QLD GovWants Your Opinion on Digital Speed Cameras

[csv8]

Comment on new digital speed cameras
www.parliament.qld.gov.au/edc

Inquiry into the road safety benefits of fixed speed cameras

The Economic Development Committee will examine and report on the road safety benefits of fixed speed cameras in Queensland. As part of this inquiry the committee will consider:

* The effectiveness of fixed speed cameras in reducing speeding and road trauma;
* The criteria used to select sites for fixed speed cameras;
* The most efficient use of resources to maximise the road safety benefits of fixed speed cameras;
* The impact of new technologies on fixed speed cameras; and
* The appropriate role of fixed speed cameras in the overall speed enforcement regime.

View: Issues Paper No 2 - March 2010
View: Media Release

Go To: Online Submission Form

[SLO AU XR8]

I've given them my thoughts on the matter!

[flappist]

As have I although I suspect it is more to see which sitting members in swinging seats will be affected.

[Wally]

Web page has frames. this is the actual link:

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/vie...ies_roadSafety

[Wally]

So issues solicited for discussion are:

1. What is the appropriate role for fixed speed cameras in enforcing speed limits in Queensland?
2. Does prominent speed camera signage promote a safer road speed environment?
3. How effective are the existing fixed speed cameras in decreasing crash risks and changing driver behaviour in Queensland?
4. What criteria should be used to select fixed speed camera sites?
5. Are fixed speed cameras more suited to specific road environments?
6. Will the roll-out of new speed detection technology lead to excessive monitoring of Queensland drivers’ speed?
7. Are there other technologies that would be more appropriate for reducing crash risk associated with excessive speed?
8. Are there other issues regarding the use of fixed speed cameras to reduce road related risks in Queensland?

[The Monty]

Done and done.

[rancidpunx]

Completed

[f1tzy]

My thoughts are *$$((&#$^%@%^$*. Anna bligh *$&#&^*@$%

[SLO AU XR8]

I gave it to them whilst staying on subject and telling them my thoughts on the over hunting of speeding, and also mentioned less Germans are killed on their roads than people are here! Basically told them speed camera's are causing accidents and to fix driver retardation!

[FPV+fteT3]

The key words in the whole article...The Economic Development Committee or the Ministry of hidden taxes and pillaging.

[phillyc]

Well, I was pretty thorough and certainly discouraged speed camera use and encouraged HWP for enforcement of road rules other than just speeding. I rated cameras as ineffective except for raising money. Suggested money raised used for driver training facilities, education and road improvement.

Also suggested. What about a carrot & stick approach? Don't offend for 3years, get the next licence free of charge!

[Pedro]

Originally Posted by Wally

So issues solicited for discussion are:

1. What is the appropriate role for fixed speed cameras in enforcing speed limits in Queensland?
2. Does prominent speed camera signage promote a safer road speed environment?
3. How effective are the existing fixed speed cameras in decreasing crash risks and changing driver behaviour in Queensland?
4. What criteria should be used to select fixed speed camera sites?
5. Are fixed speed cameras more suited to specific road environments?
6. Will the roll-out of new speed detection technology lead to excessive monitoring of Queensland drivers’ speed?
7. Are there other technologies that would be more appropriate for reducing crash risk associated with excessive speed?
8. Are there other issues regarding the use of fixed speed cameras to reduce road related risks in Queensland?

Here are the answers and summary I presented ....

1. There is no roll for any "speed cameras" in enforcing speed limits in Queensland or anywhere else

2. Prominent signage can promote less revenue

3. Not effective in any criteria

4. According to the government the best sites are the ones generating the most revenue, usually at the bottom of an incline

5. They are not suited to any environment

6. Its not about monitoring, its about gathering money

7. You are assuming that technology reduces crash risk ???????????? Hello !!!!!!!!

8. I don't understand the meaning behind the question

The government’s focus is on making money (a not so hidden tax) to make up for the shortfall in wasteful spending and is not interested in taking initiatives that are quite plain to the man in the street. How the minister for transport can lie straight in bed at night is beyond me.

Innumerable experts outside of the government have for years been advocating driver education as a primary initiative. This should be part of the curriculum in primary schools and continue through, prior to teenagers presenting themselves for a driver's license test.

Yet we continue to have cynical governments spending copious amounts of money attempting to dumb down the public with expensive TV advertising telling them that speed kills (which it does in some but not all situations). However, not all the public are morons and a high percentage realise that this is just a disgraceful attempt to present a justifiable case for "speed cameras".

[flappist]

Here are some ideas:

1) Points buyback

If you are close to running out for a set fee, plus of course a 20% commission to an appropriate private management group you can restore your pristine status.

2) Prepaid speed camera fines.

Pay up front an receive a discount both in fine and points.

3) Frequent Speeders Card.

For a monthly fee you acquire Frequent Speeders Points that will allow you discounts on other offenses. These of course can be traded with unfair local council fines or ripoff bank fees.
Bronze, Silver, Gold and of course the coveted RED memberships level can be attained after appropriate commissions are paid.

4) Prepaid Offsets.

For a monthly fee you get a 10, 20 or 30 km/h offset allowing you the privilege of traveling at the VIP speeds a person of you financially generous nature deserves.

All quite profitable and based on current propaganda well within the capability of the Caxton St spin doctors to pass off as road safety.

[zdcol71]

So for 6 months I have been listening to people on this forum banging on about what should be and shouldn't be, and the govornment this and the government that, Nazi Bligh!!, revenue raise ...Here is a simple questionaire regarding what you want and the responses are sooooo predictable. Flappist and pedro, thats real constructive.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by zdcol71

So for 6 months I have been listening to people on this forum banging on about what should be and shouldn't be, and the govornment this and the government that, Nazi Bligh!!, revenue raise ...Here is a simple questionaire regarding what you want and the responses are sooooo predictable. Flappist and pedro, thats real constructive.

What do you mean.....

They already have the "Pay 5 times the fine and don't lose any points" option.

You too are so predictable comrade............

[fordOwner]

My god! - Pay 5 times the fine and dont lose any points!!?? WOW!
People would only do this on there last point left aye?
In WA if we run out of points we have the option to - lose it for 3 months which is standard OR you have the option to be given 1 point and if you get done then its SIX months.

[zdcol71]

Here are the answers and summary I presented ....

1. There is no roll for any "speed cameras" in enforcing speed limits in Queensland or anywhere else

2. Prominent signage can promote less revenue

3. Not effective in any criteria

4. According to the government the best sites are the ones generating the most revenue, usually at the bottom of an incline

5. They are not suited to any environment

6. Its not about monitoring, its about gathering money

7. You are assuming that technology reduces crash risk ???????????? Hello !!!!!!!!

8. I don't understand the meaning behind the question

The government’s focus is on making money (a not so hidden tax) to make up for the shortfall in wasteful spending and is not interested in taking initiatives that are quite plain to the man in the street. How the minister for transport can lie straight in bed at night is beyond me.

Innumerable experts outside of the government have for years been advocating driver education as a primary initiative. This should be part of the curriculum in primary schools and continue through, prior to teenagers presenting themselves for a driver's license test.

Yet we continue to have cynical governments spending copious amounts of money attempting to dumb down the public with expensive TV advertising telling them that speed kills (which it does in some but not all situations). However, not all the public are morons and a high percentage realise that this is just a disgraceful attempt to present a justifiable case for "speed camer1) Points buyback

If you are close to running out for a set fee, plus of course a 20% commission to an appropriate private management group you can restore your pristine status.

2) Prepaid speed camera fines.

Pay up front an receive a discount both in fine and points.

3) Frequent Speeders Card.

For a monthly fee you acquire Frequent Speeders Points that will allow you discounts on other offenses. These of course can be traded with unfair local council fines or ripoff bank fees.
Bronze, Silver, Gold and of course the coveted RED memberships level can be attained after appropriate commissions are paid.

4) Prepaid Offsets.

For a monthly fee you get a 10, 20 or 30 km/h offset allowing you the privilege of traveling at the VIP speeds a person of you financially generous nature deserves.

All quite profitable and based on current propaganda well within the capability of the Caxton St spin doctors to pass off as road safety.as".

So my point is, given someone has asked a legitimate question about what can be done to reduce the road toll, " we don't know, we are asking for concerted , informed advice...."... this is what we get??

[zdcol71]

The Economic Development Committee will examine and report on the road safety benefits of fixed speed cameras in Queensland. As part of this inquiry the committee will consider:

The effectiveness of fixed speed cameras in reducing speeding and road trauma;
The criteria used to select sites for fixed speed cameras;
The most efficient use of resources to maximise the road safety benefits of fixed speed cameras;
The impact of new technologies on fixed speed cameras; and
The appropriate role of fixed speed cameras in the overall speed enforcement regime.
View: Issues Paper No 2 - March 2010

Here in lie the points of reference!!
If you have opinions on the veracity, or otherwise, of Qld road rules or regulations, then let your opinions be known now or put them to bed

[Revolver]

I'm 99% 'a glass half-full' type of guy. (Though to me the glass is half empty if it was orginally full & you drank it!).

Honestly, can anyone really tell me (I could be wrong) when was the last time the QLD or Federal Government listened to it's voters. When the public doesn't agree, they simply pat you on the head & say it's in the states/country's interest.... Look at the Traversten Dam, QLD state assets, sell off of Qld energy suppliers. HHHMMMMM. I think no matter how many of us voice our opinion, it won't be counted. Whenever the facts dont fit their little check boxes, they change them, or lie about them.

Thats that out of the way. I'll still be putting my voice in & it aligns pretty much with the rest of you guys.

I could be wrong & they will listen that one point & point to point cameras are not the ONLY solution to our roadtoll. There are SO many things that need to be addressed. Driver training, education & behavour being paramount, not just the learners. P's & us O's as well. So obviously I'm in that category, & more than happy to submit for madatory education, training & behaviour courses .

I've always held on to the hope if there are enough of us, they will listen. So my voice is in. It's just like lotto, got to be in it to win it..... I hope the rest of the QLD FF members also voice their opinion on this issue.

Phillc- I like where your head is at with don't offend for the years & get the next licence free Idea. A simple incentive. But may be counted in the 'you should be doing they right thing anyway' Section

BBII

[GoldCoastGTP]

[QUOTE=fordOwner]My god! - Pay 5 times the fine and dont lose any points!!?? WOW!
QUOTE]
The 5 times if it is in a company name not an private individual
How about remove the revenue and just get hit with the demerit points - if they claim it is not all about the money but safety

[Wally]

Originally Posted by GoldCoastGTP

The 5 times if it is in a company name not an private individual
How about remove the revenue and just get hit with the demerit points - if they claim it is not all about the money but safety

Then where would they get the money to pay the staff who adminster the fines? Without a govt sector our unemployment level would be 80% and that is not a popular thing when you're trying to bypass the public service exams and go the elected politician route. Not only that, but with less fines there would be less money for QIC to lose on the stock exchange, less money for exhorbitant superannuation, less money for servants to fly interstate and attend useless conferences full of meta talk.... good God man do you know what you are suggesting!

zdcol71, you appear very earnest sometimes and you do give the impression you have a vested interest in certain subjects, especially the role of govt to punish us into submission. This is very much the defeatest attitude my parent's generation had, but I doubt you are an old fossil, it certainly isn't a baby boomer attitude, because they are too busy making punitive laws to absolve themselves of 1960/70's indiscretions...so what is it...cop, PS, polly?

[Neeek]

Done my bit.

[zdcol71]

zdcol71, you appear very earnest sometimes and you do give the impression you have a vested interest in certain subjects, especially the role of govt to punish us into submission. This is very much the defeatest attitude my parent's generation had, but I doubt you are an old fossil, it certainly isn't a baby boomer attitude, because they are too busy making punitive laws to absolve themselves of 1960/70's indiscretions...so what is it...cop, PS, polly?[/QUOTE]
PM sent

[aussie muscle]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Also suggested. What about a carrot & stick approach? Don't offend for 3years, get the next licence free of charge!

that would probably be cheaper than they think. They could also make a Gold license be like a gold mastercard, ie it proves you are better than the norm.

i would have given my opinion, but i'm in NSW and i didn't have a rocket to attach it to. (and couldnt work out which direction to aim it for best effect ie someone's backside)

[jpd80]

Why can't the government be honest and stick the motorist $1,000/demerit point?
I think that would send a clearer message of political intent...

Am I being too cynical or what?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by aussie muscle

They could also make a Gold license be like a gold mastercard, ie it proves you are better than the norm.

Hey, he just bought a new XR6 so he can't be that bad a driver.......

[GasoLane]

The Qld Government may want Qld'ers opinion's but this doesn't mean they will listen/read them.

If they're anything like the NTC (National Transport Commission) nothing will happen.

The NTC changed our (Truck Drivers) Log books to Work Diaries, with different rules and reg's, 18 mths ago.

Before they did this they invited Senior management and Owners of major national companies to Canberra for their views. They also spoke to a large number of RTA Inspectors who are out on the road, also for their views.

ALL those invited and a large number of Inspectors pointed out shortcomings. What happened?......Nothing.

The Boofacrats won, I mean they took 2 years designing the new Work Diary so they must be right. Right?

[Burnout]

I would agree Rog, the QLD govt doesn't want your opinion, they want you to invest in their opinion.

Oh, yes they can say they held a forum, listened to the public feedback, yarda, yarda! White paper, green paper, yellow paper. Blah Blah! Bullship, Bullsip, bullslip!

Then they will just trot out their latest tool in speed detection.

[Wally]

My concern with increased detection rate is the lack of elasticity in the reaction rate.

I would suppose punishment is based on the probability of being caught. There is often mention here that "everyone" breaks the roads rules at some point and that may be true, but regularly break the rules and the chances of being caught increases. The law no doubt considers latent recidivism in it deterents.

However as detection rates increase with increased surveillance the probably of being caught increases. Instead of reducing the penalties as a result, they are actually increasing, I suspect the reasoning being the driving errors must be increasingly deliberate in the face of increasingly deliberate and visible policing.

With a rollout of more cameras, the net casts wider and eventually a large proportion of the population are criminalised, lessening the deterent value and increasing cynicism along with social unease/unrest. The reaction rate of the law should reduce to balance the scales of justice, but it isn't.

[Pedro]

Originally Posted by zdcol71

So for 6 months I have been listening to people on this forum banging on about what should be and shouldn't be, and the govornment this and the government that, Nazi Bligh!!, revenue raise ...Here is a simple questionaire regarding what you want and the responses are sooooo predictable. Flappist and pedro, thats real constructive.

The Government’s research director e-mailed me and thanked me for my comments.

If you want to do something constructive and think “speed cameras” are saving lives, then answer the government’s questionnaire to that effect, and you may receive similar acknowledgement.