Prev: Worth a look - Pissed but not in charge?
Next: More speeding stuff from the RTA
From: Sylvia Else on 11 Jul 2010 20:38
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speedandspeedcameras/mobilespeedcameras/index.html

"Locations have been selected from those previously used in the previous
NSW Police Force program and selected based on strict criteria. The RTA
has reassessed these police locations and prioritised mobile speed
camera enforcement at those locations that have been identified as
having a high number of crashes."

Fair enough.

But wait - if these locations are known to have a high number of
crashes, shouldn't there be road signs saying so? Otherwise it looks as
if the locations are being kept secret so as to be able to exploit their
revenue generating potential while at the same time saying that the
camera location was jusitified by the crash rate.

Time for an FOI? Would the RTA seek to argue that it's not in the public
interest for motorists to know where the danger spots are?

Sylvia.
From: Scotty on 11 Jul 2010 20:52

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote in message news:89v6fmFllhU1(a)mid.individual.net...
: http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speedandspeedcameras/mobilespeedcameras/index.html
:
: "Locations have been selected from those previously used in the previous
: NSW Police Force program and selected based on strict criteria. The RTA
: has reassessed these police locations and prioritised mobile speed
: camera enforcement at those locations that have been identified as
: having a high number of crashes."
:
: Fair enough.
:
: But wait - if these locations are known to have a high number of
: crashes, shouldn't there be road signs saying so? Otherwise it looks as
: if the locations are being kept secret so as to be able to exploit their
: revenue generating potential while at the same time saying that the
: camera location was jusitified by the crash rate.
:
: Time for an FOI? Would the RTA seek to argue that it's not in the public
: interest for motorists to know where the danger spots are?
:
: Sylvia.
:

On the M1 in Brisbane theres a sign saying Federally funded crash site. Does that just mean that
THEY paid for the camera to be installed?


From: George W Frost on 11 Jul 2010 23:51

" Scotty" <scoter1(a)warmmail.com> wrote in message
news:4c3a6746$0$17178$afc38c87(a)news.optusnet.com.au...
>
> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote in message
> news:89v6fmFllhU1(a)mid.individual.net...
> :
> http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speedandspeedcameras/mobilespeedcameras/index.html
> :
> : "Locations have been selected from those previously used in the previous
> : NSW Police Force program and selected based on strict criteria. The RTA
> : has reassessed these police locations and prioritised mobile speed
> : camera enforcement at those locations that have been identified as
> : having a high number of crashes."
> :
> : Fair enough.
> :
> : But wait - if these locations are known to have a high number of
> : crashes, shouldn't there be road signs saying so? Otherwise it looks as
> : if the locations are being kept secret so as to be able to exploit their
> : revenue generating potential while at the same time saying that the
> : camera location was jusitified by the crash rate.
> :
> : Time for an FOI? Would the RTA seek to argue that it's not in the public
> : interest for motorists to know where the danger spots are?
> :
> : Sylvia.
> :
>
> On the M1 in Brisbane theres a sign saying Federally funded crash site.
> Does that just mean that
> THEY paid for the camera to be installed?
>
>

Or the feds are paying the motorist to have their crashes in that spot


From: Toby on 12 Jul 2010 02:59
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 10:52:15 +1000, Scotty wrote:

> "Sylvia Else" <sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote in message news:89v6fmFllhU1(a)mid.individual.net...
>: http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speedandspeedcameras/mobilespeedcameras/index.html
>:
>: "Locations have been selected from those previously used in the previous
>: NSW Police Force program and selected based on strict criteria. The RTA
>: has reassessed these police locations and prioritised mobile speed
>: camera enforcement at those locations that have been identified as
>: having a high number of crashes."
>:
>: Fair enough.
>:
>: But wait - if these locations are known to have a high number of
>: crashes, shouldn't there be road signs saying so? Otherwise it looks as
>: if the locations are being kept secret so as to be able to exploit their
>: revenue generating potential while at the same time saying that the
>: camera location was jusitified by the crash rate.
>:
>: Time for an FOI? Would the RTA seek to argue that it's not in the public
>: interest for motorists to know where the danger spots are?
>:
>: Sylvia.
>:
>
> On the M1 in Brisbane theres a sign saying Federally funded crash site. Does that just mean that
> THEY paid for the camera to be installed?

Nope - THEY funded the crash(es) of course.
Perchance the insurance Shysters 'donated the camera and associated
rubbish/roadside hardware. It's only a matter of time....
Good song, that, too. And local, even.
--
Toby.
Caveat Lector
From: Albm&ctd on 18 Jul 2010 23:18
In article <89v6fmFllhU1(a)mid.individual.net>, sylvia(a)not.here.invalid says...
> Time for an FOI? Would the RTA seek to argue that it's not in the public
> interest for motorists to know where the danger spots are?
>
Signs cost money. Costs money to fix problem roads too.
In Qld at least they admit that "better roads" (like most are sick and have a
thermometer up their asphalt hole) are partially funded from speeding fines. So
it stands to reason, if you don't speed you don't get better roads. Don't want
us all to have roads lining up at the road hospital now do we? Might get someone
like Patel working on your pothole. Hit the loud pedal :-)

Al
--
I don't take sides.
It's more fun to insult everyone.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Prev: Worth a look - Pissed but not in charge?
Next: More speeding stuff from the RTA