North Sydney and 4wds - get the facts right.

Submitted: Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 18:58
ThreadID: 20476 Views:1608 Replies:6 FollowUps:0
This Thread has been Archived
Has any one actually read the proposal that was passed?

go to http://www.northsydney.nsw.gov.au/asset/1/upload/EPS057.pdf

3 page pdf file.

The fee is based upon the fuel consumption and environmental greenhouse rating.

If you have a vehicle that has poor fuel consumption, no matter whether it is a larger 4wd or a V8 sedan, you pay more.

List of figures at http://www.greenvehicleguide.gov.au which is quoted in the document.

If it has a lower fuel consumption like a suzuki, you pay less.

If some one has a hybrid 4wd (interesting idea!), you are on the lowest scale.

Go and read the facts, and not get stirred up by the press who are trying to make ratings (and money) out of this.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Member - Moggs - Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 19:16

Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 19:16
well said old-plodder. I have had a look at a few 4wd forums today and everyone is carrying on a bit IMHO. I also read the proposal and thought it sounded reasonable and was not a '4wd' issue. Maybe if those on the 4wd forums directed their energy towards pro-active ways to oppose things that peeve them rather than preaching to the converted (which if you are on a 4wd forum you will no doubt be a 4wd supporter) then the perception of the general public might improve.

I am not having a go at anyone, it just amuses me that people go off at Harold Scrubby for being 'ill-informed' and all I have seen today is ranting by ill-infomed people.

I don't think the anti-4wd movement will ever amount to anything and believe we as a group are playing right into their hands by the way we rant on boards like this and others.
AnswerID: 98530

Reply By: Bonz (Vic) - Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 19:32

Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 19:32
We dont want the facts to cloud a good whinge mate, John Laws waffled in objection to the proposal this morning too
.
Time is an illusion produced by the passage of history
.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message
Moderator

AnswerID: 98533

Reply By: Member - Jack - Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 20:34

Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 20:34
You are spot on plodder .. have been listening with interest to the interviews today and the papers have it all wrong.

But in the end it is just a revenue gatherer ... if they wer serious about the pollution they would find some way of restricting vehicles into North Sydney (don't ask me how ...). But it is easier to just nail the locals with another tax.

I hope when we become a republic that they abolish this costly, useless and absolutely unnecessary arm of government, and the amateurs involved with it.

Jack
The hurrieder I go, the behinder I get. (Lewis Carroll-Alice In Wonderland)

Member
My Profile  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 98544

Reply By: Lyds - Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 22:04

Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 22:04
the problem is that all references/polls etc by the media are all about 4WDs.

how non-sensical is it to put a levy on parking when there is nothing to stop you driving around the streets all day.

If they were serious about reducing you'd think they'd be encouraging larger vehicles to park! they ain't polluting while they're not running.

AnswerID: 98569

Reply By: Member -Dodger - Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 22:34

Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 22:34
Seems to me to just be a money junket for the council.
The poor unfortunate people who have an older less fuel efficient vehicle and cannot afford a modern whiz bang job will get it in the neck again.
However the media like to have a go at 4wd vehicles and bung it on.
Would it not be more in the interest of the enviroment to reduce the cost of fuel efficient vehicles via tax relief or some such to help all change to newer more efficient vehicles 2wd or 4wd.
I used to have a handle on life, but it broke.

Cheers Dodg.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  Send Message

AnswerID: 98579

Reply By: Member - Smocky (NSW) - Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 23:57

Tuesday, Feb 15, 2005 at 23:57
A fair point you raise old-plodder.

Perception is more important than reality though, and if you asked 100 people about Nth Sydney's new rule, they'll say it's to get 4wd's. Sadly, if you ask 100 politions, I reckon you get a similar % saying the same thing. The front page of the Tele said "It's war on 4wd's"

I did some digging on the links you kindly provided. An interesting thing was that in NSL councils own proposal, they have listed the 6 cylinder Commodore's as MEDIUM and the Jeep Grand Cherokee as HIGH. I checked the Green Vehicle Guide and the Jeep (Diesel) has a BETTER rating than the Commodore for greenhouse rating AND fuel consumption.

This illustrates the problem. Even the recommendation shows that the author had a pre-conceived idea that "4WD's" are the problem. So facts in this situation unfortunately counted for very little. The proposal also doesn't identify what the threshholds are so it's difficult to check on much else.

I don't think we should be complacent and say it will never happen, as you probably all thought they would never ban smoking from pretty much everywhere either. HOWEVER, I agree with you that we shouldn't all be running around saying that the sky is falling either.

Hopefully it will settle down for a while and the people that can influence the decision will have a chance to make their plans.

Kind regards,

Jason.
AnswerID: 98588

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (14)