Speeding fine revenue booms

[balthazarr]

From: http://www.theage.com.au/national/sp...0928-g98f.html

Speeding fine revenue booms
CLAY LUCAS
September 29, 2009

A SPEEDING fine is issued in Victoria every 25 seconds, according to figures from the Department of Justice.

The information, obtained by Opposition transport spokesman Terry Mulder under freedom of information, show that between April and June this year, 312,500 speeding fines were issued, an increase of 21 per cent over the same period last year.

This financial year, the State Government expects to earn $437 million from speeding fines, up from $397 million last year.

''John Brumby writes a speeding fine every 25 seconds,'' said Mr Mulder, who said the Government was trying to make up for lost revenue from fewer motorists using EastLink than predicted.

The speeding fines data shows a huge jump in the number of people caught speeding in inner Melbourne, and a drop in most country areas.

The Opposition said this was proof the Government was using speed cameras as a revenue raising exercise, rather than to lower the road toll.

Mr Mulder said speed camera fines had failed to reduce Victoria's country road toll, which stood at 110 on September 24, compared with 109 on the same date in 2008.

In the three-month period surveyed, fixed-speed camera fines increased by 45 per cent compared with 2008.

Police Minister Bob Cameron said speed cameras were about saving lives and preventing serious injuries.

''We would be happy for police never to issue a ticket if that meant motorists were no longer speeding, and putting lives at risk,'' Mr Cameron said. ''Our policy is to save lives.''

Acting Superintendent Steve Frost from Victoria Police's Traffic Camera Office defended the use of speed cameras, saying there was strong evidence they reduced road trauma.

''Speeding fines are a voluntary contribution. If you abide by the speed limit you have nothing to worry about,'' he said.

This thread will probably end with a closure, but here goes...

How can they possibly still be claiming that speed cameras are about safety, and not revenue? Their own data show that fines are down in country Vic, yet the road toll in country areas is higher. :

A 45% increase in fines from fixed-cameras over 2008 - doesn't this raise red flags? Surely this level of increase is statistically anomalous, and tends to indicate other factors - such as faulty cameras, or cameras where the calibration has drifted - are to blame?

[castellan]

Brainwashing people does work!
This is a old story, no one can deny speeding is wrong or stupid. so the gov can get away with this rubbish. and everyone knows it will not stop the toll.

But it makes me feel sick to constantly hear the gov rattle this same old can. but the gov don't have the guts to do the right thing about it.

I went from Brisbane to toowoomba with a neighbor driving his car. he is 47 years old and a f---ken hopeless driver and the car is un road worthy. i have been in cars with the driver drunk that were a way better driver then him.

I think most pollies could not drive a car competently. so this is were it all comes from. they say teaching a driver how to handle a vehicle is wrong and those skills taught will only lead to hooning. RUBBISH!
And i don't think anyone suports some idear of speeding for foolishness.

[Fev]

As always its a crock of sh....

[V8 FAIRMONT]

''Speeding fines are a voluntary contribution. If you abide by the speed limit you have nothing to worry about"

classic

[burnz]

our mexican friends will have to start voting them out, give you vote only to one that garantees reduction.

[bdave351]

As a visitor to VIC often driving, I must say I dont like driving in your state at all due to the constant worry of doing 3 over and spending the next 50 years with bubba.

They have gone waaaaay to far down there.

[EDManual]

Funny thing is that I drive in Victoria pretty much at ~20-25 over most of the time (most of the time its safe in my opinion) in 100 and 110 zones, everywhere else 10 over, unless its busy, theres people around etc. Never been caught by a speed camera in hundreds of thousands of km over 14 years. (Average 80k a year) Have been caught by perhaps 15 or so real cops. Always for around 20- 30 over in 100 - 110 zones.

In Vic if you get caught by a speed camera you arent paying attention to the road and deserve it basically. Perhaps doing 120 passed a parked car is dangerous?! Its not a bad test for drivers who arent watching the road. Too bad if you get caught by one I say.

Where I am scared to speed is WA, those tripod cameras are terrible!! You cant see them until you are ontop of them. Dont tell the Vic govt about them WA!! And these even in a safe area can catch you. WA is the worst I think.

[rancidpunx]

''John Brumby writes a speeding fine every 25 seconds,'' said Mr Mulder, who said the Government was trying to make up for lost revenue from fewer motorists using EastLink than predicted."

Thats all you need to read. Those of you up here in QLD, this is what we have to look forward to with the lost revenue on the gateway. Theres a whole bunch of road infrastructure projects to be paid for as well. The 20% rego increase wont cover it alone.

[RedHotGT]

Originally Posted by EDManual

Funny thing is that I drive in Victoria pretty much at ~20-25 over most of the time

Judging by your Avatar it may be faster than that....

[irlewy86]

So the only place the work has see a rise in the road toll. Do any of these idiots actually know what they are looking at.

[kyro_02]

not a day goes by where i break the speed limit, never been done, but if you get done you obviously not paying attention... i'd actually agree with the cameras IF they go to fixing the roads, but if thats the case... why do we still have pathetic excuse for roads.

raise the limits, ie; ringroad... and tolerence..

[Jon JGS302]

http://www.fightfines.info/12.html


The Issue

Obligation to Observe Speed Limits

Road Safety (General) Regulations 1999:- 601. Prescribed traffic infringements states that prescribed offenses are set out in Schedule 4, and under 1909 it states that it is an offence to exceed the speed limit by less than 10 km/h.

The 1991 Victorian Supreme Case Kearon v Grant [1991] 1 VR 321 is often cited as establishing that speeding is an strict liability offence and the intention is that motorists shall at their peril be aware of the applicable speed limit and shall then at their peril so govern their speed as to keep within it. Using this defence the prosecution only has to prove that the offence occurred. However, it would appear that this defence may be flawed. More...

However this still leaves open the question as to how does the motorist determine that they are within the speed limit.

The Road Safety Act 1986 (the "Act") and the Road Safety (General) Regulations 1999 (the "General Regulations") do not:

specify how a motorist is to determine the speed of a vehicle and hence ensure compliance with the applicable speed limit: or

define any error allowance that might be made for technical deficiencies in speedometers, that is an error allowance of tolerance.

Deduction - The logical conclusion is that the motorist must monitor the speed of the vehicle using the instrumentation provided with the vehicle and certified under the Regulations as being suitable for safe operation.

Instrumentation Error

There is no statement of tolerance provided in the relevant Act's or Regulations, therefore it is logical that the tolerance permitted on the vehicle instrumentation must apply. This precedent is provided on Infringement Notices which nominate a allowance for error on the speed detection device.

The requirements covering this vehicle instrumentation are set out in the Act's Regulations and therefore should be taken into consideration as the Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 1999 define requirements for registration of a vehicle suitable for operation on the roads being monitored for compliance.

The Road Safety Act 1986, Division 2—Registration, 5. Purposes of registration states: "The purposes of registration are— (a) to ensure that the design, construction and equipment of motor vehicles and trailers which are used on a highway meet safety and environmental standards;"

The Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 1999 contain Schedule 8 - Vehicle Standards - Part One Introductory - which is states This Schedule contains the Vehicle Standards that form the standards for registration under the Road Safety Act 1986.

Further the states that "The objectives of these Regulations are—

that vehicles are appropriately registered having regard to whether they meet standards for registration.....
to ensure that when vehicles are used on highways they are safe for use and are used in a safe manner....." (page 1)
Within Schedule 8 - Part 3 - Australian Design Rules it states that if a Second or Third Edition "ADR applies to the design and construction of a vehicle, the vehicle must comply with the ADR."

The Victorian Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 1999 states in 202 Eligible vehicles at a vehicle is eligible for registration if it "complies with the with the provisions of standards for registration that apply to the vehicle", and evidence of compliance can be taken as stated in “203. Compliance with standards for registration - an identification plate relating to the vehicle ”. In general this is an identification plate which states it is Australian Design Rule compliant.

Within Schedule 8-Vehicle Standards it is stated that a vehicle complaint with Australian Design Rules is considered suitable for registration under the Road Safety Act 1986 .

Australian Design Rule 18/02 – Instrumentation specifies requirements for the provision and location of certain 'Visual Indicators' and also specifies requirements for speedometers and odometers. This document states "every vehicle must be fitted with a speedometer which must:, Indicate vehicle speed only in kilometers per hour; and indicate the actual vehicle speed, for all speeds above 40km.h, to an accuracy of ± 10%."

It is important to note that in the commentary at the start of Schedule 8 - Vehicle Standards it states that "In most cases, if a vehicle complies with the Vehicle Standards, it is suitable for road use."

Deduction - Motor vehicles qualify for registration in Victoria if they are fitted with a speedometer that is accurate ±10% and are then considered to meet safety standards and to be suitable for road use under the Regulations. The same Regulations that define a requirement to observe speed limits.

Are speed camera's and radar devices legal measurement devices?

In response to the Australian Governments Constitution responsibility it created the National Measurements Act.

As a consequence there has been set up the National Measurement Institute and the National Association of Testing Authorities, Australia (N.A.T.A.) to administer these laws.

The National Measurements Act states:

legal measuring instrument means a measuring instrument used, or intended for use, in the determination of a physical quantity:
(a) for:
(i) law enforcement; or
(ii) demonstrating compliance, or lack of compliance, with a law of the Commonwealth or of a State or Territory; or
(b) that is, or may be, relevant to a proceeding in which the quantity is an issue.

The Act also sets out requirements for registration of measuring instruments, certification of testing authorities. etc. more...

The Problem with the Law

On the 10th February 2005 in a case before the Melbourne Magistrates Court in William Street, Melbourne (Case Number S02748905), the defendant was found guilty of exceeding the speed limit of 60km/h by 6km/h, i.e. within 10% of the speed limit.

Submission by the prosecution cited the 1991 Victorian Supreme Case Kearon v Grant [1991] 1 VR 321 as establishing that speeding is an strict liability offence, and that motorists shall at their peril be aware of the applicable speed limit and shall then at their peril so govern their speed as to keep within it. If this is the case then prosecution only has to prove that the offence occurred. Consequently the motorist is held liable for ANY excess over the speed limit, regardless of whether it was intentional or not, and regardless of the fact that the instrumentation provided under the Regulations is inappropriate.

This is not a reasonable position. The Police are permitted the error legislated on their equipment when detecting a speeding motorist, however the motorist is not permitted error legislated on their speedometer. There is more on the argument to support this proposition here...

It was the defendants assertion that if a motorist has been using a Regulation approved and registered vehicle, and had not exceed the specified tolerances of the Regulation compliant safety equipment fitted to that vehicle, then it is not reasonable to hold a person responsible for being in breach of Legislation when they are using equipment made compulsory by that Legislation.

Infringement notices should not be issued when the alleged speed is within 10% of the speed limit.

In the 10th February 2005 case, taking into consideration the defendants submission, the Magistrate decided not to apply any fines or costs, but advised that as the defendant had been found guilt under law, he had no choice on that matter, and he was unable to prevent demerit points being applied. However he noted that a problem with the law had been highlighted.

This view is not unique and supported by Victorian Parliamentary reports, Monash Accident Research Centre and comment from Australian Standards.

The Problem with the Government

The first part of the problem is that the Government is incented to have as many motorist on the road as possible in order to maximise the return via taxes (motor vehicle taxes ($1,306m pa), regulatory fees ($159m), GST on vehicle sales, parts & service, fuel taxes, etc, registration fees $711m, duty $595m). In Victoria there were 3,538,822 registered vehicles on the road in 2004, traveling an average 14,900km per annum.

Now the problem is that with all of these vehicles traveling on the roads, how do we minimise the damage to both people and property due to accidents, with minimal outlay. Remembering that at some point the number of accidents cannot be reduced further due human nature and in particular the human tendency to make mistakes.

Solution is to slow them down. However there is a balance to be achieved, as the Victorian Parliament Walking Safely - Report of the Road Safety Committee noted "The main concern in reducing urban speed limits would be an increase in travel times and therefore congestion on our roads."

Consequently a set of speed limits are devised which are considered a compromise between travel times, congestion and accident rates. The enforcement is then undertaken using automated means which achieves:

Additional revenue stream to the Government ( $343,495,000 in the Victorian 2006 budget).

Government seen to be doing something about traffic safety.

Expenditure on traffic safety minimised.

Then we come to the second part of the Government problem. They are also incented to minimise tolerances on speeding fines in order to maximise revenue and make the speed enforcement system viable.

We are heading for the same situation as the UK where Police traffic branches have been merged back into general Police duties, thereby boosting general Police numbers and leaving traffic safety to speed cameras.

Consequently the Government does nothing about:

Ensuring motorists have appropriate skills

Vehicles are safe to use on the road (In Victoria we don't even have an compulsory 12 month check-up to make sure even the basics are right, like legal tread on the tyres)

But can claim to have increased Police force numbers for general crime fighting.


http://www.fightfines.info/12.html

[PALE ALE]

Speed cameras are revenue raisers and do nothing to stop speeding motorists, a motorist was caught by a speed camera doing 160 in a 100 zone (southern expressway, Adelaide) What good is a speed camera if he continues on at that speed unaware that he has been caught, and ploughs into someone and kills them

[csv8]

Queensland has had more road deaths,so far this year, than 2008. BUT Government still say speed cameras reduce the road toll !!!! [B] Go Figger !!!!

[Glow_Mouse]

Originally Posted by csv8

BUT Government still say speed cameras reduce the road toll

yea and after all the cash the goverment gets, they're using it to fly over-seas for holidays instead of widening the roads, repaving, making higher less risk walk ways, ofc all of all things lettin bligh cook in tv shows...What'll they think of next...

[Jon JGS302]

They might be good if placed in ONLY black spots.....

But that will never happen. It is all about high volume areas.

[Pedro]

Originally Posted by csv8

Queensland has had more road deaths,so far this year, than 2008. BUT Government still say speed cameras reduce the road toll !!!! [B] Go Figger !!!!

The really disgusting point is that most pollies have at least some semblance of intelligence, and so they know that "speed cameras" do absolutely nothing about reducing the road toll and are only about revenue raising. Yet they are content to sit back, rake in the blood money, and absolve themselves of any blame for the continuing carnage.

[barra265t]

Originally Posted by loftie

Judging by your Avatar it may be faster than that....

Mate... that is GOLD

[Redrum]

My personal issue with speed cameras is the discretion level. I believe it should be 10%. Not 3%.

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by Redrum

My personal issue with speed cameras is the discretion level. I believe it should be 10%. Not 3%.

Dont agree, for reasons such as the "defacto speed limit" as described in http://www.walk.com.au/pedestriancou...sp?PageID=1967,

[balthazarr]

Originally Posted by Redrum

My personal issue with speed cameras is the discretion level. I believe it should be 10%. Not 3%.

I think the attitude of the police/pollies stinks. Of course, they have to keep trotting out the same old 'cameras save lives' mantra - it keeps the masses in line... imagine if they started saying that the cameras were more about revenue and less about safety.

But when the Hon Mr Cameron says, ''We would be happy for police never to issue a ticket if that meant motorists were no longer speeding, and putting lives at risk ... Our policy is to save lives.'', the implication is that if every motorist stopped speeding lives would no longer be at risk, which is absurd.

It's the ridiculous obsession with "speeding" (2km/h over the limit should not be considered speeding), as opposed to focussing on improving drivers' driving skills and attitudes that gets me.

[FPV8U]

Originally Posted by Redrum

My personal issue with speed cameras is the discretion level. I believe it should be 10%. Not 3%.

While i wasn't driving at the time was it not like this in the 90's where you had a 10% Buffer as such over the speed limit to allow for Speedo calibration and such things.?

[MAD]

In vic they say road deaths are down, thats fine I can live with that claim even though it is averaged over the state and doesnt look at individual regions.
But what I want to know is how have the serious injury statistics been affected by speed cameras? Cars are safer these days I beleive more people are surviving with horrific injuries where previously they would have been killed.
That would be a nice guage to see if speed cameras are doing anything or if its the car manufacturers that need a pat on the back.

[SB076]

Originally Posted by Redrum

My personal issue with speed cameras is the discretion level. I believe it should be 10%. Not 3%.

Yep, considering the inaccuracies of speedos and also the inaccuracies of the cameras them selves it seems the more common sense solution plus I would add that they should be installed at black spots (they seem to be installed in areas where they can be yeild a greater return for the government).

[SB076]

Originally Posted by MAD

In vic they say road deaths are down, thats fine I can live with that claim even though it is averaged over the state and doesnt look at individual regions.
But what I want to know is how have the serious injury statistics been affected by speed cameras? Cars are safer these days I beleive more people are surviving with horrific injuries where previously they would have been killed.
That would be a nice guage to see if speed cameras are doing anything or if its the car manufacturers that need a pat on the back.

Yep the road toll dropped at the introduction of seat belts, most cars these days have a host of safety features (ABS, airbags, ESC etc) which would have reduced the road toll on their own. I personally dont beleive speed cameras have reduced the road toll at all.

[torbirdie]

Originally Posted by MAD

In vic they say road deaths are down, thats fine I can live with that claim even though it is averaged over the state and doesnt look at individual regions.
But what I want to know is how have the serious injury statistics been affected by speed cameras? Cars are safer these days I beleive more people are surviving with horrific injuries where previously they would have been killed.
That would be a nice guage to see if speed cameras are doing anything or if its the car manufacturers that need a pat on the back.

The actual collision rate dropped as well as the severity of collisions in areas where speed cameras were introduced, this is basically insurance statistics. Panel beaters were suddenly not as busy.

We need a 10% buffer for those that have inaccurate speedos? And really how many cars underead by that amount?
If people are sincerly in doubt about the accuracy of their speedo, either get their accuracy verified or do 10% less than the posted speed limit(rather than insisting speed limits should be raised 10%) so you have some error margin, its your choice.

[388cube_edxr8]

Originally Posted by SB076

Yep the road toll dropped at the introduction of seat belts, most cars these days have a host of safety features (ABS, airbags, ESC etc) which would have reduced the road toll on their own. I personally dont beleive speed cameras have reduced the road toll at all.

+1
...

[castellan]

I did not buy a VE commodore ute because it was to dangerous to drive. i could not see out of the dam thing even with the seat all the way down.
My VY ute is so much better to see out of.
I can remember back in the XK falcon days that safety was about being able to see what was coming out of your car.
Air bags are rubbish if you hit one thing, then what about the next thing. i have been told that if you can breath and control the car with the dam deflated bag in the way good on ya! welcome to the real world. a mates old man hit a roo in a LTD he said the bags were a joke.

One dude i know said he was driving his bosses datsun homer at 100 KM/H he said his foot was flat to the floor and his *** was not touching the seat half the time, trying to hold on to it. but he was not speeding :
You could tow a van and sit 30 KM/H over. and ya get the same fine .