Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

$50 Levy Propaganda

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by jdkarmch, Dec 5, 2005.

  1. My bike's rego renewal arrived today from Mr Bracks and inside was a little pamphlet titled (apologies to other states - but you just have to see this to understand what we have to put up with):

    "How the Motorcycle Safety levy is used to improve rider safety" :-k

    To be honest - I think that it has been written with the aim of confusing anyone who reads it. The language used sounds like it was written by some sort of Academic person - certainly not a motorcycle rider.



    Road Repairs - "Blackspot funding" takes up a big slab of the pamphlet. Seems they can't find enough money in gerneral revenue to fund spots that are bad for riders - but not so bad for cars.

    Lots of talk about "research" - why do we have to spend money on this? Ask any rider thats been around for a while and they will tell you what the results of the research are likely to come up with.

    Monash University Accident Research Centre (the people who brought you Wire Rope barriers) get a big mention. Sounds like plenty of money will get tossed at them - so they can do more research. :evil:

    Is a pamphlet really worth sending out? Or is there some better way of achieving a better result? Does anyone read this crap? Or does it just go straight into the rubbish bin?

    What do you think guys? Any sugestions/thoughts? :roll:
     
     Top
  2. You can bet that bloody pamphlet was paid for out the goddam levy :evil:
     
     Top
  3. i read through that pamphlet

    looked like a load of c rap

    and then looked at the motorcycle gear they want you to go buy and it was the pictures of each rider... "SPORTS" "OLD RIDER" "NEW RIDER" etc ?? stupid idea

    the local salesman for bikemart helped me out with gear choices, i don't need some random pamphlet.
     
     Top
  4. yeah, every one of us sends the pamphlet back to mr bracks accompanied by a letter to the effect of "piss of you twat". might aswell use some of this $50 by wasting their time the same way they like to waste our money :LOL:

    i honestly have no problem with a $50 levy, wouldn't care if it was more. my beef is with the crap its being spent on. road repairs? come on guys :roll: how bout some motorcycle aware campaingns for drivers? better rider training? a scheme similar to lams that actually makes sense?




    nar, pamphlets are much more effective than all of this together 8)
     
     Top
  5. Well I do have a problem with levy. Discriminatory and unjust, in my opinion. And buggered if you can convince me otherwise, even if it is for our own safety. Pay enough freakin tax, just like everyone else. Why should I have to pay extra because I like riding?

    Call it even if you tax 4WDs for the damage they do to the roads and environment... not to mention little kids they run over, or other vehicle occupants in a crash.

    Call it even if you tax older vehicles that burn more oil than fuel, and help to destroy the relatively clean air we still have in Australia.

    Call it even if you start taxing cars - not all, just the ones constantly used for commuting with no passengers, only a driver. We do our bit to help - but they just clog up our highways and freeways with an inefficient and uneconomical way to travel.

    As much as I hate the Liberals, if they discontinue this unjustified attack on the motorcycling community, , there's no way I'm voting for Bracks and Batchelor next election. :evil:
     
     Top
  6. I , and am sure many of you have seen where our funds are going with all the " Hight Risk Area " signs . I know im on a good road when i see them , so i fang it :D
     
     Top
  7. You saying Academics can't or don't ride motorcycles? :LOL: . Seriously though I found the section on recommended riding gear a little confusing. Couldn't work out why a newbie needs full leathers yet a returning rider can get away with a cheaper set of Cordura gear (even though stats show they are also a high crash risk).
     
     Top
  8. :D :LOL:

    You know, I think the exact same thing. I see one of those signs and think to myself: "There's a good bit of road coming up!"

    Probably useful for learners to be a little more careful entering tighter corners. I'd rather that they just marked dangerous decreasing radius corners with some sort of special sign. That'd be far more useful to riders.

    Would be much better if the $50 was spent on some level of compulsory personalised rider training when riders transition from L's to P's, compulsory rider training courses for those going for their L's as opposed to the basic jump through 5 hoops drill, and an advanced course for the transition from restricted (P's) to an unrestricted license.
     
     Top
  9. Hmmm, would be nice to see a road sign that said something like:

    60
    DR
    40

    Indicating that it's a corner that starts off like a 60kph rated curve but decreases in radius to a 40kph rated curve. We've all seen the odd corner rated sign post that appears to be rated way too low for some corner, and so bikers are often fed confusing messages.

    They'll look at some corner entry and the road sign, think that the road sign is just another one of "those" conservative speed signs and enter the corner too hot. If the sign explicitly spelled out that the radius tightens up this would go a long way to improving road safety for certain dangerous corners.

    Rather than just a blanket sign at the start of some section "High Risk Area", actually take the time to find the corners that are consistently catching the bikers out.

    There's one in particular on the Black Spur near the top that bikes come off on all the time, but is that one corner marked any differently? No. Why not? Where's that $50 going to?
     
     Top
  10. Hear hear. I was talking to a mate about this the other day. Pace notes on the signs is what's needed.

    Main square sign tells you the direction of the corner with an arrow and a recommended speed with something like 60 T 40 for corner that tightens, 60 O 80 for one that opens. Rectangular sign at the bottom shows the number of metres from the sign to the start of the bend.

    Maybe add a triangular sign with an exclamation mark for a corner with hazards (off camber, bad dip, bad surface, prone to gravel or water runoff etc.)

    Probably cost a fortune to put the signs in but you'd have to wonder what the upsides would be.
     
     Top
  11. Just renewed my rego. Over 388 bucks. Rego about 35 bucks roughly the rest insurance and taxes on taxes. Bastards.

    You're right JD. Have you seen the ads for scooters?

    Suits, skirts etc. What happens if they come down or hit a car. Are they better protected than a bike rider? ppphhhtttt

    Does the Gov jump on them to go with safety? No way. Why not?

    Look at the pushies. They go as fast as a motorcycle in traffic. What protection do those posers have. Oh yeah, lycra. :roll:

    Let's see. How would the big harley boys look in pushy gear. Downright frightening and indeed revolting. Yech. :LOL: :LOL:
     
     Top
  12. so if they didnt send it , people would scream they are being kept informed , they do send it , its a waste of money .

    as for signs it pretty simple .

    except a bit of responsability !
    if its 60 do 60 , if the advisor speed is 40 then do forty , if your not sure slow down.

    There you go theres the friggin answer and it didnt cost 100,000 dollars to find out .

    we are not victams , we are motorcyclists .
    be responsable for your own actions.
    pretty dam simple
     
     Top
  13. Maybe I was following your twin brother on a ride one day, because don't think that was the speed you were going :p :LOL:
     
     Top
  14. I don't have a problem with Monash University Accident research getting some motorcycle specific funding because if they don't then the 'solutions' they come up with will be car centric.

    If there is bike funding as well then at least some of thier government recomendations will be done with bikes in mind.

    Sure you could argue that they'd do that without specific bike funding... but honestly... I can't see that happening :)
     
     Top
  15. Yeah, and so what's the $50 for? I guess that you always take corners at their posted limits? What about DR corners that are unmarked at all? Plenty of those about.

    If they're going to nab $50 from each of us for motorcycle safety, then the very least they could do is identify the corners that are catching the bikers out continually and mark them differently/accordingly.

    Clearly most riders are taking these corners just fine 99.99% of the time, the exact problem IS the other 0.01% of the time when the corner is catching people out. People screw up. Fact of life. If they're going to take the money for improving motorcycling safety then spend the $5000 or so it would take to employ some guy to analyse a stretch of road for 2 weeks, and another $5000 to put some signs up on the corners that are deceptive.

    Yes, it's about responsibility for ones own actions. That's all well and good if YOU'VE never ever made a mistake ever and entered a tightening radius corner too hot and thought "Geez, this corner was totally unmarked, it'd be nice if it was at least signposted at all, or even better, signposted for the tightest bit of the corner with an indication that it tightened up".

    After all, isn't that what speed advisory signs are for in the first place? By your reasoning we should remove all hazard, warning and advisory signs, and if anyone crashes, be it on their own head and stuff 'em.
     
     Top
  16. What pamphlet were you looking at? The one I got didn't have any of that crap in it.

    Also - this is the first time they have sent me anything about the levy - 4 years after they started stealing it from me - that's $200 they have extracted from me - for what? A pamphlet in the mail, a few blackspots fixed in areas that I rarley ride past/through. I could name at least another 1000 spots that need fixing - if I were to apply their philosophy.

    What is worse - all these black spots will need continuous maintainence. More money required - ad infinitum...... In the long run a very expensive approach. Why not just focus on teaching riders how to ride corners properly and how to read the conditions? That's what experience has taught me.

    There must be a better way - subsidised rider training? Anyone think that would be better?
     
     Top
  17. This issue is one of the few things that makes me glad I ride in Sydney. At least we don't have a bulls%^& "safety" levy slapped on arbitrarily. Of course there are heaps of other things to piss motorcyclists off here.

    In regards to recommended speeds for corners, I think groberts has got it spot on. Make your own assessment. We are but one group of road users. If they were to mark every corner with recommended speeds for all types of vehicles, then not only would it become extremely confusing for many(thereby leading to accidents) but we would all get slapped with more taxes and levies due to the increased cost of assessing the best speeds and displaying them.

    I don't know what formula they use but I know it is a very conservative method designed to cover almost all vehicles. I do know it is based on the worst case scenario in the corner eg. inside of the turn, tighest part of the bend, worst camber. I have seen signs that cover several corners and only one of them needed the recommended speed. If you had done the recommended speed through them all then you would have had no problem. Use your judgement and common sense to determine what speed is best for you based on what they recommend. This includes consideration for blind corners, possible water runoff, being on the inside or outside of the corner etc.
     
     Top
  18. Heck, forget the speed advisory sign on the corners then.

    Just a sign that said "Tightens" would be enough. Would that keep the "use your own judgement or it's yer own fault" sayers happy?

    ...or is even that asking for too much?

    I'm just looking for a way that would help stop bikers throwing themselves off the road, and thereby reduce some of the legitimacy that politicians use for ammunition to stick these levies on in the first place.

    You know, something actually useful that reduces bike accidents and gets them off our backs. You, I, and every person you know may take corners responsibly and fine, but that's not the issue. The issue is the riders who don't judge correctly and throw themselves down the road and get the pollies punishing the rest of us.

    At least do something to help those with poor corner speed judgement that doesn't involve sticking another 20 speed cameras everywhere but where the problem actually is.
     
     Top
  19. Believe it or not the following is a true story :roll:
    When they first did the advisory speed signs in NSW many years ago they used a simple method.

    They drove an XP Falcon with a bench seat and the speed at which the passenger started to slide across the seat was rated as the advisory speed for that corner. :?

    On roads that have been essentially unchanged since then, most of those corners remain rated at those speeds! I don't know how they are rated now but knowing Government Departments :p they probably have the same XP Falcon :LOL:

    TonyE
     
     Top
  20. Hey Mark, remember, we used to call those shiny bench seats COD Seats (Come Over Darling! :LOL:)?
     
     Top