The new fix....... QLD

Submitted: Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:06
ThreadID: 31064 Views:2581 Replies:14 FollowUps:16
This Thread has been Archived
I'm sure most Queenslanders seen the news on how we fix the road safety probelm and reduce the road accidents.
More speed cameras and double points.... that will fix it. No extra driver adjucation for young people no compulsory defensive driving courses.....nothing smart like that. More points and more fines.
I realy thought our Peter was a bit smarter than that.....just as thick as the rest of them........
Very sad news

Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Scoey - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:13

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:13
Very sad news mate! I heard a clip that we might be getting some kind of incentive to reward good driving, but other than the highlights package never heard anything about that again!

Does anyone know of that being used anywehere else? Say if you don't lose any points or get any fines for a year you get a small reduction on your rego or some similar incentive?? Did it work? I'm just curious - I mean insurance companies use the rating system, why not Govt with fines etc? Oh yeah, less revenue! HA! What WAS I thinking! ;-)

AnswerID: 156626

Follow Up By: Member - Reiner G (QLD) 4124 - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:24

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:24
In Germany in the 70's we used to be able to earn points back by doing defensive driving courses. a 8hr course gave you 1 point back.
Smart, why we don't do thigs like that I really don't understand.
Its all to hard I think........much easier playing Robo-cop and collect your money.

FollowupID: 410705

Follow Up By: Scoey - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:32

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:32
Sounds like a top idea! I'm gonna go off track for a minute but stick with me - Isn't the most basic theory when training anything that you will get far better results rewarding good behaviour than you do punishing bad behaviour? Unfortunatley you'll never convince our Pollies that an idea that costs money is better than an idea that makes money. It's all dollars and cents and no common sense!
FollowupID: 410706

Follow Up By: Mad Dog (Australia) - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:57

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:57
There is a new scheme in Vic where drivers license renewal is reduced by a pittance if you're a good boy for a number of years, not sure of the exact details, one thing for sure is that because the amount is so small and one has to wait years to receive any benefit it doesn't alter driving habits.
FollowupID: 410710

Follow Up By: Member - Blue (VIC) - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 17:19

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 17:19
Ray, I think it was along the lines of 10% off for no fines when you renew your license... In 10 years, when I renew my license that will be about $12 off(at todays rates)... Probably buy me a litre of petrol in 10 years...
FollowupID: 410788

Reply By: Rigor - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:19

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:19
Yes Reiner (spelt correctly this time) I thought exactly the same when I saw it on the news last night. Any mug can be punitive but we pay our pollies to be a bit creative I thought ! Wrong again . The way I see it the problem revolves around the general attitude of people these days , is my generation of parents to blame for raising rsole kids or am I simply more sensitive to an issue that always existed?

I want a package and retirement.

Dave L.
AnswerID: 156630

Follow Up By: Scoey - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:36

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:36
There definately is an attitude problem out there. I'm curious though, do you (I mean everyone! ;-)) think that the proposal mentioned above is the result of the "attitude" or the attitude is the result of the system that's been governing us now for so long? Maybe neither and maybe I'm dribbling bleep but it makes me wonder!

FollowupID: 410707

Follow Up By: Pajman Pete (SA) - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 13:51

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 13:51
I was talking to a parent at a gathering the other day. She has a 6 year old who is autistic. He was fine, but her 3 year old was tearing around causing havoc. One of the other parents asked if she was autistic too. Mums reply:

"No, she just needs a belting!"

Some of them still understand the program. :o)

Any mug can be uncomfortable out bush

My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

FollowupID: 410744

Reply By: Member - Reiner G (QLD) 4124 - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:39

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:39
I don't think that we parents have much to do with that. For some reason the kids today have this desperate urge to impress each other and show off in gerneral. The coolest kid has the most horsepower and so on.
Why do we have a 250cc limit on motorcycles but a 18 year old kid can drive a 200HP Commodore?
We used to drive 6V Beetles and you had to wind the windows up if you wanted to go faster than 80km/h :-)
It would be very easy to have a horsepower limit on cars but I wonder if Mr Holden and Mr Ford have anything to do with that.
I don't think that the kids today are out there to kill somebody it's just that they think it wont happen to them and they don't know what they doing.
They need proper driver training.
Our politicians think taking a license of somebody will stop them driving, that is very very naive thinking. Taking the cars away wont work either, they buy another bomb for $500 which is much more dangerous than the one they had before.

I better go and do some work now :-)

AnswerID: 156634

Reply By: Rigor - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:49

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 10:49
Good philsophical point Scoey, Crikey, I usually have these discussions after a bottle of red or 2 .

Dave L.
AnswerID: 156636

Follow Up By: Scoey - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 11:44

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 11:44
Hehe! Yeah me too! And I've only had half a bottle of red so far this morning! ;-)
FollowupID: 410720

Reply By: robak (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 11:19

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 11:19
Good old pete is trying to take the headlines away from the health system.

AnswerID: 156641

Follow Up By: Trevor R (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 17:22

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 17:22
I think you hit the nail on the head with this suggestion.

Regards Trevor.
FollowupID: 410790

Reply By: Kiwi Kia - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:02

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:02
Rewards ! from a poly - wash your mouth out with soap & water, what were you thinking !!!

Local high school gave kids $50 if they never missed a day during the year. About 15 kids qualified last year and the parents went ape about giving money (out of the parents donations) to the kids. after all the kids were only doing what they were suposed to be doing - going to school !

So, why do you expect a reward for doing what you are suposed to be doing - obeying the road rules !
AnswerID: 156648

Follow Up By: Scoey - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:44

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:44
Yeah good point. BUT, A rule is simply a tool to make a person, group or thing do something (or don't as the case may be) that you want them to do (or don't do). Take speeding for example - The powers that be say that you must not exceed the speed limit. Fair cop. They justify why that's necessary with reports & experts that say it's dangerous to exceed what they say is their limit. Fair cop too. BUT what's to say that they are ultimately right and that say 100km/h is safer than 101km/h or 110km/h for instance. Nothing. They make the rule and we are expected to accept it or be punished. I think if they offered an incentive to follow thier suggestions (read: rules & laws) rather than a disincentive to break them, they MAY have more success!
FollowupID: 410728

Follow Up By: Scoey - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:51

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 12:51
"So, why do you expect a reward for doing what you are suposed to be doing - obeying the road rules !"

Oh I forgot to say that I don't "expect" a reward for doing what I'm supposed to be doing.

I would look at it like this - you have an arguement - so you try to convince the other party that you're right.
They THINK we should be obeying thier road rules, and they're not having much luck convincing us that they're right - hence thier "crisis" so why not try a different way of convincing us they're right?

DISCLAIMER: I don't generally flaunt the rules - I tend to stick to them as demonstrated by my relatively good traffic history. I just think it's high time our pollies tried a little bit of creative thinking to solve the age old problems we are faced with! ;-)
FollowupID: 410729

Reply By: Member - Norm C (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 13:04

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 13:04
Increasing penalties will not solve the problem. Having a massive penalty, say $10,000 fine or gaol for 10K over the limit might decrease it, but that would be stupid. The gaols would be full from unpaid fines and we would need a 3 strikes and you are executed policy to keep the penalties progressive and prevent overcrowding.

After all, the death penalty has not stopped murders in USA, or drug trafficing in Indonesia and Singapore.

This must also be kept in perspective. Of course we should aim for zero road fatalities, but that is impossible to achieve with current technology. Back in the early 70s, I was living in Victoria. There were 1034 people killed on the roads one year. I remember it well because the government ran a road safety campaign called '1034 campaign'. Over the past 20 years, the number of deaths has been well below this level despite many more vehicles, much faster cars and many more young drivers (few 18 year olds could aford a car back then). Most of the improvement was in the early days, long before speed cameras etc.

I suspect that given current vehicle technology, road construction etc, there is a 'natural level' of road deaths that will occur regardless of what is done with penalties. A bit like unemployment. Around 5% unemployment is widely believed to be as low as it can reasonably go without draconian measures like removing the dole, forcing people to accept available work or move to get work.

Another point. Queensland does not have annual vehicle safety inspections. Inspections are only required when selling or re registering an unregistered vehicle. How many accidents are caused by poorely maintained vehicles? I'd rather not have to get annual inspection, but is this simple measure likely to be more effective than doubling fines?

And finally. With the right attitude, kids can be safe drivers. I have 2 kids in their mid 20s. Both have been driving since 18. Neither has had an accident and the only 'driving offence' was when my son lost his muffler when he went camping one time. Got defected on his way home. They NEVER drink (even one drink) and drive.

I don't mind big penalties for serial offenders (particularly serial drink driving offenders) or for driving 30kph or more over the limit. But doubling penalties for 5kph over the limit will do nothing other than increas government revenue.

Bit of a ramble. Sorry about that. But I had my say.
AnswerID: 156659

Follow Up By: Member - Norm C (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 13:53

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 13:53
I guess this all depends on the detail. There have been a number of reports in the media with different info. So the facts remain a bit vague.

The following was copied from the National Nine News Website. If this is what is going to happen, I have no great problem. Although I think signs highlighting high accident areas (like in Northern NSW now) may be more effective than fixed cameras; but signs cost without generating income.

'Under the changes, people repeatedly caught driving drunk, unlicensed, disqualified or unregistered cars, will have their vehicles confiscated.

The alcohol breath testing units attached to the ignition, known as alcohol interlocks, will be fitted to cars for those caught twice with alcohol blood levels above 0.15 per cent.

And drivers caught speeding 20kph above the limit twice in one year would be slapped with double demerit points - meaning they could lose their licence.

Fixed speed cameras would also be introduced at accident hot spots on the Bruce Highway and the M1 between Brisbane and the Gold Coast.

An extra 1,000km of audible line markings will be fast-tracked, while a crackdown on drug driving will be introduced through roadside testing following the completion of a 12-month trial already underway.'

FollowupID: 410745

Follow Up By: Member - Beatit (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 16:18

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 16:18
G'day Norm,

I read in the RACQ mag a couple of years ago now that even though Qld doesn't have annual rego inspections they did not support it to be introduced. They quoted some figures involving unroadworthy cars involved in accidents in Qld and NSW and per capital there were more unroadworthy vehicles involved in prangs in NSW - where it is cumpulsory to have these checks.

I wonder also if a performance measure might be undertaken based on cost to the community v's additional lives saved in say a year. We might even find that no one benefited except general revenue.

Kind regards
FollowupID: 410769

Reply By: Member - MrBitchi (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 14:21

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 14:21
They've missed the bleedin obvious....

Put more coppers on the road!!! Take them out from behind their desks and cameras and have them actually patrolling the roads. A copper in a patrol car cruising down the freeway is a far better deterrent than a speed camera hidden behind a bush.

Oh, silly me. That would COST money, not MAKE money... What WAS I thinking???

Seriously, back in the bad old days there used to be heaps of Q (plain police) cars on QLD roads and no-one dared to speed. You'd come over the border from NSW and everyone would slow down to the speed limit.
Most of the Q cars are gone...
Cameras are more revenue efficient......
AnswerID: 156670

Follow Up By: Phreeq - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 16:11

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 16:11
You got it in one mate. I have seen less and less cops on the roads over the years but more and more speed cameras. Im thinking if there was more cops on the road they can actually catch the people driving dangerously and stupidly because you don't have to be breaking the speed limit to be dangerously driving.
FollowupID: 410765

Reply By: Member - Reiner G (QLD) 4124 - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 15:07

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 15:07
The number of people getting killed on the road is going down for the last twenty years and the pollies know that as well as we's all bull#% so they have a reason to book us more and increase the fines. They don't give a stuff about road-safety, it couldn’t be any more bluntly obvious.
We have very smart people come up with real good Ideas, you see them ones and they disapera for ever....wonder what happens to those good ideas?
AnswerID: 156677

Reply By: Phreeq - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 16:06

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 16:06
Seems this edbate will gon forever throughout a fair bit of the world. I'm only young but even still just with experience and observing things around me there is no real easy solution. Increased fines and penalties really don't do a lot they may work to a degree but it's like putting gaffer tape over a hole in a tube, it will stop the leak for only a small amount of time. In my opinion we all should be taught on how to drive correctly none of this learning road rules and how to park nonsense that should be the first part of a more elaborate means to egtting your licence. You should be taught how to controle the car you are driving in different situations hence defensive driving courses. I just think that it all should be intertwined together with learning the road rules also. It doesn't matter how slow you make the roads it doesn't matter how high fines and penalties are people will die. Everyone makes mistakes it just seems some are more than others. Maybe if the politicians were serious about reducing road deaths with young people aybe they should introduce a 'horsepower' limit at what they can drive. It also doesn't help with peer pressure and trying to be cool either. You will never stop young people trying to impress their friends or soemthing they will always want to outdo each other and maybe the government should think about creating events where it is free for the younger people or even a fairly cheap option of just letting of somesteam at a drag track or something. the government is intent on spending millions upon millions each year on ads for these things when maybe they could pump those funds into something that will allow the younger people do what they want and show off to their mates in a 'controlled' environment. It's going to get to the point where people won't drive anymore and what will the governemnt do without revenue from fuel taxes,fines and registrations when more and more people stop driving. It's all being done wrong and the wrong people are suffering.
AnswerID: 156683

Reply By: Trevor R (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 17:56

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 17:56

I respect the laws and understand we should be punished when we break them, but the poor bloke who drives in excess of 100 000km/yr has a much higher chance of a lapse in concentration to exceed the speed limit compared to the driver that does 9000 city km and 2000 highway km/yr. At present there is no compensation in the point scale to adjust for this, I don't think too many people would disagree with the punishment by means of fines and points demeritted from license. However those who have the most experience in highway driving are at greater risk of loosing their license by the very means that gives them this experience. Most of these people also depend on the license to provide income for their families to put food on the table, take this income away and we will have to be supported by taxpayers until we can find an alternative income source.
I have no problem with drink driving or drug driving penalties being severe (especially for repeat offenders) to the point of breath analysis before ignition can be started. Speed however, only takes a split second lapse to get a speeding fine. I know this is all it takes for an accident to occur as well but point scales should be reflected in km travelled each year. Also fines should be a percentage of one's income as this would be a truely equal deterrent accross the population. Someone on $150k/yr is not interested in a $250 fine but if it were say 1% (as is the case for some people) of his/her income I am sure they would feel different about it.

Good topic, regards Trevor.
AnswerID: 156701

Follow Up By: dirtygq - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 20:31

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 20:31
As you said rich people take the business fine option 4 x the fine which sux
FollowupID: 410835

Follow Up By: Member - Reiner G (QLD) 4124 - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 23:58

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 23:58
Totaly agree with what you say Trevor.........I find it very scary that we can see what they can't.......what ever happen to comon sense?

FollowupID: 410901

Reply By: BorisK - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 18:59

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 18:59
Our politicians or anyone in a position of power need to be held accountable for there decisions, but how do we do this. Voting system is a joke. The people in SW Victoria may remember how many hundreds of millions of dollars Bracks wasted on the train line between Geelong & Melbourne so the "fast train" could do the trip a whole 5 minutes quicker and it fails to I believe. By car I can cut my travel time by much more by speeding a little & have been doing so for the last 10 years. Im still alive ! I havent killed anybody! Im finding it much harder to read traffic & other drivers now because I have to watch that I dont go over the speed limit by 1 km/hr because the new camera system measures time travelled point A to point B. Im getting very tired physically & mentally of concentrating on speed rather than tuning in to the traffic and anything other dangers ahead of me. Wheres my mate WODDONNEE!!!
AnswerID: 156719

Reply By: Member - Jon W (QLD) - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 19:21

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 19:21
I'm sure the lack of a visible presence is a key factor. Last weekend we drove from Yeppoon to Brisbane and back (approx 1600 km) and, apart from in Rockhampton and in Brisbane, did not see or pass a single Police car or speed camera on the highway.
Jon W
AnswerID: 156723

Follow Up By: dirtygq - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 20:29

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 20:29
the problem is people don't care about the consequences of there actions. I f they go and buy a 4wd they are a baby killing monster truck driver and if they buy a ss or xr8 they are a hoon and criminal they can't win .
The thing is the roads are wrecked, the hospitals are in chaos and schools are hot day care centres not capable of tedching a kid how to tie there shoe laces let alone road safety and responsibility.
Everything kids do now is harder then it has ever been they have no bushland because homes are being built there and everything they do is wrong according to wowsers. And the hostile world they live in is not much better when lebs hate aussies and aussies hate lebs and war is all the hear about. And we wonder why they don't care we live in a selfish war hungry judgemental world . Education is the answer as well as fixing roads and ban drink drivers from drinking instead of taking there licence. using electronic speed limiters on all cars should trialled working off satellites to determine if speed is exceeded.
FollowupID: 410834

Reply By: bigcol - Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 23:34

Thursday, Feb 23, 2006 at 23:34
Premier Pete is only doing this to take the heat away from the hospitals and to raise more revenue to pay for the hospitals.

This is just more revenue raising, nothing else.
If they were serious about reducing the road toll we would see kids learning it as part of the school ciriculum.
Notice not one thing they're doing relates to driver education.
The M1 between Brisbane and the Gold Coast is one of the safest roads in QLD but they want to put fixed speed cameras on it.
This is just out and out revenue raising
AnswerID: 156784

Sponsored Links