Welcome to MotorcycleForumz.com!
FAQFAQ      ProfileProfile    Private MessagesPrivate Messages   Log inLog in

Just to add fuel to the Government control debate.

 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
   Motorcycle Magazine (Home) -> Aussie RSS
Next:  WRB inflicted injuries  
Author Message
Michael Bednarek

External


Since: Jan 09, 2008
Posts: 1



(Msg. 16) Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 12:18 pm
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: aus>motorcycles (more info?)

On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:24:33 +1100, Nev.. wrote in aus.motorcycles:

>Dale Porter wrote:
>> http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23025498-661,00.html
[snip]
>Interesting, the Chief Commissioner of Police and several Government
>Ministers, the same people who claim that speed kills, are going to have
>to break the law intentionally, and speed, and not die, to prove that
>the road toll will be reduced if people don't speed.

Speaking of speed; here's a different view, not often expressed:
(the paragraph starting with "In 2002" might bring some unpleasant
memories back for some).

<http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23024712-28737,00.html>

Lost in the rush
Bill Tuckey | January 09, 2008

IT took just five hours for the first road carnage newspaper headline to
appear at the start of the 2007 Christmas-New Year holiday period. A man
was killed when a stolen car crashed at an intersection during a chase
in Melbourne at 5am on December 20.

And so it began: the parade of news presenters, police using words such
as slaughter and issuing pleas to slow down, and graphic images of
mangled wreckage, sobbing relatives and friends, and flowers laid at
crash sites.

Properly analysed, road death toll figures demonstrate there is an
extraordinary lack of debate about the real reasons behind fatalities
and injuries in crashes. An examination of the figures shows that with
all the speed and red light cameras, anti-alcohol measures, vehicle
safety, improvements, road upgrades, street lighting and big spending on
creative advertising over the past five years, the death toll has
largely plateaued. Over that period total national vehicle registrations
(adjusted for deregistered vehicles) have risen from 13.162 million
(10.365 million of them passenger vehicles) to just over 14.8 million
(11.51 million passenger vehicles). During 2007, an average of 9200 new
(and safer) vehicles came on to the roads every month.

Data shows Australia has been very good at reducing road trauma. The
death ratio per 100,000 population has been about the same for the past
five years. Injury totals have declined significantly because of vehicle
impact performance, faster paramedic response and more effective medical
intervention. As a result, holiday road trauma does not justify the
alarmist treatment it gets or the authorities' shock-horror rhetoric.

Figures from the federal Australian Transport Safety Bureau show that
for several years state authorities have set the Christmas-New Year
holiday period at 13 days (in Victoria in 2007 it began at midnight on
December 20 and ended at midnight on January4). In 2006, the last full
year for which ATSB figures are available, 62 people died: drivers,
passengers, motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians. That represented an
average of 4.7deaths a day. The same figures show that for the entire
year, deaths averaged 4.38 a day and the most lethal weekly period
year-long is Friday to Sunday, when there is an average of 5.4 deaths a
day. For the five days of Easter 2007, there were an average of five
deaths a day.

It shows during holiday periods roads are no more dangerous than on the
average weekday, and certainly safer than during normal weekends. And
this is despite the diluting holiday logistics of extra distances
covered, heavier traffic, bigger passenger loads, unroadworthy vehicles,
drivers not used to distance driving, greater stress, more distractions
and increased alcohol consumption.

Of 1000 drivers stopped for random breath-testing, two or less per 1000
tested positive (over .05) and 65 per cent of those tested between .05
and .08, according to Australia's data bank of driver blood-alcohol
content, now the longest-running and most detail-rich in the world. A
three-week blitz by Victorian police in the first three weeks of
December2007, yielded 989 positives out of 192,000 tests: a little less
than 2per cent.

All ordinary fatal crashes (can there be such a thing?) are attended by
local police, not an elite crash investigation unit. So the death of a
lone driver on a straight country road against a tree, in the absence of
any obvious evidence of alcohol, drugs, another vehicle or braking
marks, leads police to tick the box marked speed. Never mind that it
could be caused by 30,000km-old windscreen wiper blades crazing the
windscreen, bald tyres, scored brake discs, no seatbelts or even a
huntsman spider falling into the driver's lap from a sun visor.

Excessive speed is a simple reason commonly cited to explain a very
complex problem. There is no single reason for a crash. Every crash is
the result of a series of tumblers falling in the wrong sequence.
Multiple-death crashes are extremely rare occurrences. However, no
official will admit that factors such as vehicle roadworthiness, road
engineering or maintenance, weather, or even untimely text messaging
could be significant factors.

US National Health and Traffic Safety Administration researchers
produced a survey of fatal crash data that found excessive speed to be a
small or negligible factor. It blamed driver inattention, "failure to
see", and loss of control as by far the commonest causes.

When 50 people died in the 1997-98 Victorian Christmas-New Year holiday
period (which began that year on December 1Cool, the government convened
an immediate road safety summit. After meeting for one hour, the
participants announced an extension of the zero blood-alcohol limit to
the first three years of a licence and the suspension of the licence of
any driver exceeding a speed limit by 20km/h. Their perspicacity was
reinforced by a senior police officer, who used the much-run television
footage of a red Falcon wagon that had been parked that holiday under a
Hume Highway overpass and whose four sleeping occupants had been
decapitated by a semitrailer, to demand compulsory five-hour rest stops
for drivers and, further, the mandatory use of crash helmets for all
passengers.

About the same time the NSW Stay Safe Committee recommended that as most
deaths happened on two-lane country roads, all overtaking on such roads
should be banned in the state. Common sense prevailed in that case. In
November 2004, Victorian premier Steve Bracks called for car
speedometers to be capped at 130km/h. The motor industry considered it
the stupidest idea ever suggested.

In 2002, Victoria followed New Zealand and Britain and painted a number
of police road patrol cars in garish colour schemes. Police responded by
hiding them in scrub and behind buildings to set up speed traps. (I
watched a thick scrub set-up on the Princes Highway book almost 100 bike
riders in 90 minutes as they returned north from the Australian Grand
Prix on Phillip Island).

And so the road safety lie has been embedded, preying on road users'
perceptions that if they don't drink and drive, or exceed the speed
limit, they will be safe from the depredations of crazed drivers.

It reinforces the common feeling that if an act is made illegal, it will
fix things. However, people will always ignore what they perceive as bad
or unenforceable laws: tailgating, failure to keep left, the use of
mobile phones and (in some states) the suspension of dangly objects from
the rear vision mirror.

Several surveys have confirmed more than 30 per cent of drivers continue
to drive while disqualified. Speed cameras can't stop that.

Yet, even as state governments project traffic infringement revenue into
annual budgets, they continue to insist that fixed and mobile cameras -
euphemistically called safety cameras - are located in black-spot zones
and not used for revenue raising.

In 2005, NSW, which posts signs warning of fixed speed cameras, issued
about 550,000 traffic infringement notices. Victoria - with fewer
drivers, far less road surface mileage, and no such signposting - sent
out 1.07 million; 82 per cent of those were for speeds less than 15km/h
over the limit. Apart from a relative handful of cameras policing 40km/h
school speed zones, the vast majority are placed on roads with high
traffic volumes.

In May 2005, the South Australian Government announced it would spend
$35.6 million of its road safety budget of $60 million on 50 new red
light intersection cameras, adding to the 12 existing cameras that in
their first year of operation in 2004 generated $11 million in revenue.
Yet the Government's official figures showed that over the previous
eight years, disobeying traffic lights had caused only 1.34per cent of
fatal crashes.

Victoria Police runs almost 300 fixed speed and red light cameras,
estimating that about three million vehicles are tabbed every month. Yet
so far Victoria Police and its enforcement partners, VicRoads and the
Traffic Accident Commission, have refused to reveal any detail of the
infringements from the new average speed traps set on both three-lane
sides of the Hume Highway early in 2007. These set-ups measure average
speeds up to 72km/h into and out of Melbourne, issuing fines for speeds
averaging more than 3km/h over the limit over distances as short as 3km.
There are no notices warning hapless interstate drivers.

Emphasis in all Australian states has shifted from surveillance and
visual deterrence to speed measurement, as if this is the main crash
factor apart from alcohol.

The overemphasis on speed as a factor justifies government investment in
ever more sophisticated technology to trap more vehicle users; in fact,
government polling shows this gives voters a nice warm feeling because
the authorities are seen to be doing something. Thus, as mobile road
patrols vanish, we are losing the ability to check on the use of phones,
suspended licences, outstanding warrants, underage drivers, the wearing
of seat restraints, lane discipline, tailgating, unroadworthy vehicles
and the rest.

No longer do police sit and watch for those rolling through stop signs,
as they did in the 1970s, nor can they lurk at railway level crossings
to stop the growing incidence of vehicle-train crashes. They can't. They
simply don't have the manpower, or are diverted to more revenue-worthy
pursuits.

There are calls for more transparency and more rational debate on new
ways to lower road trauma, apart from the standard techniques of more
disinformation to justify more technology and greater punishment.

The all-states Australian Transport Council created by the Howard
government in 2000 as part of a road safety strategy set a target to cut
road deaths by 40 per cent by 2010.

On New Year's Eve, Australian Automobile Association chief executive
Mike Harris told The Australian: "Unless something serious is done,
we've got no chance of reaching that 2010 target. In terms of the
national road safety strategy target, we're actually going backwards
when you look at the statistics."

And, based on the statistics, that "something serious" could well be
understanding that the huge emphasis on speeding and drink driving may
even be counterproductive. Anecdotal evidence suggests that 95 per cent
of people don't exceed speed limits and even fewer drink and drive. So
their belief is that if they avoid those offences, they don't have to
pay much more attention to being safe or driving carefully.

Bill Tuckey is the former motoring editor of BRW and former editor of
Wheels magazine.

--
Michael Bednarek http://mbednarek.com/ "POST NO BILLS"

 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
sstrik

External


Since: Dec 02, 2007
Posts: 10



(Msg. 17) Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 3:34 pm
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Jan 10, 9:16 am, "Theo Bekkers" <tbekk... RemoveThis @bekkers.com.au> wrote:
> Nev.. wrote:
> > CrazyCam wrote:
> >> Well, in the event of this stuff being implemented widely, how much
> >> income would state governments forgo from speed cameras?
>
> > Nothing.  They would reap a percentage of each unit sold in tax etc,
> > possibly even retailing them through government owned corporations
> > such as the RTA and Vicroads, so for every dollar they lost in speed
> > camera revenue they would gain in tax/markup/etc on the purchase cost
> > of the unit from every road user, whether they sped or not.
>
> Now there's a can of worms for you. The Fed gov't will make money from the
> importation taxes and GST. The State gov'ts will have the cost of
> administering the implementation, as they control vehicle rego, and the
> State gov'ts will lose the fines revenue.
>
> That's never gonna fly.
>
> Theo

Theo,

What makes you think the Feds get any GST money? All of it is
redistributed back to the states.

Regards

Steve

 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
sstrik

External


Since: Dec 02, 2007
Posts: 10



(Msg. 18) Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 3:44 pm
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Jan 10, 10:38 am, Johno <varc....RemoveThis@msn.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 15:34:16 -0800 (PST), sstrik <sst....RemoveThis@dodo.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jan 10, 9:16 am, "Theo Bekkers" <tbekk....RemoveThis@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
> >> Nev.. wrote:
> >> > CrazyCam wrote:
> >> >> Well, in the event of this stuff being implemented widely, how much
> >> >> income would state governments forgo from speed cameras?
>
> >> > Nothing.  They would reap a percentage of each unit sold in tax etc,
> >> > possibly even retailing them through government owned corporations
> >> > such as the RTA and Vicroads, so for every dollar they lost in speed
> >> > camera revenue they would gain in tax/markup/etc on the purchase cost
> >> > of the unit from every road user, whether they sped or not.
>
> >> Now there's a can of worms for you. The Fed gov't will make money from the
> >> importation taxes and GST. The State gov'ts will have the cost of
> >> administering the implementation, as they control vehicle rego, and the
> >> State gov'ts will lose the fines revenue.
>
> >> That's never gonna fly.
>
> >> Theo
>
> >Theo,
>
> >What makes you think the Feds get any GST money?  All of it is
> >redistributed back to the states.
>
> >Regards
>
> >Steve
>
> I am sure the Libs when in power didn't get the $16 billion surplus by
> re-cycling coke cans
>
> Johno- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

do you think for one minute that the States would not have kicked up a
massive issue over it if they didn't get the GST collected?
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
sstrik

External


Since: Dec 02, 2007
Posts: 10



(Msg. 19) Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 4:59 pm
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Jan 10, 11:46 am, Damien <al.qa....TakeThisOut@asio.gov.au> wrote:
> sstrik wrote:
> > do you think for one minute that the States would not have kicked up a
> > massive issue over it if they didn't get the GST collected?
>
> What do you think they've been doing??? Maybe you should watch/read the
> news a bit more closely, so you don't keep missing things? Smile

They were bitching about how it was distributed, not that all of it
wasn't being distributed.
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
sstrik

External


Since: Dec 02, 2007
Posts: 10



(Msg. 20) Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 5:43 pm
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Jan 10, 12:20 pm, "Theo Bekkers" <tbekk....RemoveThis@bekkers.com.au> wrote:
> sstrik wrote:
> > On Jan 10, 10:38 am, Johno <varc....RemoveThis@msn.com> wrote:
> >> I am sure the Libs when in power didn't get the $16 billion surplus
> >> by re-cycling coke cans
> > do you think for one minute that the States would not have kicked up a
> > massive issue over it if they didn't get the GST collected?
>
> Let me understand this correctly. The Feds gave up the 10-30% wholesale
> sales tax when they intro'd the GST, gave all the GST to the States, and
> wound up with a $16B surplus?
>
> Theo

Yes Theo, the GST goes to the states. The massive surplus likely
comes from company taxes. you know where the feds take 33% of company
profits. Noticed how many companies here have posted record profits
over the last few years.
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
Marts

External


Since: Aug 10, 2007
Posts: 44



(Msg. 21) Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 6:15 pm
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

John Tserkezis wrote...

> I think it's just vapourware. I doubt it's past the prototype stage.

I wonder if this is the project that some fellow who called himself "Hyperactive
Frootloop" claimed that he was involved with.

http://snurl.com/1x0a0
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
Theo Bekkers

External


Since: Apr 11, 2005
Posts: 2026



(Msg. 22) Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:25 am
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

CrazyCam wrote:

> Well, in the event of this stuff being implemented widely, how much
> income would state governments forgo from speed cameras?

I think the gov't would be most upset if everybody stopped speeding. There
was an article in The West about three years ago saying there was budgetary
concern about the low number of speeding fines at the time. So speeding
fines are in the budget.

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
Theo Bekkers

External


Since: Apr 11, 2005
Posts: 2026



(Msg. 23) Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:25 am
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

CrazyCam wrote:
> Nev.. wrote:
>> Dale Porter wrote:
>>> http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23025498-661,00.html
>>
>> "It's believed a trial of the technology will soon be held in
>> Victoria, with several ministers, Chief Commissioner of Police
>> Christine Nixon, a former state coroner and 45 others likely to have
>> devices fitted to their cars."
>>
>> Interesting, the Chief Commissioner of Police and several Government
>> Ministers, the same people who claim that speed kills, are going to
>> have to break the law intentionally, and speed, and not die, to
>> prove that the road toll will be reduced if people don't speed.
>
> But Nev, maybe they _will_ die.

Well, that thought cheered me up.

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
Theo Bekkers

External


Since: Apr 11, 2005
Posts: 2026



(Msg. 24) Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:25 am
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Nev.. wrote:
> CrazyCam wrote:

>> Well, in the event of this stuff being implemented widely, how much
>> income would state governments forgo from speed cameras?
>
> Nothing. They would reap a percentage of each unit sold in tax etc,
> possibly even retailing them through government owned corporations
> such as the RTA and Vicroads, so for every dollar they lost in speed
> camera revenue they would gain in tax/markup/etc on the purchase cost
> of the unit from every road user, whether they sped or not.

Now there's a can of worms for you. The Fed gov't will make money from the
importation taxes and GST. The State gov'ts will have the cost of
administering the implementation, as they control vehicle rego, and the
State gov'ts will lose the fines revenue.

That's never gonna fly.

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
Theo Bekkers

External


Since: Apr 11, 2005
Posts: 2026



(Msg. 25) Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:25 am
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Michael Bednarek wrote:
>
> Speaking of speed; here's a different view, not often expressed:
> (the paragraph starting with "In 2002" might bring some unpleasant
> memories back for some).
>
> <http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23024712-28737,00.html>
>
> Lost in the rush
> Bill Tuckey | January 09, 2008
>
> IT took just five hours for the first road carnage newspaper headline
> to appear at the start of the 2007 Christmas-New Year holiday period.
> A man was killed when a stolen car crashed at an intersection during
> a chase in Melbourne at 5am on December 20.
>
> And so it began: the parade of news presenters, police using words
> such as slaughter and issuing pleas to slow down, and graphic images
> of mangled wreckage, sobbing relatives and friends, and flowers laid
> at crash sites.

> Figures from the federal Australian Transport Safety Bureau show that
> for several years state authorities have set the Christmas-New Year
> holiday period at 13 days (in Victoria in 2007 it began at midnight on
> December 20 and ended at midnight on January4). In 2006, the last full
> year for which ATSB figures are available, 62 people died: drivers,
> passengers, motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians. That represented
> an average of 4.7deaths a day. The same figures show that for the
> entire year, deaths averaged 4.38 a day and the most lethal weekly
> period year-long is Friday to Sunday, when there is an average of 5.4
> deaths a day. For the five days of Easter 2007, there were an average
> of five deaths a day.

Spot on, I've been saying that for years. In WA, the Xmas 'carnage' over the
last five years has been below the daily average.

We doubled most of the fines and increased demerit points last year (OK we
were pretty much the lowest) and we had a 15% increase in deaths. The
solution? Double the fines again. ??

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
Johno

External


Since: Feb 15, 2006
Posts: 290



(Msg. 26) Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:25 am
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 15:34:16 -0800 (PST), sstrik <sstrik RemoveThis @dodo.com.au>
wrote:

>On Jan 10, 9:16 am, "Theo Bekkers" <tbekk... RemoveThis @bekkers.com.au> wrote:
>> Nev.. wrote:
>> > CrazyCam wrote:
>> >> Well, in the event of this stuff being implemented widely, how much
>> >> income would state governments forgo from speed cameras?
>>
>> > Nothing.  They would reap a percentage of each unit sold in tax etc,
>> > possibly even retailing them through government owned corporations
>> > such as the RTA and Vicroads, so for every dollar they lost in speed
>> > camera revenue they would gain in tax/markup/etc on the purchase cost
>> > of the unit from every road user, whether they sped or not.
>>
>> Now there's a can of worms for you. The Fed gov't will make money from the
>> importation taxes and GST. The State gov'ts will have the cost of
>> administering the implementation, as they control vehicle rego, and the
>> State gov'ts will lose the fines revenue.
>>
>> That's never gonna fly.
>>
>> Theo
>
>Theo,
>
>What makes you think the Feds get any GST money? All of it is
>redistributed back to the states.
>
>Regards
>
>Steve

I am sure the Libs when in power didn't get the $16 billion surplus by
re-cycling coke cans

Johno
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
Theo Bekkers

External


Since: Apr 11, 2005
Posts: 2026



(Msg. 27) Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:25 am
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

sstrik wrote:
> On Jan 10, 9:16 am, "Theo Bekkers" <tbekk... DeleteThis @bekkers.com.au> wrote:

>> Now there's a can of worms for you. The Fed gov't will make money
>> from the importation taxes and GST. The State gov'ts will have the
>> cost of administering the implementation, as they control vehicle
>> rego, and the State gov'ts will lose the fines revenue.

> What makes you think the Feds get any GST money? All of it is
> redistributed back to the states.

ROTFL. Did you enrol for naivity 101.

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
Damien

External


Since: May 22, 2007
Posts: 104



(Msg. 28) Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:25 am
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

sstrik wrote:

> do you think for one minute that the States would not have kicked up a
> massive issue over it if they didn't get the GST collected?

What do you think they've been doing??? Maybe you should watch/read the
news a bit more closely, so you don't keep missing things? Smile
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
Theo Bekkers

External


Since: Apr 11, 2005
Posts: 2026



(Msg. 29) Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:25 am
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

sstrik wrote:
> On Jan 10, 10:38 am, Johno <varc....DeleteThis@msn.com> wrote:

>> I am sure the Libs when in power didn't get the $16 billion surplus
>> by re-cycling coke cans

> do you think for one minute that the States would not have kicked up a
> massive issue over it if they didn't get the GST collected?

Let me understand this correctly. The Feds gave up the 10-30% wholesale
sales tax when they intro'd the GST, gave all the GST to the States, and
wound up with a $16B surplus?

Theo
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
Nev..

External


Since: Aug 30, 2003
Posts: 2341



(Msg. 30) Posted: Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:25 am
Post subject: Re: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)

Theo Bekkers wrote:
> CrazyCam wrote:
>
>> Well, in the event of this stuff being implemented widely, how much
>> income would state governments forgo from speed cameras?
>
> I think the gov't would be most upset if everybody stopped speeding. There
> was an article in The West about three years ago saying there was budgetary
> concern about the low number of speeding fines at the time. So speeding
> fines are in the budget.

A budget is an estimate of all spending and revenue. The state treasury
would be negligent if they failed to include a legitimate revenue stream
in budget estimates.

Nev..
'07 XB12X
 >> Stay informed about: Just to add fuel to the Government control debate. 
Back to top
Login to vote
Display posts from previous:   
Related Topics:
O.T. Do you trust the Government? - Who's the stupider? Us for voting the Government in? Or the Government them selves? Since when has Boxing day come before Christmas? http://www.info.vic.gov.au/resources/publichols.htm

Nice work Victorian government - Have to say it... Most draconian road regulations. Most Easter road deaths. We're not that far behind here in NSW. OK - statistically the above (obvious) implication requires some attention (as does the following) but it appears your glorious leade...

Cool bike control - pardon if this has been posted before http://eris.gnarf.org/~sege/christianpfeiffer-bechyne2003-short.wmv

Remote Control Numberplate Changer. - Has anybody seen or heard of an efficient remote control number plate changer? I'm thinking of inventing one as an antidote for most road traffic infringements.

fuel cat ? - Anyone out there with an oldish bike that needs leaded fuel ever tried the "Fuel Cat" device ? J the A.
   Motorcycle Magazine (Home) -> Aussie All times are: Pacific Time (US & Canada) (change)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 2 of 3

 
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You can edit your posts in this forum
You can delete your posts in this forum
You can vote in polls in this forum



[ Contact us | Terms of Service/Privacy Policy ]