10 year road safety plan consultation

[candor]

This is coming up in a couple of months.

Having seen draft plan :mad::crybaby:(descriptor: 3rd world gearing) main addressable problem I see is that instead of making training a priority it is "young drivers" right up top along side motorcycling - they're still going on the parents as coaches model to marginalise the expertise of professional instruction. God forbid that instructors might poison young minds by not conceding that speed (present in the minority of fatals) is the root of all evil.

Info to help or present the mc case, just obtained under an OIA by Candor Trust to Ministry of Health (MoT presents politically slanted info - not trusty as a primary port of call) now follows.

Crash head injuries total have gone from 1922 in 2002 (pre quota ramp up) to 1820 last year. Static figure is attributable to MCs portion rising. Brain injury ='s nasty :eek5: and as less obvious to look at than spinal there is much less support - yanno governments!

2002 - 128 head injuries of total 669 distinct mc people discharged post crash excluding short stays at ED
2003 - 133 of 674 " " "
2004 - 139 of 724
2005 - 166 of 901
2006 - 191 of 964
2007 - 201 of 1064
2008 - 216 of 1121 ='s up 73

Spinal injuries total went from 191 in 2002 to 276 last year - rise is attributable to car occupants not MCs - so don't let MoT or ACC say the cost / harm blowout is all due to bikes, its not.
2002 - 131 car occupants spinal injury versus 25 MC rider/ pillion spinal
2003 - 155 " " versus 22 " "
2004 - 151 versus 23
2005 -170 versus 32
2006 - 169 versus 42
2007 - 171 versus 40
2008 - 171 versus 44
Up about 40 car occupants versus Up about 20 mc'ist


People with both head/spinal injury went from 62-104. Even spread of rise over road user types.

Need to get these crashes midst rising motorcycling down, and maybe review/raise if MC input to last consultation round (Safe As) was acted on. Also suggest any new ideas need brainstorming now, so input can be ironclad. Road Safety on serious injuries is now 50-100% higher risk (dependent on injury type) than 7 years ago!

[CookMySock]

There isn't any professional motorcycle training over here. I went on the defensive driving course and it was the most boring and demoralising thing I have ever sat through.

I have my son, daughter, and wife to teach about motorcycling, and I have zero support. I tried to enrol in a (govt sponsored!) mentoring course (since that is what I would be doing) and they wouldn't take my application.

The only advanced motorcycling course near to me is four hours ride (return) and it is about carpark cone work and classroom and monkey-see-monkey-do things like following an instructor and putting my knee or shoulder out.

The only people using the car driving courses, are kids wanted to get their full license quicker.

There should be mentor courses to support parents training their kids, or at the very least mentor packs for parents.

There should be advanced training days for people of different skill levels. I hate sitting in classrooms listening to dribble about countersteering and leaning.

The basic handling skills course should be much more about the things that kill motorcyclists - not putt-putt basic balance exercises.

There should be a course for learners going onto their restricted.. about handling a larger motorcycle and being able to corner and brake with it, and why its important not to panic and brake.

Steve

[Usarka]

Is there a public consultation process? If so, any details?


Crash head injuries total have gone from 1922 in 2002 (pre quota ramp up) to 1820 last year. Static figure is attributable to MCs portion rising. Brain injury ='s nasty :eek5: and as less obvious to look at than spinal there is much less support - yanno governments!


I had a 7 hour memory loss from my feb accident. No where on my discharge form is there any mention of a head injury. Incompetence or conspiracy?

[candor]

I had a 7 hour memory loss from my feb accident. No where on my discharge form is there any mention of a head injury. Incompetence or conspiracy?

Anyones guess - they're trying to bring figures down as NZs idiot road safety program is a world pilot, so who knows if it was rushed form filling or someone suggested some injuries be not recorded. We see a lot of this with our members finding crash reports and the like omit stuff - which impacts crash causes recorded as biggies in the CAS data base.

Public consultation hasn't been announced yet - its a couple months away and may involve seminars round the country like last time or else just written submissions. Hope for workshops as then its transparent. KB was at all workshops last time, despite attempts to exclude the bikers. They got a tip off - hopefully it won't be needed this time as they have big stake & good input.

[Tony]

Public consultation hasn't been announced yet - its a couple months away and may involve seminars round the country like last time or else just written submissions. Hope for workshops as then its transparent. KB was at all workshops last time, despite attempts to exclude the bikers. They got a tip off - hopefully it won't be needed this time as they have big stake & good input.

I note that there were 25 submissions on the stupid 70K rule during the last public consultation all stating the dangers of it. These dangers of this laws requirements have been widely reported and LTSA even quotes the Monash study that touched on it - yet the rule change to scap this has not progressed.

From my research it is apparent that no statisics are collected on many causes and contributors to accidents. Further no research is being done on the statistics they do collect (Note quoting statistics and doing research based on statistics are very diffenent activities - One is done by politicians and the other is done by academics and researchers).

Does anyone know of any department within the LTSA, Police, Ministry of Transport or other government department or consultative body in New Zealand who employs traffic safey researchers in New Zealand?

[candor]

it is apparent that no statisics are collected on many causes and contributors to accidents. Further no research is being done on the statistics they do collect .

Does anyone know of any department within the LTSA, Police, Ministry of Transport or other government department or consultative body in New Zealand who employs traffic safey researchers in New Zealand?

BIIIIIIIIGG CAN OF SNAKES. Research has its carpet pulled out from under it at first base due to the Crash Analysis System being hijacked by economics research. The same elite team at MoT, NZTA and NZIER have been involved in a very concerning study that dominates all of ther oad safety program since 1995 - it got turbo charged 2003 - and by 2005 the MoT was saying in internal e-mls as we hit the worst rankings for serious injuries and child deaths "we have to try and believe it works".

The reason primary data collection to base broad research on is scant is that the ongoing MoT study inherited from LTSA/LTNZ called "to develop and refine a resource allocation model (RAM) for road safety" (Guria, Leung - economist and mathematician I believe) required police traffic crash reports to be modified ie dumbed down to primarily evaluate speed, drink drive and seatbelt infringement quotas.

Once the data which can identify a few crash causes arrives to get coded into the CAS data base a primary cause is attributed out of the main choices of
1)speed
2)alcohol
3) speed + alcohol
4) other
This assists fine tuning in 12 regions of the Road Police resource allocation model/study ie fine tuning of the next 6 months of quotas - also known as World Bank Safety management system 1b (enforcement option) Standard categories included on crash forms internationally are plain missing! So bias is introduced and misclassification to justify the status quo of only addressing causes JUST contributing (alone or in combo) to under 40% of the toll.

Independent research that could challenge the current model is strongly discouraged using several levers. The govt does research - but mostly focussed on proving the efficacy or need for safety management system 1b/RAM.
For example MoT do research on speed and youth crashes (Ben Evans), on alcohol and youth crashes (Frith - also involved in the RAM project).

Police do research on the RAM project eg J Jones "Effective and efficient road policing in NZ" a discussion document oin Trentham library says the NZ experience shows no link between ticket quotas and reduced trauma. A doc hard as to obtain. And as part of the RAM group of projects NZTA studies effectys of publicity on the public perceptions re speed, alcohol, seatbelts.

As part of the RAM project NZTA or MoT study average speeds, Police study numbers of drink drivers per capita found after breath checks, and someone collates info about seatbelt wearing rates.

Occasional grants go to university academics to do traffic safety studies but these have little application unless relating to the permitted issues eg research about sleep apnoea anddriving or drugs and driving is ignored.

NZTA does some limited research in partnership with university academics on novel engineering solutions in black spots as part of a deal with the world bank. Other research drawn on by involved agencies is spoon fed by MUARC university in Victoria (where we think safety management system 1b is under trial) - it's a non independent body with Govt funding and a board stacked with Public servants that specialises in speed panic type studies. Audits have found its professed independence of concern.

Members of the National Road Safety Committee sign a secrecy agreement re their business prohibiting community consultation (too sensitive given the experimental nature of our approach). They are also required to promote the officially sanctioned research and to mention no other research without permission of the bigwigs doing the RAM study. As per a memorandum of understanding set up by the world bank lending guy who initially worked at LTSA setting up the RAM study for launch. Pretty tough on those council road safety coordinators who care about road safety more than propaganda.

So essentially if we hope science can get a foothold and shine a light of hope we're well screwed in this fishbowl of smokey mirrors. I do know someone who is about to approach the Auditor General to seek an audit of crash report contents since they are so obviously lacking quality assurance, misclassify causes STANDARDLY and undermine evidence based progress. The Police training manual for learning how to fill them likely needs scrutiny too.

What has gone on here with a project Treasury freely admitted was risky at the outset and has cheated many out of life or wellness is the scandal of the decade. And will soon be exposed with nowhere for the perpetrators and sell out boffins to hide!

[candor]

http://www.transport.govt.nz/saferjourneys/Documents/SaferJourneysfull_web.pdf

The suggested initiatives for increasing the safety of motorcycling are to:
• Improve rider training and licensing
• Introduce a specific programme of treatments for motorcycle black spots
• Require all new motorcycles to have anti-lock brake systems by 2015
• Promote high visibility and protective clothing
• Introduce an engine size levy (bikes over 600cc pay a higher ACC levy)
• License moped riders and require warrant of fitness tests for mopeds.

And there is a consulation website if you go to the MoT website to find it. Apparently due to the rebellion at the last consultation posts have a 20 line writing limit.

[SPman]

Or, in other words, they are tailoring their "research" to fit predefined, narrow, predetermined objectives in keeping with their narrowly defined bias as to what defines and controls road safety!
And if even that "evidence" doesn't fit, they will massage it so that it does!
And still call it Science!

[Genestho]

Background Paper - 60 pages!! (http://www.transport.govt.nz/saferjourneys/Documents/SaferJourneysfull_web.pdf)
Summary Paper (http://www.transport.govt.nz/saferjourneys/Documents/Safer%20Journeys%20SummaryGuide.pdf)

Make an online submission (http://www.transport.govt.nz/saferjourneys/Lists/Safer%20Journeys%20Full%20Submission/NewForm.aspx?Source=http://www.transport.govt.nz/saferjourneys/Lists/Safer%2520Journeys%2520Full%2520Submission/overview.aspx)

Guys this effects all of us, right across the board, there are over 60 initiatives up for public consultation regarding the Road Safety Strategy to 2020.

Have your say.

Before you make a submission check over the saferjourneys roadsafety strategy website (http://www.transport.govt.nz/saferjourneys/)

You can't say in a years time - you didn't know.

"Public feedback will inform the development of the final strategy, due to be released late in December this year"

You have until Friday 2nd October to make submissions.

[Hitcher]

Is there a public consultation process? If so, any details?


The consultation period will run from Saturday 15 August through to Monday 14 September 2009.

Supporting background documents can be viewed at www.gw.govt.nz/tdm or www.gw.govt.nz/roadsafetyplan

[Mom]

The consultation period will run from Saturday 15 August through to Monday 14 September 2009.

Supporting background documents can be viewed at www.gw.govt.nz/tdm or www.gw.govt.nz/roadsafetyplan

Hitcher can we make this a front page item for a bit? Or even a sticky on the forum?

[scracha]

>600cc bad..m'kay

I can see a shitstorm happening from Italian & HD Importers. No argument about better training but why not require professional training for car drivers too? To be honest, if it reduced our ACC...sorry, rego costs, I'd have no arguments with requiring ALL existing motorcyclists to have to go through professional training over the next 5 years. We haven't got a leg to stand on complaining about piss poor car drivers until our own house is in order.

If they tackled drink driving properly, threw the book at unlicensed riders/drivers, moved more freight via rail/sea and fixed some of the accident black-spots they'd meet most of their targets.

[Ixion]

The consultation period will run from Saturday 15 August through to Monday 14 September 2009.

Supporting background documents can be viewed at www.gw.govt.nz/tdm (http://www.gw.govt.nz/tdm) or www.gw.govt.nz/roadsafetyplan (http://www.gw.govt.nz/roadsafetyplan)

Those links actually lead to the Wellington Regional Safety Draft document, which is a different document.

The 'Safer Journies' document (which affects the whole country) is linked in post #9

[Hitcher]

Those links actually lead to the Wellington Regional Safety Draft document, which is a different document.

The 'Safer Journies' document (which affects the whole country) is linked in post #9

Perhaps a misunderstanding on my part having read the first post in this thread. But there is an opportunity for articulate, well reasoned submissions to be made in connection with both -- particularly for those who are able to make submissions to both.

[motorcyclesonline.net]

The government is also looking at introducing LAMS power to weight regs as now used in all states of Australia
Maximum cc is 660
All 250 2strokes are specifically excluded
Google LAMS and a list is there
It will need to be modified for NZ as we have many used imports here as opposed to Australia
Bill
www.motorcyclesonline.net



Those links actually lead to the Wellington Regional Safety Draft document, which is a different document.

The 'Safer Journies' document (which affects the whole country) is linked in post #9

[avgas]

hmmmm..... i still think the law is going the wrong way.
Make learners go to 230cc max - this cuts out most of the rice racers.
i don't care if you the biggest fattest person on the planet. I have been picked up in China by a "taxi" Gn125 and with both of us on there it did over 100kph fine.
Or how about this - Learners can ride any bike they like. Pre-1970

[Genestho]

http://www.badd.co.nz/files/AA%20Saving%20ourselves.pdf

I do think this should be looked over by all who still have outstanding submissions to make. cheers