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.

NSW Better drivers -- safer roads

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by A boy named Sue, Mar 12, 2013.

  1. Also Learner drivers can go 90kph rather than 80kph I assume the same will apply to riders!


    Big changes for learner drivers in NSW

    By Lawrence Champness

    "I think there is going to be rejoicing across the state this afternoon from parents and the young people" said NSW Roads Minister Duncan Gay after his announcement of changes to the system for learner drivers in the state.​
    The biggest change for learner drivers and their families is that drivers will now be able to cut down the amount of supervised driving hours from 120 hours to 80 hours.
    The amount of hours will be reduced by 40 hours if the drivers do 10 hours of professional lessons and also a safe driving course.
    "We had a situation that whenever there was a problem on the roads, whenever there was an accident, we bumped the hours up, they went from 20 to 40 to 60 to 80 to 120.
    What we are saying is that it probably didn't improve their ability to drive.
    We put parents and young people in a situation where they were probably cheating and we weren't training them" said Mr Gay.
    Safe driving courses will be available from July 1 and will be subsidised.
    "We are going to subside the course with money from speed cameras.
    We will lower the hours provided they get proper training with driver trainers, and/or a safer driver course.
    Here's a better way, less hours, better training
    The whole point of this is to have a better outcome for safety" said Mr Gay.
    Learner drivers will also be allowed to drive 10km per hour faster than they currently can, up to 90 km per hour.​
  2. #2 NSSherlock, Mar 12, 2013
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2013
    So they still get 2 hours for 1 for professional lessons up to a max of 10 hours of lessons as it was before but the big change is:

    Ref: http://www.mynrma.com.au/about/media/nrma-supports-safer-drivers-course.htm

    Nothing to say when the increase in speed limit comes into effect. That *should* also apply to bikes.

    Edit: News just said it's now 3 hours to 1 for leaner drivers with an Instructor so that's a change.
  3. Heheh....Mr gay.
    • Like Like x 2
  4. #4 Fractalz, Mar 12, 2013
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2013
  5. Both of these are a step in the right direction but still bullshit, if they can't drive at the posted speed limit of 110 after 6 months of training then they shouldn't have a licence.
    And the hours requirement is ridiculous, you can get a pilot licence in 40 hours, and you do it all going a lot faster than 90kmh.

    The difference is education, you should be able to get a car licence over a week with professional instructors.

    And I'm yet to hear a good excuse as to why we consider it safer for drivers to be forced to travel at a different speed to the traffic flow.

    TL:DR f*ck off RMS, you still have it wrong.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. And furthermore

  7. Definitely a step in the right direction, especially providing subsidises through speed cameras.
  8. Yeah, you can get a recreational pilot's license after 40 hours of strict instruction by a qualified instructor which lets you control your vehicle under limited conditions (no night flying, passenger limit, vehicle limits, altitude limits) in a totally different environment and in a totally different situation. It's not a valid comparison at all. It also takes a LOT longer than a week to gain the experience necessary to anticipate the sheer number of idiots on the road, all passing close to you, many of whom can't focus past their mobile phone or GPS screens let alone THINK about what's going on ahead of them. There's no worse driver than one who thinks they're entitled to their license.
    • Like Like x 2
  9. unsurprisingly, not everyone is in favour:
  10. Increasing the speed limit from 80 to 90 makes no sense when learners can do 100 in the rest of the country.

    If you're going to stick restrictions on L-platers, I'd much rather see a requirement that they're supervised by trained instructors rather than just anyone with a driver's licence.

    Or make learners sit their driving test while drunk, because they're going to end up driving with a BAC of 0.05 at some point so might as well make sure they're capable of piloting a car proficiently in that situation.
  11. Amen to that, Cam.

    This business of daddy or mummy passing on their total incompetence to their kids is just bloody stupid.
  12. Learners are already quite proficient at driving in an illegal manner before they ever get behind the wheel. Doing something as asinine as getting them to drive drunk is no better than lining most of them up and just shooting them in the face and will have about the same effect.
    If you drive drunk you deserve all the contempt and hate society can pile on you.

  13. I'd vote for that.
  14. I think it's brilliant. For any gov to do anything in the right direction at the mo is very unique .... rare.... farken gold.
    I think camera's make enough dough for those that be, that they should subsidize 20 hours of pro training for each student. Maybe some parents could learn how to drive then.... pitty it's off their 16 y/o kid, but none the less they would learn
  15. I really want to kick "Mr Scruby" in the balls. (a punishment normally reserved for the very worst of society)
  16. My suggestion was half-serious, half-facetious. Facetious, because on the face of it it's a stupid, but makes about as much sense as Harold Scruby's ideas and he gets covered by all of the major newspapers. Serious, because I reckon that you could probably reduce drink-driving by demonstrating to young people in a controlled environment how impaired their ability to drive is after a few drinks. I remember reading a while ago an experiment with a bunch of experienced bikers where they measured their ability to control the bike (time through a slalom course, I think). They did significantly worse after even a small amount of booze, within the legal limit.

    FWIW: a friend of mine ended up in hospital after a drunk driver ran a red light and T-boned him. The other guy immediately drove off without even checking to see if my friend was okay. (Fortunately there were witnesses.) You're not going to find me defending drink driving.
  17. It's a fair and valid point that parents should have to do some basic training before being allowed to teach kids to drive.
    My old boss told me about an incident that happened a few years ago when they were travelling down to Wollongong from Young. They were sitting on the posted limit (110) when a L plater blew past them, and badly (not holding a clean line, sudden steering changes etc). Car load of passengers, the supervising driver sitting back with his feet sticking out of the window stubby in hand. The L plater then swerved suddenly in front before overtaking the next care on the left hand side. Boss's wife called 000 on the mobile, who confirmed that was a legitimate use of the service and passed them to the police who alerted the nearest highway patrol. Ten minutes later the L plater and family were seen on the side of the road with highway patrol cars front and back. The woman in the back seat was apparently yelling and waving aggressively at the cops as my boss drove past.
    Some parents simply cannot be trusted to teach their kids to drive, but fixing the problem isn't easy.
  18. If I sounded like I was using "you" at you personally, it's not what I meant. It was a general "you" as in "that guy doing whatever it is".
    I drove my Dad home more than once because he was either drunk or toasted on pain killers (the latter legitimately for medical conditions, the former ... not so much). I understand some people find themselves in awkward circumstances, but we always have a choice.
  19. No it's not.

    Most of the parents who have held their licences for a while, couldn't pass a driving and road rules test now, assuming that they ever could.

    Re=educating the existing licence holders would be great, but it won't happen for political and economic reasons, but it would be relatively easy to stop them passing on their ignorance to their kids.

    Hereditary has already done enough damage.
  20. I reckon re-testing a full licence holder before they can supervise a learner would go some way towards improving the situation.
    • Like Like x 1