the vision of INVESTMENT.
3) Motor skills. The simple requirement to demonstrate that you can drive to the standard of the current driving test each time your license is renewed. (Note I said CURRENT driving test - we would hate to raise the bar in that area for fear the word “advanced” might creep in and normal, sane, rational people might start getting grandiose ideas of their abilities - that would be a disaster!! Of course, one has to suspect that the “anti advanced driving advocates” might have second thoughts about loading their family into a plane piloted by someone who had been trained to such a rudimentary level, but that is a debate for another day).
It is abundantly clear that many drivers lack the most basic skills relating to judging the size of their vehicle and its positioning on the road, the fundamentals of merging, of lane discipline etc. (As another aside, while many of these poor skills and practices regularly result in infringements of the road rules, such infringements are significantly under-represented in the Infringement Notice statistics. The agreed arrangement seems to be “do whatever the hell you like - just don’t speed - or hit anyone - and you won’t be booked”).
There would no doubt be an expense and an inconvenience to people renewing their licenses to implement this strategy, so one would have to expect that it will go the way of the previous two suggestions, but the opportunities and consequential benefits are there for the taking.
Oh, that we should be blessed with politicians and leaders endowed with a modicum of foresight, vision and courage……..!!!!!!!
There are, of course, other strategies that could be adopted by utilising the licensing system to provide an incentive to make a contribution in others areas that would have a net beneficial effect. In reality it could be possible to quickly and easily (relatively) create a NEGATIVE road toll by leveraging the licensing system. Unfortunately people would no doubt continue to die on our roads (as another aside, are the statistics cleansed of suicides? You hear of gassings, hangings, overdoses, jumps, walking in front of trains, etc. Seems funny that you don’t hear of vehicular suicide), but by providing incentives through the licensing system for people to modify their behaviour the overall death rate in the community could be reduced by an amount greater than the road toll.
The opportunities here relate to our absolutely appalling community participation rate as it relates to activities such as blood donation, organ donation and first aid training. Motor vehicle trauma has a direct relationship to all of these areas and the concept of leveraging the license system to improve the participation rates is not exactly rocket science. There are numerous options for operating such a scheme, including the provision of tax incentives, license extensions or straight financial incentives. An unrestricted NSW license is now $45 for one year, $106 for three years and $142 for five years.
The simple example would be to raise the five year price to $1000 and offer a $300 discount for each of evidence of one blood donation per year during the term of the previous license (with an exemption for those unable to donate due to medical or religious beliefs), evidence of registration as an organ donor (with provision for exemption if required) and evidence of holding a current first aid certificate (no exemption offered). Total cost of license - $100.
As the population ages we are seeing a significant increase in the need for blood and organ donations and the opportunity is there to save far more lives than the road toll tragically takes from us – if only we have the courage, vision and foresight to recognise the opportunity, grab it and run with it.
It is easy to criticise the status quo and those responsible for creating and maintaining it. It is far harder to propose alternative concepts to those that you are criticising.
I have levelled criticism in the above passage, but I have taken the time and effort to propose alternative concepts that offer the opportunity to enact meaningful change in an area that is of significant importance to all in our community.
I can only hope that someone, somewhere, in a position to enact meaningful change, is listening, or is at least of like mind.
February 14th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
I believe the heavy penalties are saving lives. I know of many drivers who take great care to comply with speed limits to avoid the penalties both dollar wise and loss of points. Without stiff fines for speeding I don’t doubt for a minute that more drivers would be inclined to ignore speed limits thereby increasing the risk of serious accidents. With the increased speeds of course comes the increased risk of fatal injuries.
Anyone that thinks speed doesn’t cause accidents is kidding themself. Maybe not by itself but it certainly is a major contributing factor.
Things are fine when you are hurtling along at 150kph, until a kangaroo hops out onto the road 5o metres ahead. At 150 you are either going to hit it or like a lot of inexperienced drivers do, roll your car when you swerve to miss it. At 100kph you can brake in a straight line slowing the car enough to do minimal damage or none at all with the roo having time to clear the roadway.
February 14th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
When the offenders are allowed to get off with very light penalties from the judges, and also if you are well known sports person the offence is pardoned by a judge, ie; where a Panthers footy player was let off by a Penrith judge, this man did not have a licence, and was caught driving with out a licence, the judge let him off with out a conviction or fine, I would like to know how judges can do this? how about the insurance? etc; laws are only ment for some not for the lawbreakers, as the judges let them off…
February 14th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
I believe they are just raising revenue recently my wife was booked for stopping in a bus zone to drop my daughter off at school along with 37 other drivers the police car was parked across the road and the officer was just noting done the rego numbers and posted out the fines later the fine was $220
My brother inlaw was caught by a speed camera doing 10 kph over the speed limit the fine was $79 which offence was more dangerous the speeding was but iy only attracts a small fine.
February 14th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Speed in the wrong places can cause accidents but so does lack of attention but try traveling to Canberra from Wollongong most of the traffic is bunched up doing 115 which is the main cause of multiple rear end crashes. There will always be accidents as long as people drive. I am amazed there are so few considering the stupid things some drivers do. Politicians like to be seen to be doing something and speed cameras are cheaper than highway patrols. If they really wand to stop drivers speeding increase registration or sales tax on cars with engines over 1500cc. That will never happen because too many will be put out of work.
Have you noticed how big the car parks at the clubs are - the customers don’t just go there to gamble. Can you imagine NSW government instructing police to check everyone as they drive out.
February 15th, 2008 at 3:59 am
Speeding is a control issue. If people have no self control then the government has to step in to control them for the public’s safety.
But, what are we doing to promote the learning of healthy self control? Speed and red light cameras can be successfully obeyed by those with enough basic awareness and self respect, but many, probably most peole will not be so conscientious about their speed when they think their is no one checking. In fact by imposing only external controls we implicitly teach drivers that they are not required to have self control.
So, education would ideally require learners to build and demonstrate self control. They will only value self control if they understood how they will benefit. A big stick approach has no value in a society that seeks to have all people equally educated and informed so that they can make healthy choices.
Those who refuse education can be refused the privilege of driving. Lets sort out the sheep from the goats at the licencing stage.
February 15th, 2008 at 5:17 am
I do above average driving time on the Pacific Hwy in Nth NSW. Yes Speed is factor in crashes, yes speed cameras work in their immediate vicinty then everyone accelates back to their original speeds? Road conditions are ,well I’m amazed more aren’t hurt, the Pacific Highway is just a death trap for the unwary. But one thing constantly amazes me is the in attention drivers give the road, you see people arguing, picking their nose etc some are just in lala land (ask any truckie on this route) Everyone keeps blaming everything else but keep omitting Driver education. Why cant we have a compulsary course and then say graded levels. To become a motorcyclist, they need to do specialised driving course and then they can do advanced defensive driving levels, you become so much more aware of what is happening around you. Aggression on the roads is rising, lack of courtesy to straight out rudeness, all needless. If you want to lower speeding, leave the Hwy patrols out there on the roads. Driver education is the big one, the EU drive considerably faster than we do on the open roads, they are also educated drivers and have less deaths per population they we do, their roads and assoc. conditions are a factor but at least they all move out of the fast lane after overtaking.
February 15th, 2008 at 8:21 am
Fines don’t work. My son owes nearly $ 4000 in fines for various driving offences. he still drives the same way. He has lost it one five occassions. As he is paying the fines off at $50 per week, he doesn’t care.
Rather than blame solely just the driver, let’s look at the poor infrastructure due to poor forward planning. How often have we seen a road built, only to suffer two years later when they decide it needs widening.
Also, let’s train our young drivers to drive, not just to pass the exam.
On a properly built road, a properly trained driver, speed is no longer a factor. Having driven in Germany, on the autobahns, i can speak from first hand experience. There the drivers overtake & get back over, leaving the overtaking lane for those drivers that want to do 250kmh.
February 15th, 2008 at 8:31 am
Alright, Personally, as a recent Green to Black licenced driver, I copped alot of the flack as a P-Plater through my time, I was on my P’s when all the new laws and all that business came out.. I have to say, yes I speed on occasion, as do alot of other drivers out there.. (Honestly I see more ‘full licence’ drivers doing stupid things than P-Platers; I guess people think as soon as they are on a ‘full licence’ their driving skills boost majorly…)
The thing that controlled me the most, was the risk of losing my vehicle to either the police or a telegraph pole, and losing friends in the mean time.. The fines and points were lower on the “scare” scale..
But I don’t think heavy fines, increased points, and all that stuff would be as effective of reducing the road toll as DRIVER EDUCATION..
Ok, I know I’m not the greatest driver in the world, or may not have as much “experience” as someone with 25years behind them.. But I know that, if I were to do an advanced driving course, in alot of different situations I know I could prevail over someone with 25-30 years of “experience”..
What do you refer to as the better kind of “experience” though? Driving at a normal pace amongst cars for 30 years? Or being able to avoid hazards, knowing the limits of your vehicle and being able to control it in different situations?
I think a mandatory driving course or something for new drivers would be the best way to go at reducing road tolls and stuff.. Leave the fines as are, because I know that works to scare people.. But more ‘advanced’ driving experience at the Licencing stage would do a great deal (Instead of the stupid amount of 120 hours!!)
February 15th, 2008 at 9:13 am
I agree that we need something to deter drivers from driving too fast in certain areas. Sometimes the road is not suitable for excessive speeds or a unforeseen curve ahead.
The amount of money the NSW government collects from around schools should be put back into those schools. If a school area is pulling in large amounts of money, obvioulsy drivers are speeding in those areas. Police should be there in those areas to deter them more.
Don’t just say - it’s OK cause there is a camera there to deter. The Government don’t want the police there as an extra deterent becasue they are pulling in the dollars. When will the Pollies get off their butts and protect the children??
An area pulling in money from RTA cameras should have bollards and traffic signals there to allow the kids to cross safely.
Too much money is already given to private schools who have a third of the states schoolkids but, get two thirds of the state’s education funds.
The teachers federation has been trying to publicly advertise this and get people to lobby their local ministers about this for years.
Again the pollies making sure their kids get the best education and funding for it.
Wake up people, speeding is a problem but , in areas known for cameras and good revenue is comming from them, police should be there as well to deter drivers from speeding , not just the government pulling in the dollars and allocating it back to private schools where the pollies kids go.
here’s proof
http://www.nswtf.org.au/media/latest_2008/20080212_review.html
February 15th, 2008 at 9:27 am
THEY ARE NOT SPEED CAMERAS JUST CASH CAMERAS
February 15th, 2008 at 9:27 am
Whilst the reduction in deaths on our roads is both pleasing and necessary I think the actual traffic infringement process is over used and in many cases not capturing the motorists who cause the problems. At a recent discussion between friends we noted that many had swapped infringements to a family member or friend who had a clean record. The is because the camera approach does not identify the actual driver and leaves the system open to systematic abuse. Noote this is not just the average Australian driver, but as certain high profile cases have identified is a practise undertaken by many even in the judiciary!
I had my license cancelled because I could not identify a driver even though the offence happened whilst I was under hospital treatment. When I finally received the fine, no-one could identify who the driver was, although some volunteered to reeive it and take the points. It was a large number of points as it occured during a double demerit period. I however felt I could not sign an Affidavit stating someone was driving when I could not be sure of this. I could show it wasn’t me, but this isn’t good enough under the legislation.
There is no doubt that the fines issuing process has grown dramatically with the impoition of camera detected offences and it would seem that there is a fault in this process that the government does not wish to address, or cannot address, without the loss of significant revenue streams.
February 15th, 2008 at 9:29 am
The next time you get pulled over by one of our state’s finest for driving your vehicle, albeit with the greatest of care and attention but none-the-less over our ridiculously over-policed and archaic speed limits, just ask yourself while your waiting to receive your “infringement notice” for a couple of hundred bucks, wouldn’t it be great if the next time your house got burgled and all your prize posessions stolen by some drug addicted loser, that… maybe, just maybe, our police force and politicians would give a damn? Would that be too much to ask or are the motorists of NSW the only criminals worth persuing?
And BTW - A message to Graham about his comments above. Please let everyone else know how it is possible to brake from 100kph and avoid a hitting an object 50 meters in front you without swerving! Pyshics would suggest that this is impossible, however if you know how to do this, please share as this knowledge would undoubtly save many lives.
February 15th, 2008 at 9:55 am
Speed Cameras are a revenue raising cash cow !
More police cars on the road would have more of an impact as they can patrol through the suburbs, catching thieves, vandals, hooligans and yes the person speeding that normally would have slowed down for the fixed roadside speed camera. Roadside speed cameras only catch out the unwary local or the out-of-area passer by !!
Even the most diligent driver eg: Kathy (above) can get distracted for enough time to slip over the threshold & get booked - a moments lack of concentration, a push of the radio or CD control, a child in the back screaming or crying, a passenger asking your opinion on a current news item etc etc etc. Combine that with too many signs on the roadside, a late night or a hard day at the office or on the tools, and it will happen. Don’t preach to us that we shouldn’t speed, or whinge when we get caught - a good percentage of us don’t mean it !! Driver education is probably the biggest cause of accidents, however without police on the roads this cannot be addressed. It is easier for the RTA/DOT etc to spread propaganda on speeding and setup (mostly hidden) speed cameras.
Oh and for the record, I have been driving for 25+ years and had not been booked for speeding for the at least the last 15+ years, until about 4 months ago. Without going into all the nitty gritty, I don’t believe my speeding fine was justified due to road conditions, circumstances etc.
Also like what Chris Eddy has said regarding driving courses for drivers. I have completed many driving courses as well as engaging in more than one form of motorsport over the last 15 years. My 18 year old son is locked in to do his defensive driving course very soon - a must for all new and many existing drivers. There are plenty of accident drivers waiting to happen out there……..
February 15th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Interesting article from the UK only 15% of accidents in UK caused by speed? read on
Failure to pay attention main road crash cause
Rebecca Smithers, consumer affairs correspondent The Guardian, Friday September 29 2006
This article appeared in the Guardian on Friday September 29 2006 on p6 of the National news section. It was last updated at 12:43 on September 29 2006.
Drivers’ failure to pay attention, rather than speed, is now the main cause of road accidents, according to government figures published yesterday.
Motoring groups campaigning against speed cameras urged the government to shift the emphasis of safety campaigns from speed to drivers’ concentration and avoidance of distractions such as phones, music and satellite navigation systems.
For the first time the accident statistics include contributory factors, and failure to look properly was the one most frequently reported, in 32% of cases last year, the Department for Transport (DfT) reported.
Overall, deaths and injuries on Britain’s roads continued to fall, with 3,201 people killed on the roads last year - 1% down on 2004. The number of people seriously injured fell 7% to 28,954. Total casualties - deaths, serious and slight injuries - were down 3% to 271,017. There was also a significant reduction in the casualty rate for children, with 141 killed on the roads in 2005 - 25 fewer than in the previous year.
The DfT figures are based on accidents at which a police officer attended - estimated to be 80% of the total last year.
Exceeding the speed limit or going too fast for the conditions was said to be a contributory factor in 15% of all accidents and 26% of fatal accidents. Eight times more male than female drivers or riders involved in accidents were said to be speeding. Exceeding the speed limit was the sole factor in 5% of all accidents and 12% of fatal accidents last year.
The RAC Foundation expressed concern that, despite last year’s small decrease, the fall in road deaths had “plateaued out” over the past few years. Edmund King, executive director of the foundation, said: “For a number of years we have been arguing that we need to know more about the causes of crashes so that they can be addressed.
“Cars have become ’second homes’ for drivers, kitted out with the latest mod cons which also present considerable distractions. These figures suggest that all drivers need to concentrate more on the road ahead rather than on their phones, passengers, music, food, drinks, navigation systems, or countryside clutter of signs. We need to get drivers to take more responsibility for their actions.”
Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, said: “This report shows that we have to re-emphasise the need to continue with the overall campaign against speed. It is not just about cameras - we have to continue with engineering measures, traffic calming, advertising and speed awareness courses. Manufacturers need to do more to make it easier for drivers to see what speed their vehicle is doing.”
Some statisticians point out that the DfT figures are based on police reports, not those from hospitals, so could underestimate the casualty rate.
Shadow transport secretary Chris Grayling said: “The government should start taking proper action to deal with the problem, and stop sheltering behind statistics about which there are very real concerns.”
February 15th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Education is a key factor - Learn time management!!
Also, I believe teh next round of anti-speeding ads should focus on the theme “It’s a LIMIT not the compulsory speed” Teach our drivers it’s OK to do 100 in the LEFT LANE on a freeway.
Why not use the ‘Power to Weight’ ratio licence restrictions for cars like they do for bikes? Too much power in basic sedans for inexperienced (and some older) drivers who don’t know how to handle it - especially in an emergency.
As for fines, rich people or louts that organise to pay $4000 off in $50 bits (See Brian’s the story above) don’t care. Try more of the vehicle confiscation idea.
12 SPEEDING points in 2 years - Loose your car
30k over any limit - Loose your car
Driving without a licence - Loose your car
Over point 1.0 breath test - Loose your car
You could make the confiscation for a 3 or 6 month period - second offence - squash it or auction with money to the hospital system.
I know it is very easy to drift over the limit on a good road so I have cruise control to help me. I even use it around town so I can concentrate on what is going on around me and not get caught up in the rush.
As for those judges and celebrities that get off because they volunteer to do community work - one rule for all. (Side note on th ejudge that gave a dead womans name as driving his car - no memory lapse alowed in his position SACKHIM and take his car - even if it is registered in his wife’s name!!!)
February 15th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Perhaps anyone that has not had a speeding ticket does not have the confidence to drive their car competently and should have their licence withdrawn immediately…….and not reinstated until they pass an exhaustive defensive driving course?
If you haven’t completed a defensive driving course (at the mimiumum) you should not have an opinion.
Poulation density will cause congestion on the raods - this will automatically reduce the road toll so the stats are not very real.
February 15th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Speed cameras on the major freeways etc. do not detect P platers exceeding their limit but belo 110neither do they detect heavy vehicles exceeding 100 but less than 110.
Who is most at risk of speeding? P platers we are told. What vehicle would be the most dangerous when speeding? Do I need to say.
February 15th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
People are going to continue dying on our roads when we have a an organisation such as the RTA promoting a drive to a rule book mentality. I personally believe the RTA is an accomplice to mass manslaughter.
People are not taught anything about car dynamics, handling or what will happen when it goes pearshaped. Hey, they are not even taught to put on the brakes after an accident!
We should be promoting proactive driving NOT reactive driving!
Stop wasting our taxpayers money and build better roads and while we are at it stop dropping to the lowest common denominator (in other words lets raise the average driving standard) and make it compulsory for everyone to do a car control / advanced driving course. Next we need a highway / freeway standard. Why not? We have standards for everything else! Min 100kmh - max 130 kmh for drivers with more than (say) 10 years experience.
Introduce log books for all drivers so that you have to get a stamp at service stations (ok, so this is not a perfect solution) and those not clocking up a required number of kilometres a year - they get retested. The points are changed to also reflect this - people who drive 50,000 km a year get more points - people who drive 1000km a year get less! Why? I know people who have a “gold” license and NEVER drive - no exposure to the road means they will never loose any points!
Stop parents from training their youngsters for driving - unless they pass a more advanced driving test. Why? I see many people who are obviously themselves not a good driver and then they teach their kids - what? How to be a bad driver!
Speed limits to be enforced within say 10%, many many road incidents occur due to slower drivers. It is not unusual on the mid north caost to see people on a highway that is 100kmh doing 60 or 70 and in one extreme 40kmh! If these people cannot or will not stop being a mobile traffic jam they must be removed from our raods or forced to pullover at points to allow traffic to move on (this normally never occurs).
School zones - are purely a revenue earning exercise as most schools do not offload onto main roads. If they do - it should be changed not the raod. A highway must not have a school zone on it as highways should be treated as a national resource - see standards above!
Overtaking, I see a lot of near disasters occuring due to people overtaking and not gaining significant speed differential - in other words they go past at no more than 100kmh which is absolutely crazy! The law should allow for a (say) 25% increase in allowable speed for overtaking. Less time on the other side of the road means safer! (Then again if we had dual carriage roads it would not be necessary!) - I could go on (and on)
February 15th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
I live in regional NSW and I offer a different viewpoint, simply based on geography. Interestingly, I have the Pacific Highway almost at my front door and I can see no evidence that heavy fines are a deterent to speeding. We have upward of 250 b-double heavy vehicles on most nights travel past and almost all of them exceed our 50 k.p.h. speed limit. This happens nearly every night and police do not monitor the speed limit in our area. We have been told by the RTA that it would be too dangerous to place a pedestrian crossing across the highway, albeit in a 50 k.p.h. urban zone, and it doesn’t take Einstein to work out why it would be dangerous. Imagining a pedestrian being hit by a heavy vehicle travelling at 80 to 100 k.p.h is terrifying. I have to agree with the notion that our ‘p-platers’ are definitely not competent drivers. Multiple choice answers for the test to gain a learners permit and no limit to the number of times one can take the test ??- the RTA have to be joking! What do they honestly expect the outcome to be? At best, it could only validate that a “p-plater’ can operate the machinations of a motor vehicle sufficiently to gain driving experience but certainly not that they are able to drive a vehicle COMPETENTLY. That requires experience driving on all sorts of roads in all sorts of conditions. Perhaps the RTA could advise our new drivers that their license means that are able to use the controls on a vehicle sufficiently to gain further experience in order to become competent. One can only hope!!
February 15th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
no heavey fines and especially double demerit points do not save lives as the statistic’s prove that only 9% of road fatalities are speed related!
what saves lives is defencive driver training as has been such a huge success in NSW with the compulsory pre licence motorcycle rider training.
E.G 1989 203 deaths 1994 24 deaths.
rider training was introduced in 1990.
February 16th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Sadly we are all paying to many fines however my only fine in 20 years was because I drove to slowly through as traffic light there it stands to reason, drive at a safe speed, drive fairly, obey the laws and guess what, you won’t get fined so stop whinging you mob and drive within the rules and guess what, hmmmm, no more traffic fines..THINK ABOUT IT
February 17th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Some people’s logic here is way off but that’s another matter.
Great idea Dan. If an area is particularly problematic, why isn’t police presence increased? If the powers that be were serious about saving lives then this is exactly what they would do - put police where there is a serious problem and fix it.
Obviously they aren’t serious about saving lives - parking fines are the perfect example.
February 17th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Having driven on NSW roads for more than forty years I belive I am qualified to make a statement (speeding is the only offence I have ever been fined for).
I believe that better roads and more importantly better cars are responsible for the reduced road toll.
The method used to change driver’s attitude to driving under the influence of alcohol was a special case of a draconian way but it also worked and would have helped reduced the toll.
I doubt that the government could do the same with exceeding our ridiculous speed limits. Why have cars on the road which can readily exceed 200kph when the maximum is 110kph. More importantly, why allow young drivers to own or drive them.
February 17th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
There has been a tendency for the media and others to denegrate the authorities for penaties imposed for traffic offences. This is deplorable. I would suggest that current penalties be increased 10 fold to well over $2,000 for the most minor offence and driving licenses cancelled as well for many years, not a few months. What is the alternative to these reckless person’s behaviour, who are out to flout the law - which they consider to be an ‘ass’. Would these intelligent critics consider minor offenders spending a many months behind bars for these offences? Australian, generally do not consider that the law in any respect is to be followed, but to be flouted irrespective of whether such actions will murder a fellow human being in their path.
February 18th, 2008 at 8:55 am
“P” PLATES, SIGN OF AN INEXPERIENCED DRIVER OR A TARGET FOR THE REVENUE RAISER. Too many “P” Plate Drivers lose their Licences for not displaying a “P” Plate. This apparently is a major offence. P’s could be displayed inside the vehicle, but that meant they were safe from falling off or being removed by other drivers. At 1 point and $179 per plate, a lot of revenue was lost by dispaying plates in in this manner. Make it mandatory to display “P” plates on the outside,that will raise a lot more money.
Most roads in NSW are governed by 80kph speed limits or less and every driver, regardless of their Licence classification, must obey these speed limits. If a driver does not exceed these limits but is unfortunate enough to lose a “P” plate, surely a warning is sufficient. The “P” system was introduced to enable drivers gain experience, instead it is used to raise revenue.
It doesn’t matter if plates are stolen from your car or if the road conditions or bad weather cause them to fall off. No excuse is tolerated. Lose your Licence for 3 to 6 months, what driving experience do you gain? Nothing, you go back on the Road worse off, because you couldn’t keep “P” plates on your car.
Do something positive for road safety, change this stupid regulation. Allow plates to be placed inside the vehicle where they can’t be tampered with. To gain experience, drivers have to be able to drive.
If “P” Drivers do Lose their Licence through stupidity, don’t take them off the road, do something sensible, put them back on “L” Plates. They can then learn the error of their ways, and still gain experience to make them better more responsible drivers.
February 19th, 2008 at 7:04 am
Hefty fines will not save lives!
A better deterrent for speeding motorists would be loss of license and use of motor vehicle.
February 24th, 2008 at 8:38 am
From the years that I have been involved with safety in industry, I have all ways noted the lack of training for the drivers of vehicles. For apprentices their training commences on the least expensive machines and, are taught how to be safe with the machine during operation. This must apply to the road machine operators (vehicles). Learning some basic knowledge on traction, center of gravity and towing trailers. Their has to be a type of institute for the learning in road vehicle operations. This not to prevent people in obtaining a license but, to obtain a safer manner for individuals who either driver in the cities or out on the country roads. Forcing people to pay fines does not improve knowledge, it only improves the revenue for the Government.
March 12th, 2008 at 12:31 am
Awareness of ones surroundings (defensive driving) is one of the keys to safe driving. Constant attention to monitoring and maintaining a precise speed diverts precious and necessary attention (as do mobile phones) from the difficult and more important task of monitoring and adapting to the external conditions.
Research repeatedly shows that far superior safety outcomes are achieved in circumstances of uniform relative speed, over enforcement of a precise absolute speed.
I frequently see drivers desperately standing on their brakes to slow from 70km/h to 40km/h on major arterial roads, frequently nearly causing numerous collisions, as they enter a school zone, with not a child in sight! It’s nonsense!
May 9th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Having been fined twice within days for travelling at 62 k/h on Cleveland Street near Anzac Pde at 11pm, I’d love some feedback or advice from members about how to respond (in court) to what is obviously a ‘trap’ - a 50k/hr section on a main arterial road when all roads nearby (including tiny local streets) have 60 or above! Do I have any chance of beating this in court? There’s nothing dangerous about this speed at this time of day/night (and in truth, in daylight it’s impossible to go that fast as the street is a parking lot!)
The fine is tiny ($79) in each case but I can’t afford 2 x 3 points!
Does NRMA have a legal advice dept still? I can’t get through by phone and the website is a maze
June 9th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Hi Geoff,
I found this (http://trafficlaw.com.au/speeding.fines.html) which might be useful:
Q. I just received 7 speed camera fines in the mail, including 4 on a single day, with a total of 13 demerit points. What can I do?
There are several options. You can write to the Traffic Camera Office and ask for all but one fine to be withdrawn on the basis that if you had received the first fine promptly and before the others, you would not have reoffended. This might be the case if the offences were committed on the same day or over a period of a week or two. The PRB (Penalty Review Board) has guidelines for this and they are able to make you pay the most serious fine and withdraw the others. Writing to the PRB also has its downside if you later decide to take your case to court, so you may want to get legal assistance and advice if you want to protect all your rights. Another option is to lodge an objection to each of the fines and use various strategies to get rid of them, or win them, via the court system.
August 5th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
RE: Geoff Sirmai Says: May 9th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Geoff, I also have been caught out at the same spot on Cleveland Street near Anzac Pde at 60kl, I was not aware this was a 50klm zone, does anyone know how I can find out when this speed limit zone changed? Any advice on how best I could fight this would be great, I thought the speed limit was 60klm other than school times. I have elected to go to court. What is also amusing is not more than 100m up the rd on Anzac pde the speed limit changes 4 times in the space of less than 500m.
Having been fined twice within days for travelling at 62 k/h on Cleveland Street near Anzac Pde at 11pm, I’d love some feedback or advice from members about how to respond (in court) to what is obviously a ‘trap’ - a 50k/hr section on a main arterial road when all roads nearby (including tiny local streets) have 60 or above! Do I have any chance of beating this in court? There’s nothing dangerous about this speed at this time of day/night (and in truth, in daylight it’s impossible to go that fast as the street is a parking lot!)
The fine is tiny ($79) in each case but I can’t afford 2 x 3 points!
Does NRMA have a legal advice dept still?
September 22nd, 2008 at 6:14 pm
The public must have the right to know at what speed the camera is triggering, and only an institution like the NRMA can take the RTA to a Court of Law to force the publication of the figure.
People being fined for 3 K/h over the limit is unethical. It must be considered:
1.- The error in the measuring devices (both the camera and the car) ,and
2.- the difficulties in controlling the speed, unless the vehicle is driven (say) 10 km under the speed limit.
Studies in the USA shows that raising the speed limit (that some states actually have done) has, in fact, lowered the rate of fatalities.
The reader may refer to the website:
http://www.roadsense.com.au/latest.html
To make my position clear for sake of contributing, in goof faith, the law should be as hard as possible with drivers breaching the limit for more that 30 km/h, but no points, or just one point should be deducted for driving up to 14 km/h over the limit.
When people that have been driving for many years (sometimes over 30) has lost half their license to just two fines for exceeding the limit for three Km/h on dubiously marked 50 Km/h zones, we have a clear indication that the system is unfair.
November 8th, 2008 at 8:37 am
RE: Geoff Sirmai Says: May 9th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Would you mind letting us know how you went?
I have been caught at the same spot doing 63km. Who would have thought that that strip of Cleveland Street is 50Km/h.
Anzac Pde joined to that part of Cleveland Street is 70km/h and further that part of the street is not even residential. Why is it 50km and where are the signs?
Any ideas?
November 17th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
I’ve been photographed twice in the same day at the Cleveland St, Moore Park ‘trap’.
Try as I have, I couldn’t find any other 40/50 zones (school times / off times) on a main arterial road like Cleveland St.
Even in heavily built-up areas (with parking & high pedestrian crossing) like Ashfields Liverpool St, it’s a 60 zone out of school hours.