NSW Opposition to review speed limits/cameras to curb 'Blatent Revenue Raising'

[Brazen]

Some potential good news... well at least its being discussed even if they dont win

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/state-elec...226-1b9gb.html

Review of speed limits February 27, 2011

The NSW Opposition will today announce plans to conduct a statewide audit of speed limits, if elected next month.

Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell says he wants a review of fixed and mobile speed cameras to curb blatant revenue raising.

The policy, to be announced at the Coalition's regional campaign launch in Dubbo, follows a proposal announced in January to increase the speed of single-lane highways in country areas from 100km/h to 110km/h.

Advertisement: Story continues below The audit aims to reduce the number of complicated speed changes on main roads and to see if speed cameras are saving lives or raising money. So far this year, NSW motorists have paid more than $32 million in speeding fines.

[prydey]

would be good if they would reverse the decision to drop the state limit to 100, rather than 110.

[sneaky]

doesn't really matter what they say before the election, they will say whatever they think voters want to hear, and once they get in they will do whatever they please..

and unlikely they will get rid of $32 million of tax just to keep voters happy, and if they do where will they tax you to get the money back?

[GS608]

Originally Posted by sneaky

doesn't really matter what they say before the election, they will say whatever they think voters want to hear, and once they get in they will do whatever they please..

and unlikely they will get rid of $32 million of tax just to keep voters happy, and if they do where will they tax you to get the money back?

Well with that kind of attitude it's no wonder NSW is in the state it's in. Anything has to be better than that **** in there at the moment

[XR6TCraig]

5.0. you realise that QLD is in as bad a way too thanks to the Beattie/Bligh dictatorship courtesy of QLD labour , right?

[SSD-85]

Originally Posted by Craiginmackay

5.0. you realise that QLD is in as bad a way too thanks to the Beattie/Bligh dictatorship courtesy of QLD labour , right?

Pity the opposition agrees with practically everything theyre doing/done....

With all of this legalised robbery occuring, this country is starting to have very little appeal to me.

[GS608]

Originally Posted by Craiginmackay

5.0. you realise that QLD is in as bad a way too thanks to the Beattie/Bligh dictatorship courtesy of QLD labour , right?

Yep mate, but we are talking about NSW here not QLD.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by sneaky

and unlikely they will get rid of $32 million of tax

nowhere in the article does it actually say they will get rid of speed cameras! they do say they will look at speed limits and try to reduce the confusion caused by too many changes in speed zones.

[GTP owner]

Originally Posted by prydey

nowhere in the article does it actually say they will get rid of speed cameras! they do say they will look at speed limits and try to reduce the confusion caused by too many changes in speed zones.

That's right. You need to read the fine print. They are just as likely to make all urban areas 40km/h, all outer urban areas 60km/h, and all highways 80km/h. The justification will be a reduction in changes, but the new limits will be enforced heavily as there will be no excuse for not obeying these new limits.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by prydey

nowhere in the article does it actually say they will get rid of speed cameras! they do say they will look at speed limits and try to reduce the confusion caused by too many changes in speed zones.

well the article does say the audit will look at whether speed cameras are saving lives. The article is very brief.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

That's right. You need to read the fine print. They are just as likely to make all urban areas 40km/h, all outer urban areas 60km/h, and all highways 80km/h. The justification will be a reduction in changes, but the new limits will be enforced heavily as there will be no excuse for not obeying these new limits.

dont be so sure, its well known that speed limits are set too low. I know within nsw Liberals there is a push for a new 130 limit, but not policy... Yet.

[Brazen]

Starting to sound serious..

SPEED camera "traps" will be eliminated and speed limits lifted on roads across NSW under a complete overhaul of traffic management planned by the Coalition.

The Opposition will today announce an election policy to conduct a statewide speed audit of roads after receiving an overwhelming reaction to a proposal - revealed in January by The Sunday Telegraph - to raise speed limits on major single-lane highways in the bush from the current 100km/h to 110km/h.

The audit is aimed at cutting the number of confusing speed zones on major roads that are huge revenue earners for the State Government, reaping millions of dollars in fines from unsuspecting motorists.

On one section of the Great Western Highway, drivers have to negotiate more than 40 speed limit changes in a single 72km section.

Major speed traps targeted for rationalisation include:


* Cleveland St in Sydney, where the speed limit was cut from 60km/h to 50km/h in 2007, leading to it becoming the site of the highest grossing speed cameras in NSW raising $6 million from nearly 50,000 motorists last year.

* The M2 motorway where speed limits drop from 80km/h to 70km/h at the Epping tunnel, even though the speed limit in the opposite direction is 100km/h. The tunnel camera caught 9767 speeding motorists last year.

* The Princes Hwy near Heathcote where it changes from 70km/h to 50km/h.

* The Anzac Bridge's zone drop from 70km/h to 60km/h.

Other targets include the Princes Hwy between Sutherland and Yarrawarrah, near the Royal National Park, and where the limit has been lowered from 90km/h to 80km/h. A 40km/h zone between two schools on King Georges Rd in Beverly Hills will also be targeted.

The Coalition policy, to be unveiled at the NSW Liberal and National Party regional campaign launch in Dubbo today, will include a review of mobile and fixed speed cameras to determine whether they are being used to raise revenue or save lives.

In addition to making speed limits uniform, motorists will be asked to nominate their worst road on a specially set up website.

Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell said the Coalition policy was aimed at ending an era of NSW motorists being used as revenue-raisers by the State Government.

"Speed limits should be about safety and saving lives, not about revenue raising," Mr O'Farrell said.

"After 16 years of Labor, the emphasis is on speed cameras, rather than a visible police presence on the state's roads."

State Nationals leader Andrew Stoner said the speed limit audit would begin immediately if elected.

He said speed zones would be rationalised within the first year of government.

"The Keneally-Labor Government has chosen revenue raising over road safety, cold cash over common sense," Mr Stoner said.

"We believe that clearer and more consistent speed limits will not only increase driver compliance and safety, but will also improve traffic flow and help to reduce travel times for motorists."

He said the proposed website would enable the public to submit examples of inconsistent, dangerous and confusing speed zones to help guide the government.

Drivers will also be able to subscribe to an email service notifying them of speed limit changes in their local area.

The Auditor-General will be asked to report on whether speed cameras are designed to raise revenue or to save lives.

NSW Office of State Revenue figures show the Government earned a staggering $322,485,773 in the past five years from 2,669,373 motorists stung by a Roads and Traffic Authority static speed camera.

The most lucrative year for the State government was in 2007-08, when 678,001 NSW motorists were caught speeding, netting Treasury a record $79,805,551.

So far this financial year, the State Government has earned $32,388,432 from 208,979 NSW motorists who were caught speeding.

Under the Coalition's plan, speed zones would be rationalised with few speed limit changes over short distances.

The policy is among the key announcements to be delivered at its regional campaign launch at the Dubbo Regional Theatre.

National Party leader Warren Truss will be among more than 400 Coalition supporters to hear Mr Stoner and Mr O'Farrell unveil their plans for the bush.

Other Coalition guests will include Queensland LNP John-Paul Langbroek and the former NSW deputy premier Ian Armstrong.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Scotty85

Pity the opposition agrees with practically everything theyre doing/done....

With all of this legalised robbery occuring, this country is starting to have very little appeal to me.

Do not give up hope. Things are happening in the background.

The next election will have a few surprises.........

[Papa Smurf]

I don't believe there is a Government out there that would relinquish the control over making money from the greatest Cash Cow since Petrol pricing and oil parity pricing.

Don't get your hopes up that ANY politician would scrap these little electronic gold makers.

[FPV+fteT3]

Originally Posted by Papa Smurf

I don't believe there is a Government out there that would relinquish the control over making money from the greatest Cash Cow since Petrol pricing and oil parity pricing.

Don't get your hopes up that ANY politician would scrap these little electronic gold makers.

Obviously this man is not a polly as he speaks the truth.

[mr ghia]

There's a really good way of cheating governments out of lots of money -- DON'T SPEED. ;D

[Jack91]

Originally Posted by mr ghia

There's a really good way of cheating governments out of lots of money -- DON'T SPEED. ;D

Theres always one....

[David222]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226012535385

This goes into a bit more detail about what is being announced/proposed by the NSW opposition today.

Admittedly they haven't won the election yet, and nothing has been implemented yet. But it is the first bit of common sense I have heard coming from politicians in a long long time. 72Km of highway with more than 40 speed zone changes is obscene to say the least. Thats an average of 1 change every 1.8km.

[The G6ET Spot]

Originally Posted by David222

[url]


Admittedly they haven't won the election yet, and nothing has been implemented yet. But it is the first bit of common sense I have heard coming from politicians in a long long time. 72Km of highway with more than 40 speed zone changes is obscene to say the least. Thats an average of 1 change every 1.8km.

yep Penrith to Lithgow, It's an absolute debacle and gets policed heavily. And then throw in a speed camera at Rivulet on a down hill run makes for keeping you on your toes. You are watching your speedo more than the road to make sure you are not going over the limit.

Now that is making for safer driving. I just love the way that all the bozo's that make up these driving laws, most of them are running around in Government cars and wouldn't have a clue what it is like to actually drive on the roads.

[GTP owner]

Originally Posted by David222

72Km of highway with more than 40 speed zone changes is obscene to say the least. Thats an average of 1 change every 1.8km.

If you go from one side of Sandy Bay in Tas up to the southern outlet during school hours you go through 8 speed changes in 4km. Works out to around every 500metres. Pretty easy to get confused on which speed zone you are in, "but ignorance is no excuse" the coppers will tell you when they take their tax...

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by Papa Smurf

I don't believe there is a Government out there that would relinquish the control over making money from the greatest Cash Cow since Petrol pricing and oil parity pricing.

Don't get your hopes up that ANY politician would scrap these little electronic gold makers.

Pffft whilst the revenue is great for a government, speed revenue is small fry for the economy the size of NSW, plus it takes a lot in costs to administer it - I think about 30%. Also at the moment they are negotiating an extra billion in GST revenue from the Federal government, speed camera revenue is small potatoes in the scheme of things. The people I have spoken to see this being just the beginning, talk will eventually turn to increasing the 110 max speed limit, sooner than what people think. The Nationals see this pivotal in reducing accidents and travel time for people in the Bush.

[casabonka]

I've just come back from a trip to NZ. The roads there were fantastic, and they had 3 speed zones;
100km/h open road/fwy/mwy
70km/h town
50km/h city

Simple - also found it rare for people to be speeding as everyone KNEW what the speed limit would be, rather than guessing!

[prydey]

when they add their carbon tax to fuel, it will more than make up for cancelling a few 'safety cameras'!!

also, lowering the speed limit to 100 on interstate highways means that now all traffic does the same speed. before with the speed for cars at 110 and heavy vehicles at 100, it was enough difference that most of the time, they never bothered you and you never bothered them. they need to re instate the 110 limt.

[mr ghia]

There is a need to get the stinking trucks back down to 80 km/h where they belong.
Much less damage to roads and people.
Abeles (TNT trucking) in the 1980s successfully lobbied his mate Hawke (then Prime Minister) to get the speed of trucks raised to 100 km/h and we've been paying dearly for it ever since.
Trucking -- would have to be the most subsidised industry in the country.

[SteveJH]

Originally Posted by mr ghia

There is a need to get the stinking trucks back down to 80 km/h where they belong.
Much less damage to roads and people.
Abeles (TNT trucking) in the 1980s successfully lobbied his mate Hawke (then Prime Minister) to get the speed of trucks raised to 100 km/h and we've been paying dearly for it ever since.
Trucking -- would have to be the most subsidised industry in the country.

Freight needs to be transported somehow, and Trains don't go everywhere. Plus the faster they can go (and they seem to be going 100km/h quite safely) they more freight they can deliver and the less of them there is.

[The G6ET Spot]

Originally Posted by mr ghia

There is a need to get the stinking trucks back down to 80 km/h where they belong.
Much less damage to roads and people.
Abeles (TNT trucking) in the 1980s successfully lobbied his mate Hawke (then Prime Minister) to get the speed of trucks raised to 100 km/h and we've been paying dearly for it ever since.
Trucking -- would have to be the most subsidised industry in the country.

What planet are you living on?

You obviously have no idea on freight movement around this country at all. To come out with such an absurd statement.

[Rockape]

Originally Posted by mr ghia

There is a need to get the stinking trucks back down to 80 km/h where they belong.
Much less damage to roads and people.
Abeles (TNT trucking) in the 1980s successfully lobbied his mate Hawke (then Prime Minister) to get the speed of trucks raised to 100 km/h and we've been paying dearly for it ever since.
Trucking -- would have to be the most subsidised industry in the country.

I can see the long line of cars stuck behind the truck doing 80km/h. There would be much more dangerous overtaking going on i think.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by The G6ET Spot

What planet are you living on?

You obviously have no idea on freight movement around this country at all. To come out with such an absurd statement.

Perhaps he knows about how much more it costs to build a road that can survive 40 tonne trucks thundering along then at 110km/h rather than 80km/h? You've heard that road damage is proportional to the axle weight^4 and I believe its also dependent on the speed^2.

Billions is spent on road maintenance in this country that wouldnt be necessary if we kept the speed of trucks lower.

[XR6TCraig]

You haven't taken into account the fact that we would need 30% more trucks on the road to deliver the same volume of goods in the same amount of time. This would cause more expense in transport costs ( more fuel, tyres, drivers, truck purchase costs, etc, while not really looking after the roads any better, due to higher volume.

And at what cost to human lives too.

I can picture the frustration of people stuck behind trucks doing 20-30kph under the speed limit, with 800-900klm still to go until their destination is reached during busy school holiday periods on a road like the Bruce Hwy. For those of you that don't know it, just google "Worst national hwy in Australia" and you will get the idea. With no passing lanes and no shoulders on much of the road and up to 300klm between towns, the line would be several klms long trying to get around a convoy of trucks and people would make rash decisions to get away from this. Also, truckies would be on the road longer, raising a fatigue issue and would be interacting with more cars.
More people would die on our roads!

Lowering the truck speed limit is not the solution! Building better roads is! Of course that costs money though.


Of course, none of this matter where there are multi lane freeways ferrying traffic everywhere just a few minutes from your door. Places like Newport!

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Perhaps he knows about how much more it costs to build a road that can survive 40 tonne trucks thundering along then at 110km/h rather than 80km/h? You've heard that road damage is proportional to the axle weight^4 and I believe its also dependent on the speed^2.

Billions is spent on road maintenance in this country that wouldnt be necessary if we kept the speed of trucks lower.

A reduction of 20kmh over a 1000km journey means an extra 2.5hrs on average to a truckies trip. This also means he probably wont make his destination within his allowable time before he needs to take a break.
This will then add an extra overnight stay.... imagine a 3000km trip and how much more time they will need?

its bad enough now the pressures on the average truckie has, without telling him he now has to be on the road even more...
Maybe if our RAIL system was better??? scarey thought....