That is the way we are tracking, this past weekend it stood at 307 deaths.
Leaked material from Waka Kotahi suggested they had mapped the country for problem roads and turns out just about every road is a problem road. So they are suggesting they drop the speed limit to 80 kilometres per hour.
This is what happens when you reach a point where all the ideas you have tried don’t work. If 80 doesn't solve it, it will be 60. They're already at 30 at many downtown areas of urban New Zealand.
It does follow that if the speed limit was 5 kilometres an hour, the road death toll would drop. How could it not?
But the economic damage not to mention psychological impact would far outweigh any road toll gains. I am assuming that somewhere between where we are now and that particular absurdity is where they might look to head towards.
The answer is, of course, the quality of the roads. We have shocking roads, but we don’t want to spend the money. It's not helped by a government that doesn’t like roads. They would far rather spend money on trains and buses that people don’t use.
And they are in a bind, because Julie Anne Genter launched her Road to Zero campaign which as the numbers sit, is an abject failure. But then again, who is surprised?
What do you reckon has been spent over the years on ads? They've been warning us, cajoling us, and threatening us. But, to what end?
My view is that bad accidents are the result of a couple of things. Exceedingly bad luck, in other words you are in the wrong place at the wrong time. It isn't your fault and no amount of advertising and road rules would have stopped it.
And idiots. Whether by madness, booze, drugs, criminal activity, poor cars, or insane behaviour. It's the stuff that is preventable, but only if the fool behind the wheel was behaving differently.
Those sort of people are not reached by ads on telly and cops that aren't on the road.
So, back to the question; when we get to the end of the year in a month or so and the toll is up yet again, one of the worst yet again, what then? Another ad agency ?
It does follow that if the speed limit was 5 kilometres an hour, the road death toll would drop. How could it not?
But the economic damage not to mention psychological impact would far outweigh any road toll gains. I am assuming that somewhere between where we are now and that particular absurdity is where they might look to head towards.
The answer is, of course, the quality of the roads. We have shocking roads, but we don’t want to spend the money. It's not helped by a government that doesn’t like roads. They would far rather spend money on trains and buses that people don’t use.
And they are in a bind, because Julie Anne Genter launched her Road to Zero campaign which as the numbers sit, is an abject failure. But then again, who is surprised?
What do you reckon has been spent over the years on ads? They've been warning us, cajoling us, and threatening us. But, to what end?
My view is that bad accidents are the result of a couple of things. Exceedingly bad luck, in other words you are in the wrong place at the wrong time. It isn't your fault and no amount of advertising and road rules would have stopped it.
And idiots. Whether by madness, booze, drugs, criminal activity, poor cars, or insane behaviour. It's the stuff that is preventable, but only if the fool behind the wheel was behaving differently.
Those sort of people are not reached by ads on telly and cops that aren't on the road.
So, back to the question; when we get to the end of the year in a month or so and the toll is up yet again, one of the worst yet again, what then? Another ad agency ?
Mike Hosking is a New Zealand television and radio broadcaster. He currently hosts The Mike Hosking Breakfast show on NewstalkZB on weekday mornings.
2 comments:
Nov2 Bob Jones speed limits
The problem with vehicles made in the last 30 years or so is that negligible skill or concentration is required on most roads even at speeds considered high. Unlike vehicles of previous times the drivers have few clues that limits are being approached until the car crashes. The smooth silent ride and huge pillars and seating far removed from the outer edge of the car further give a sense of detachment. Accompanying this is a myriad in car distractions; complex dashboard controls, displays, electric window winders, air con controls, GPS, and of course phones.
But apart from hugely increasing the already great boredom factor, there is a good case for 80 kph. The time lost is not great, especially if any traffic light or roadwork stops involved. Persons "speed" mainly to allay boredom, and once a higher speed is sampled it is difficult to return to the tedium of less (the case against 110 kph expressways). With 80 kph limit the performance of cars of the 50s would suffice and the opportunity could be taken to reduce car accommodation, weight to that of the 60s. Tedium will discourage much use and the reduced performance will enable further considerable improvements in CO2 emissions.
The reasoning ability of Waka Kotahi is abyssmal. After the very predictable disaster of indexing insurances to supposed accident injury proneness, they were then party to the similarly fraught prices based on alleged CO2 production scheme.
But no risk of 80 kph limit. The all powerful Road Transport Forum who in effect determines conditions for trucks, will ensure that.
You're right on this Mike, and 80k on a State Highway is coma inducing stuff which won't over time improve the accident rate, but will sort term improve revenue. Those adds on the telly are not only stupid, they are an outright waste on money. As for Genter, should get on her bike and return to whence she came.
Post a Comment