How the NSW RTA Manages Your Life - A Lesson in Just How Lost They Really Are

So, all those wonderful government public servants raking in big dollars and telling YOU how you should drive. How you don't have any right to earn a living holding a drivers licence.

Well, it's time you knew how these people make decisions that affect your every day life.

I refer you to the Staysafe Committee website which can be found under committees at www.parliamant.nsw.gov.au - just so happens there's an enquiry on the management of road safety and you can have a say.

I'll concentrate on one example to show you how bad things are. The NSW RTA says it uses statistics to determine black spot locations and conveniently make decisions on where to place things like speeding countermeasures. But here's a bit of info: since 1994 the RTA has blown out the lag times for studying crash statistics from a then standard 6 months, to a staggering 25 months in 1998 (oh, that would be 4+ years) and 21 months in 2002. The only reason they got the reports out for 2002 was that Staysafe asked them about it and in particular Paul Gibson asked the following of Mr Forward (Snr Road Safety entity at RTA):

Mr Gibson:
How do you know where the blackspots are if you are three (or more) years behind?

Mr Forward:
...our local people are on top of the issues in terms of accidents.

Mr Gibson:
How can you...plan to achieve the best results in road safety if your statistics are three years behind?

Mr Forward:
...We do not need the statistics to plan for the future.


Why then do these statistics seem to magically appear in a timely fashion when they want to deploy 80 more fixed speed cameras (circa 2003 when in fact their only available completed statistical report was pre-2001)?

And to make you realise just how bad things are the RTA has STOPPED making road safety statistical reports publically available. To humiliate these people and highlight just how poor this is the Staysafe Committee has had to take the reports and publish them under the Parliament Reporting system as reports of the Staysafe Committee in order to make them public.

These people are responsible for our safety. Our livelihoods. Our families and friends. Ask yourself what they have to hide.

The only things we see from these people are the crack pot punitive increases in fines and demerit points dreamed up by their closed shop and their crony allies such as Harold Scruby. Ask why The Pedestrian Council (a fancy title for a front of one single person) has more say in Road safety policy than motorists.

Please, if you are going to do something, take a day off AFF and spend that time writing a submission on what you think of Road Safety management in NSW. You can find the submission details at http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/pro...19038A#Reports - they close end of May 2005.

AP says get to it!

if i was to only post up the letter i recieved back from liverpool council as to why they should not pay for a tyre after i hit one of the 50 pot holes on the main road in our area!

I can understand everything with that, the world we live in has certainly degraded! there is no more quality of life, can any one say that over the last month every day was a happy one?

Whats the point of an enquiry if you know the outcome of it anyway. we all know the RTA and NSW government are out to make a quick dollar off motorists, it is a boys club so Mr Carr and Scully can live a rich retirement, they dont care about the State of NSW just there back pockets.

As for speed cameras the only reason they are in existance is to make money. how many other things like dodgey roads are the cause of crashes and lack of education.

Get ****ed NSW

no point wasting our breath this has been said for years on end, LoL Vote so you are heared!!! ROFL yeah right

[MrSparkle]

My submission is underway. I will not accept no response to it!

Don't complain. Jusat get constructive and write those submissions. On this one the Staysafe Committee is on our side. They cannot believe the disgrace we called the demerit points review because like me they can't understand how all the fines/points went UP!

Trust me, this is one worth putting effort into. We gotta get rid of the closed shop of cronies running the state system.

[DRU842]

http://www.just-auto.com/news_detail...t=47765&dm=yes

UK: Government fails to ban speed camera detectors
13 Apr 2005
Source: Press Release.

The UK Government has failed to ban the devices that allow a motorist to know the location of mobile speed cameras and hand held police laser guns. The proposed new legislation failed because Parliament could not agree on the ban and the Government ran out of time to make a decision before the election.

The supplier of one of the best selling speed camera spotters, the Quintezz XT7000 Plus, has announced they will now increase production to meet demand now the law has failed. Mark Cornwall of www.carparts-direct.co.uk the UK supplier of the Quintezz said, “This is brilliant news - the Government’s failure means motorists will now have a legal defence against the greedy hidden mobile speed cameras and laser guns that are everywhere across the UK - this is great news for us and great news for our customers.”

The company supplying the Quintezz offers a guarantee that if the user receives a speeding ticket while their unit is fitted, the driver is paid £60 cash-back. The unit, which costs, £199 is designed to spot both Gatso and mobile laser speed traps.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign said that 290 drivers were caught by cameras in 1992 against a massive 3.6 million drivers last year. Plans to activate still more cameras will likely see those numbers rise.

A spokesman for the Department of Transport when asked about the Government’s failure to impose the Radar Detection ban said: “We have not failed, we just ran out of time.”

The news comes in the week of the controversial announcement that speed cameras are to be activated on a heavily used stretch of England’s West-East M4 motorway.

The Association of British Drivers pointed out that the use of speed camera vans on the M4 is a clear demonstration of how spurious safety arguments are used as an excuse to raise money.

"Camera partnerships are locally based organisations," said ABD spokesman Nigel Humphries. "So if they catch too many local people on local roads, they lose the support of their constituents. A motorway is one great big gravy train for them, full of people who don't live in their area, who they can rip off without fear of any local political fallout. It's taxation without representation."

As usual, the ABD said, Wiltshire camera partnership [M4 section] justify their actions by simply quoting the number of accidents that have occurred in a three year period.

But they make no attempt to explain why these accidents happened, or to demonstrate why slowing people from 85 to 75mph will make any difference, the ABD added.

"In fact, if you ask camera partnerships to release details of what caused the accidents that they are using to justify cameras, they won't tell you", continues Humphries. "How can keeping the causes of accidents a secret be consistent with an organisation that’s supposed to be about improving safety?"

On a motorway, this scam is more obvious than elsewhere, says the ABD, claiming that ‘anyone can see that accidents on motorways are caused by inattention, tailgating and changing lanes without looking. The more serious ones are caused by the bored and inattentive drivers of speed limited trucks and coaches ploughing into the back of stationary traffic.’

As the RAC foundation said, speed cameras are "irrelevant" to these accidents - in fact they make them worse by making drivers switch their cruise controls on and their brains off.

"This pattern of lying about the true causes of accidents to justify cameras is well established, and that's why road deaths are increasing in Britain rather than falling as the camera apologists predicted," concludes Humphries. "They work this scam on all roads, but the simplicity of a motorway makes it easier to expose. Camera partnerships have got a built-in financial incentive to indulge themselves in pointless speed enforcement to the detriment of safe, attentive driving, and that's why they should be abolished immediately."