Paula Rose is retiring [Archive]

martybabe

17th February 2012, 21:48

Paula Rose the (heavily made up face) of Road safety in NZ is retiring:

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/nbnat/1559402731-Face-of-road-safety-retires

She was responsible for overseeing the lowered tolerance on speeding on public Holidays and is very proud of her achievements in road safety policies. Should she be?

HenryDorsetCase

17th February 2012, 21:54

Burn the witch!!

FJRider

17th February 2012, 21:59

Before bold comments ... let's see who replaces her.

TrentNz

17th February 2012, 22:02

..........

98tls

17th February 2012, 22:06

No doubt at some stage Hitler was proud of his dealing to the Jewish problem as he saw it,hes gone and there still here as we all are aware,her retirement might be longer but ive no doubt history will remain the same long after shes gone.

Gremlin

17th February 2012, 22:18

Good riddance to the dopey bitch.

However...

Better the devil you know, than the Devil you don't... :shutup:

red mermaid

18th February 2012, 06:44

My occupation prevents me from making any statement on her passing.

cs363

18th February 2012, 07:25

Good riddance to the dopey bitch.

+ 1

Let's just hope they replace her with someone capable of looking past the trees and seeing the wood... (although my hopes aren't high)

Maha

18th February 2012, 07:39

Sometimes, when you try your very best, no matter what the results are, there will always be a percentage of people that will redicule you at every oppotuntity.

Oakie

18th February 2012, 09:19

Sometimes, when you try your very best, no matter what the results are, there will always be a percentage of people that will redicule you at every oppotuntity.

And those who would stand up and say well done or thanks for trying will remain quiet for fear of being ridiculed themselves.

jimbo600

18th February 2012, 09:33

MSTRS

18th February 2012, 09:42

Are we sure she is retiring?
The cynic in me ponders the possibility that it's a euphemism for 'leave, or be fired'. The mixed bag of results stemming from her 4kph tolerance (wasn't this Xmas just gone one of the worst in terms of deaths?) and we never heard of her before the 4k thing...

BMWST?

18th February 2012, 09:50

shit you guys are harsh....its her bloody job....she has to be seen sayin certain things and prolly has no control on the resources she can bring to bear....

FJRider

18th February 2012, 10:02

... All of which no doubt are the real reasons the road toll lessened.

Perhaps ... when people stop for stop signs, actually give way to all other vehicles at give way signs, stop trying to overtake in stupid places, ... the toll might just be a little lower. :shutup:

Why couldn't she have stopped those things happening ... :wacko:

MSTRS

18th February 2012, 10:27

shit you guys are harsh....its her bloody job....she has to be seen sayin certain things and prolly has no control on the resources she can bring to bear....

You're right. Probably nothing she is seen to be doing/saying is actually her idea/s. She is just the face of that level of traffic management.
However, as the face, she is also the sacrifice if a policy is a failure...

Maha

18th February 2012, 11:02

And those who would stand up and say well done or thanks for trying will remain quiet for fear of being ridiculed themselves.

Human nature is a fickle thing Oakie.

carbonhed

18th February 2012, 11:39

I'll be glad to see her go. She's got that glib line of plausible PR bullshit that papers over the fact that she's clueless. The cops only insight is that if they reduce everybody to the slowest common denominator then when we inevitably crash fewer people will die. Thanks guys! Please feel free to fuck right off.

martybabe

18th February 2012, 16:28

I don't know the woman but for me she's on a par with the Briscoes lady, just pops up on the telly and says the same thing over and over, does anybody listen to them anymore, does any body care that it's Briscoes best sale ever or that 'They' will be watching our speed this holiday :yawn:.

Cynically, I am inclined to think she just jumped on the anti speeding propaganda train to further her career and get her face on the TV, in any event she came across as a one trick pony, speeding, speeding, speeding. For all the problems on our roads, the question has got to be, lady is that all you've got!

I'm not sorry to see her go but as someone said earlier who's next and what blinkered single minded strategy will they have to reduce the road toll?

HenryDorsetCase

18th February 2012, 16:32

slofox

18th February 2012, 16:41

I don't know the woman but for me she's on a par with the Briscoes lady,

The Briscoe's lady...isn't she the one with the pumpkin up her muff..?

Jantar

18th February 2012, 16:55

My occupation prevents me from making any statement on her passing.

That is comment enough. :yes:

FJRider

18th February 2012, 16:56

I'm not sorry to see her go but as someone said earlier who's next and what blinkered single minded strategy will they have to reduce the road toll?

I saw recently ... the goverment are "considering" raising the ACC levies ... to make it more attractive for privatisation ... the next of the family jewels to be sold. (If Big River Power sale gets stymied)

So speed ... and ALL the injuries on the roads ..... will be paid for under the user (injured) pays ... thus the target will change ....

And ... I forsee the ACC compensation payments in future having a repayment "deduction" ... for those not registered as having paid an ACC levy.

pete376403

18th February 2012, 17:10

What I read about the ACC levies was that Smith wanted to raise them in order to make private insurance companies "more competitive"

WTF?? ACC does its job too efficiently so he wants to raise the prices so the private companies look a better deal??

Compared to that arsehole, Paula Rose looks sort of reasonable

martybabe

18th February 2012, 17:24

I saw recently ... the goverment are "considering" raising the ACC levies ... to make it more attractive for privatisation ... the next of the family jewels to be sold. (If Big River Power sale gets stymied)

So speed ... and ALL the injuries on the roads ..... will be paid for under the user (injured) pays ... thus the target will change ....

And ... I forsee the ACC compensation payments in future having a repayment "deduction" ... for those not registered as having paid an ACC levy.

What I read about the ACC levies was that Smith wanted to raise them in order to make private insurance companies "more competitive"

WTF?? ACC does its job too efficiently so he wants to raise the prices so the private companies look a better deal??

Compared to that arsehole, Paula Rose looks sort of reasonable

Interesting and quite worrying. Totally agree Pete, the full effects of the meddling arse smith are gonna reverberate in our world long after Rose is forgotten.

ducatilover

18th February 2012, 17:27

That reporter needs to learn how to proofread.

The Briscoe's lady...isn't she the one with the pumpkin up her muff..? What in her where? :blink:

Swoop

18th February 2012, 17:44

I hope she gets employment with the lady who does the thin lizzy "luminous spheres" advertising. She certainly plasters her makeup on...

As for a job well done? Where were her campaigns for "keep left unless passing"? Or "only the fool breaks the 2 second ruewl"?

Nope. Just the usual propaganda of "speed kills".:oi-grr:

Coldrider

18th February 2012, 17:51

My occupation prevents me from making any statement on her passing.women bosses eh, who'd have 'em.

jasonu

18th February 2012, 17:57

And ... I forsee the ACC compensation payments in future having a repayment "deduction" ... for those not registered as having paid an ACC levy.

No put in, no take out. Sounds fair to me.

FJRider

18th February 2012, 18:15

No put in, no take out. Sounds fair to me.

Privatisation isn't fair ... it's profitable ..... so the theory goes ... :facepalm:

Coldrider

18th February 2012, 20:21

Privatisation isn't fair ... it's profitable ..... so the theory goes ... :facepalm:yes this is interesting because ACC doesn't have to make a profit, so is too cheap for competition, despite the fact I 'thought' they had to make a surplus to return to the Govt.
But it was never meant to make a profit, just pay its way as a 'public good'. So to make alternative providers competitive ACC has to lift its levys, or competitors reduce theirs (assumption that they would be more expensive to provide profit). I feel a lot of bullshit coming on in order for ACC to raise levys, and what is to be done with their (our) profit.

FJRider

18th February 2012, 20:39

But it was never meant to make a profit, just pay its way as a 'public good'. So to make alternative providers competitive ACC has to lift its levys, or competitors reduce theirs (assumption that they would be more expensive to provide profit). I feel a lot of bullshit coming on in order for ACC to raise levys, and what is to be done with their (our) profit.

It is just another Goverment department ... reliant on taxpayer money to survive. As with that "Other" Goverment department (IRD) ... it developed it's own authority and power (ever increasing) to merely do its job. How can a "Goverment Department" be sold off ... untill an alternitive "business" is set up and running first .... surely ... :wacko:

Coldrider

18th February 2012, 20:50

It is just another Goverment department ... reliant on taxpayer money to survive. As with that "Other" Goverment department (IRD) ... it developed it's own authority and power (ever increasing) to merely do its job. How can a "Goverment Department" be sold off ... untill an alternitive "business" is set up and running first .... surely ... :wacko:Wasn't the employer provider opened up a wee while ago, for accredited employers?

FJRider

18th February 2012, 21:03

Wasn't the employer provider opened up a wee while ago, for accredited employers?

Not all ACC claims are employmet related.

Brian d marge

18th February 2012, 22:51

yes this is interesting because ACC doesn't have to make a profit, so is too cheap for competition, despite the fact I 'thought' they had to make a surplus to return to the Govt.
But it was never meant to make a profit, just pay its way as a 'public good'. So to make alternative providers competitive ACC has to lift its levys, or competitors reduce theirs (assumption that they would be more expensive to provide profit). I feel a lot of bullshit coming on in order for ACC to raise levys, and what is to be done with their (our) profit.

well said

be interesting to see the spin they give it

Stephen

scissorhands

19th February 2012, 09:45

I think its a shame. She's proud of the lowest road toll ever (last years). Hails as a career highlight. Who would've thought that a police Supernintendo would invent SRS airbags, restraint systems, lay better roads, build crumple zones into vehicles, develop better tyres. All of which no doubt are the real reasons the road toll lessened.

I always liked the woman. She has that elfin face and impish smile and inner 'aliveness' that in big eared woman always appeal to me. Could be just my aspie bromance thing though. Her unique technical and engineering contributions remind me of thinking mavericks like Burt Munroe, peps reinventing the wheel, and yeah, we need more like her. To her credit she could easily be on the famous ------ list. On ya Paula

https://encrypted-tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQbuUTlrvWjOQya3o6buXR2vZnVCgSZr VNIjQyb3vJJUjOdNfF3dLu64A1S

MSTRS

19th February 2012, 09:50

What the hell has a face got to do with a naff measure? A measure that any halfwit can see through?

scissorhands

19th February 2012, 09:53

Nothing, I just like her face. She seems like an okay person to me

Madness

19th February 2012, 09:53

I sincerely hope that a certain Superintendent Kelly isn't promoted to the top job else we're all royally fucked.

Lying cunt. (http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/cellphones-superintendent-john-kelly-talks-tvnz-news-8-5-42-3104933)

puddytat

19th February 2012, 10:33

yes this is interesting because ACC doesn't have to make a profit, so is too cheap for competition, despite the fact I 'thought' they had to make a surplus to return to the Govt.
but it was never meant to make a profit,just pay its way as a "public good" So to make alternative providers competitive ACC has to lift its levys, or competitors reduce theirs (assumption that they would be more expensive to provide profit). I feel a lot of bullshit coming on in order for ACC to raise levys, and what is to be done with their (our) profit.

Like every other asset that we're letting them sell on our behalf....

admenk

19th February 2012, 12:43

... the next of the family jewels to be sold. (.

They won't get much for mine......:facepalm:

FJRider

19th February 2012, 12:49

They won't get much for mine......:facepalm:

Why ... has the wife got them in a vice ... ???

scumdog

19th February 2012, 14:21

My occupation prevents me from making any statement on her passing.

ditto:shutup:

Coldrider

19th February 2012, 18:38

Not all ACC claims are employmet related.That is very true, but i can't find reference in anything I have read to any other but the employer/employee levy. And that is the one that has gone up, gone down, probably going back up, and has been opened to privatisation before. The decision by crusher collins will be tabled to cabinet on the 29th.
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/12934148/acc-costs-will-increase-under-national-little/
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/6436289/ACC-levies-may-climb-again

Oakie

19th February 2012, 20:58

My occupation prevents me from making any statement on her passing.

ditto:shutup:

Me thinks that if you were to make a positive comment there would be no problem. If you are prevented from making a comment though then the hypothetical comment you can't make must be .... :shit: (My detective powers are great n'est pas?)

FJRider

19th February 2012, 22:16

Me thinks that if you were to make a positive comment there would be no problem. If you are prevented from making a comment though then the hypothetical comment you can't make must be .... :shit: (My detective powers are great n'est pas?)

Me thinks they cannot be seen to be making a show of support in a public forum such as this .... as they get accused of saying that ... because ... "they have to say that" ...

You can't win with some people ...