Its True the police can't influence those things - but did that stop them from claiming credit and causation for the lower road toll? - I seem to remember when we had the first death-free public holiday that the police were blowing their trumpets about how it was a direct result of their lower speed tolerance (never mind the other factors that probably had more to do with it)
And now, the toll is up, the speed tolerance is down and yet the same line somehow rings hollow - surely if the lower tolerance was the sole and only reason for the death-free holiday, then an even lower tolerance would have meant a lower toll overall for the year....
I am not having a go at the individual cop - who may believe the line or may simply be following orders - Just this kind of thing grates me: If the lower speed tolerance works, then why did it not do dick over the holidays, or if it isn't working, a retraction, public apology and a refund are in order.
What about passengers? Fitting Jammers is a 1000 lb bomb to crack a walnut.fit jammers to vehicles to stop mobile phones working.
Have Rego based on power, want more power, pay more.
Make third party insurance compulsory
Take ACC off motor vehicles and transfer to personal insurance.
Rego based on power - I could somewhat agree with this notion - but if we are going to go down that path, there are other factors I would like to see accounted for before power
Compulsory insurance - I am vehemently against it for the following reasons:
1: It does nothing to help the road toll
2: all the insurance companies who are currently telling you that premiums won't change much are lying - just look at the UK to see how it works over there - I could not own or drive Any of the vehicles I owned and drove for the first 10 years of my driving career - the cost of an insurance premium for a 1.1 ltr car for a male driver under 25 is almost more than the cost of the car.
3: it gives Mr Plod another excuse to issue tickets (and boy do they love to do that in the UK)
4: it doesn't change what happens if there is an accident with someone with no insurance - you log a police report, you go to court, the lawyers laugh to the bank and everyone gets screwed.
Finally ACC - I personally don't mind keeping ACC around - but I do think that it should take into account fault in an accident - afterall, if I have to spend 2 weeks in hospital and a further 1 year in physical rehab because somebody pulled out without looking, it isn't right that my premiums increase, if ACC behaved more like an insurance company, they would be reaming either the person at fault or the person at fault's insurance - not mine.
Bookmarks