Law makers/breakers

**vifferman** · 22nd July 2004, 15:27

Originally Posted by merv

Like who else likes driving/riding slow on the Canterbury Plains?

Umm - what did you hear? I had a plane to catch on Saturday, honest!
(I did, actually, but I drove at sedate speeds in Canterbury. Central Otago was a different matter...)
Ah yes - driving slow (less than 70kph) on the canterbury Plains, in 1979, in an old Holden stationwagon, trying to eke out the petrol because the stations were closed on weekends. Holding my eyelids open with my fingers, because everyone else was asleep, and I damned near was too...

Wasn't the least bit funny at the time...

**Bob** · 23rd July 2004, 00:23

Just found this whilst doing my daily newsround...

NZ Premier Helen Clark has raised the prospect of a prime ministerial aircraft after the furore about her motorcade. She has been under fire since a cancelled flight prompted Saturday's motorcade dash from Waimate to Christchurch airport.

The Prime Minister said other leaders would not have to rely on commercial airlines "In other countries the prime minister would have a plane that flew them there," she said.

"I shouldn't be put in the position where people are complaining about the mode of transport. In other countries people are whisked from place to place by dedicated transport, air and road. No-one would turn a hair. Here the tall poppy syndrome says we'll try and pick and find fault."

**Deano** · 13th November 2004, 01:32

I saw on the news tonight that 5 cops and the civilian driver of Helen's motorcade are now facing prosecution for the high speed run to watch the rugby. The opposition are saying they will take the flak instead of Helen. I guess they may have been under pressure but still, if she said jump off a bridge would they do it ?

Good to see that no one is above the law, at least in this case.

**scroter** · 13th November 2004, 09:25

so they were speeding. who cares. i got no problem. now can i please speed officer

with no further consequences or incidents be it law upholders or the media.

While im at it ive had 3 speeding tickets and havent been on the news for it once, not radio or even newsprint. i want my money back!!!

**Motu** · 13th November 2004, 10:13

I wonder if it was the President of the United States of America,or the Pope if there would be a hew and cry about this sort of thing.We like our leaders to be a little more human,although some would doubt Helens humanity.But really - a head of state in an escorted motorcade,I don't see a problem with them speeding.

**Blakamin** · 13th November 2004, 11:26

Originally Posted by Bob

Just found this whilst doing my daily newsround...

NZ Premier Helen Clark has raised the prospect of a prime ministerial aircraft after the furore about her motorcade.

She probably would have one .... if the air farce still had planes!!!!

**inlinefour** · 13th November 2004, 11:27

Originally Posted by sAsLEX

Seeing aunty helen's motorcade breaking the law on the news this morning reminded me of another instance down south when an MPs cars overtook us when we were travelling above the posted speed limit.

Now what repurcusions sp? will come of this? Shouldn't this sort of person be setting the example to NZ. What am I now to think, if I am running late for the airport it is ok to speed, even through built up areas?

can you tell me you dont speed???

**sAsLEX** · 13th November 2004, 12:58

i dont bleat on to the public through my legislation how dangerous it is too speed.

and yes I often go 101 or maybe 110

**Deano** · 13th November 2004, 19:12

Originally Posted by scroter

so they were speeding. who cares.

I care - I hate being told not to speed by people who then go and do it themselves and expect that its ok.

Originally Posted by Honda

can you tell me you dont speed???

No, but I don't go around telling others not to. So

back at ya.

**Deano** · 13th November 2004, 19:13

Originally Posted by sAsLEX

i dont bleat on to the public through my legislation how dangerous it is too speed.

and yes I often go 101 or maybe 110

**denill** · 15th November 2004, 06:34

Originally Posted by merv

On this forum I thought we all thought policing of the speed laws is oppressive and hopefully this will hint that it aint so dangerous at all to cover that distance that quickly. Problem is as usual the minority of do-gooders come out of the woodwork and get their fame on Holmes.

Yeah, I'm with Merv on this one. Good on yer Helen, you have proved that speed does not (necessarily) kill.

But as Lou wrote, I also - "take pleasure at seeing Helen get a taste of what the public get every day",

Cheers
BillW

**MikeL** · 15th November 2004, 08:18

Originally Posted by firestormer

This whole thing is a non-issue, in my opinion, and frankly I think it's been blown up out of all proportion.
[*]There was no (or very minimal) safety risk with the cars breaking the speed limit, as there were cop cars with lights and sirens going. This is not the case when Joe Public speeds.

I agree that the whole episode has been gleefully seized upon by those with a political axe to grind (but could we expect anything else?).

However, disregarding the media hype there is still an important issue here. It is to do with the responsibility of people in power to ensure that propaganda messages are consistent, credible and perceived as reasonable. Without the LTSA "be prepared to kill" campaign, the PM's speeding motorcade would indeed be a non-event. In the context of the advertising campaign, it becomes at the very least an embarrassment...
Let's analyse the different messages we are getting here:

The faster you go, the more likely you are to kill. This is an inescapable statistical truth. The motorcade drivers, like all speeding drivers, were placing themselves, their passengers and other road users at higher risk. The law attempts to reduce this risk overall by punishing those who exceed the speed limit (and thereby deterring others) regardless of individual circumstances and without requiring any evidence of specific harm or danger. It then goes on to make exceptions to the rule in the case of emergency vehicles, police cars in pursuit, prime ministerial motorcades, or whatever. Attempts to justify this on the grounds that these drivers are more highly trained and skilful, or that the vehicles are inherently safer, are understandable but irrelevant and illogical, because individual circumstances are unable to be used as a defence against a speeding charge by the general public. The only logical justification is that the increased risk is outweighed by a greater good, i.e. the risk is acceptable. (The point at which the risk becomes unacceptable is of course a matter of judgement on which there is likely to be some disagreement...)
Now along comes the LTSA with the message that if we are prepared to speed, we are prepared to kill. No ifs, buts or exceptions. The traffic cop in pursuit, the ambulance driver, Helen's chauffeur, whoever... By exceeding the speed limit, they are knowingly and deliberately risking other peoples' lives as well as their own. They are potential murderers. If they have seen the television advertisements, they should by rights, as they watch the speedometer wind up, have mental visions of their neighbour's children, your brother, my sons and countless other innocent victims of their wilful act, looking straight at them and silently pleading for them to slow down and spare their lives...

So Helen deserves to feel a bit embarrassed. Not because she was in a car that drove faster than the rest of us are allowed to go. Who begrudges that?

She should be embarrassed that she is at the head of a government responsible for the travesty and inanity that is the LTSA...