Good God Harry makes sense
I was staggered yet pleased to find myself in near total agreement with transport safety minister Harry Dynhoven.
Harry has said in the SST that speed limits should vary according to conditions, that some motorway sections could have a higher than 100 km/hr limit, and a focus on speed cameras and blind enforcement had alienated many motorists.
I could swear Harry is plagiarising me (but I don’t mind) when he says: “Is it rational for us to have a 100km/h limit on highways that are long, clear, straight roads?” asked Duynhoven. “In the central part of the South Island we have a lot of long roads where you can see forever and there are no traffic entrances or exits. But we also have the same 100km/h limit on all rural roads, no matter how windy or twisty.”
Exactly!
October 10th, 2004 at 10:50 am
I think Dynhoven should bugger off. Yes, there are motorways that should have a 110km/h limit, but I must point out that many people do that anyway. And the substandard roads that should be slower are already so – people are not stupid. My main gripe is the use of speed cameras. We all know what their primary function is, and that is for revenue collecting. The police should be concentrating on other areas of driving other than speed, such as tailgating and driver distraction. While excessive speed does cause crashes, a motorist driving 10-20 km/h over the limit does not, and it is he who is handing over the vast majority of speed cameras.
One might also note that revenue from speed cameras rose 30% last year while the road toll also increased 10%.
October 10th, 2004 at 10:53 am
Unfortunately I’ll believe it when we see it as far as policy reform goes. There are too many financial and career vested interests in the “speed kills” industry now, and too many brainwashed voters after years of taxpayer megabucks funding LTSA lies on TV.
I think we can read this mostly as a bit of precautionary butt-covering ahead of election year. Maurice Williamson used to perform the same act.
The facts are clear and simple – four years of rigid enforcement of speed limits has resulted in a slight upward trend in fatalities and a huge upward trend in injuries. See http://www.fastandsafe.org for all the details.
Policy has been made for years on the basis of completely invalid misinterpretations of statistical evidence. LTSA’s track record is stunningly abysmal. Nothing will change until the public force the government to completely restaff the policy-making agencies with competent, independent people and break the vice-grip that State of Victoria hardline advisors have on NZ traffic policy advice.
October 10th, 2004 at 12:37 pm
Looks like a cynical attempt to spin the (mildly) embarassing revelations about speeding ministers – especially Happy Hetero Tamihere’s jolly admission that the tickets weren’t doing a damn thing to modify his behaviour…
October 10th, 2004 at 2:00 pm
You are right in theory but the problem is that if you make the speed limit rules too complex people will break them even more often. Most poeple dont want to apply more than a minimal amount of intelligence to deciding how fast they will drive. So they expect 110 on the moterway 60 in the city and “a bit slower” if they see a childrens bus or have a sharp corner etc.
October 10th, 2004 at 4:35 pm
the problem is the roads in NZ. There aren’t enough passing lanes/ 4 lane hi-ways. Speed has sod all to do with it, apart from the total a-holes who drive on open roads at 60-70kph, they are the tards who should be banished to public transport
October 10th, 2004 at 8:28 pm
Genius – I think it is automatic to decide how fast to drive based on conditions. I alter my speed dozens of times in a trip based on weather, road, visibility, crossings, roadworks etc.
The posted speed limit has little bearing oin my calculating a safe speed to be at.
October 11th, 2004 at 11:47 am
Why does the government allow the importation or sale of any vehicle that can travel at more than 100kms/hr when it is illegal to do so.
If the government seriously did not wish for us to travel at speed in our cars it would simply make us put speedometer blocks in our cars to ensure we cannot go over 100 kms/hr.
The government is not serious about stopping us speed, it is only serious about collecting fines off those who do.
October 11th, 2004 at 4:13 pm
If there was an upper limit of 100kph then a whole bunch of idiots would drive around with their foot planted firmly to the floor, no matter what the road conditions. Part of the whole “If I am travelling at the speed limit I am _safe_” brigade.
I prefer an approach that encourages drivers to consider the appropriate speed for the circumstances, and drive commensurately.