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.

VIC RACV supports frontal identification

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by Heli, Sep 12, 2013.

  1. There has been discussion within the FNP thread about the support by the RACV for Frontal Identification of motorcycles, and the forthcoming elections for the RACV Board.

    I've had two responses (out of 6 candidates approached) both of which were polite and supportive of motorcycling until it came to the RACV Policy Position on Motorcycles, at which stage I checked which single malt to help me calm down.

    The policy must have been written by someone within the RACV who is both enamoured with Mr Lewis and his rants, and has little or no understanding of the facts behind motorcycling in Victoria today.

    I can only ask that any and all of you who are RACV members use this opportunity to send a request to each of the candidates using this link asking them about their policy toward motorcycling in general, and any specifics you have from what they have published?

  2. #2 BUBF, Sep 12, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 20, 2013
    This is my response from RACV and highlights their backward bias.

    Driver training
    RACV’s policy position
    September 2013
    RACV is very active in the area of road safety, and understands the need for continuing education programs to minimise driver mistakes and improve driver safety.

    In order to understand the effectiveness of driver training on behaviour and reducing crash risk, RACV has commissioned several research reports on driver training in recent years to determine what initiatives are best practice and have rigorous scientific research evidence to support them.

    The research has found that there is no sound evidence that either advanced or defensive driving courses reduce the crash involvement of experienced drivers who attend them.

    For younger drivers in particular , there is little evidence that young novice drivers who undertake driver training programs have a reduced crash risk or fewer traffic violations. This training often leads to an increase in confidence and the belief that the novice driver is more skilful than they actually are. Some novice drivers, particularly young males, have an increase in crash risk after driver training (in particular for off - road and defensive driving courses).

    Research did conclude that alternative road safety initiatives for novice drivers may be more beneficial than conventional driver training. One alternative is to ensure that learner drivers get extensive on road driving experience in all conditions and road environments. Learner drivers who receive 120 hours of supervised experience have up to 35% fewer crashes after they get their probationary licence than those who receive only 40 - 50 hours. As a consequence of this information, RACV strongly advocated for and is supportive of Victoria’s Graduated Licensing System with its minimum of 120 hours supervised experience for learner drivers.

    RACV is also a partner in the P Drivers Project, which is a large scale road safety research project to develop and implement a behaviour change program for young P plate drivers aged between 18 to 22 years. This project is one of the largest and most complex scientific research studies undertaken in the area of driver education in the world. The research is focusing on current behaviour, decision making and risk - taking and exploring further inirtiatives that will help reduce the number of crashes and fatalities involving young, inexperienced drivers and promote their safe driving behaviour.

    It involves classroom sessions as well as an on - road driving session. RACV is very pleased to be involved in the P Driver Project and is keen see the outcomes which will shape RACV’s position and handling of driver training in the future. More information can be sourced from RACV’s report “The effectiveness of driver training as a road safety measure – 2011 edition,” which is available on our website:

    Guess who I wont be voting for..

    Looks like these are canned responses for RACV.
  3. And there are motorcyclists in Victoria that support these bastards by being members or buying insurance from them? Why?
  4. The RACV is not very representative of its members and its more than likely due to its virtual monopoly in roadside assistance. Without roadside assistance its insurance business would struggle.

    We need a viable alternative roadside assistance offering to the RACV and this will most likely come from a newly formed publicly listed company or current insurer. The RACV's tune would change overnight.
  5. #5 mainstage, Sep 12, 2013
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2013

    That's a good point mate I think if riders knew about the RACV position on FNP most would change insurance providers .

    We need to get the message out there to riders on all mc forums fb all social media , change your insurance,, change your break down service ,,and email RACV to tell them why " fcukers

    Ps the majority of netriders wouldn't even know about this shit .for me we need to get the message on to every sub forum or PM all Victorian members ,
  6. #6 robsalvv, Sep 13, 2013
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2013
    The more I've thought about this, the more I think that the 6 candiates should be exposed to the motorcycle fails and ethical conflicts that RACV appear to have.

    The motorcycle policy supports frontal identification based on a selective use of RSCC supplied stats. The same stats that show the increase in failed frontal ID also show a small drop in speeding over three years. This is whilst registrations increased by 10%. (That's a strong real terms reduction). The increase in failed frontal id is consistent with an increase in forward facing camera use, not an increase in speed. Riding has recorded a real terms decrease. Why hasn't the policy properly reflected this?

    Also, RACV supports the RSCC who has failed to provide the Police study that was central to his justification for FNP's, the police study that four FOI's can't find, the Victoria Police says doesn't exist and a police study with speed characterisations not backed up by any current road safety database or any safetycrat in the media. If 84% of rider fatalities occurred at over 120km/h, it'd be news - at least half of those would have been occuring in metro area. The RSCC has steadfastly obfuscated on the point of this study mischaracteristing it on 3AW and in his latest report where he classed the study as outdated / irrelevant ... fatality stats are never out of date or irrelevant. The RSCC has shown massive disrespect.

    Is the RACV happy to support the RSCC who is playing loose and with a fair degree of intellectual dishonesty?

    Then there is the whole PIMs debacle which you can read about in the PIMS thread (search my posts and RACV). If you're an RACV member, ask the candidates for their motorcycle policy, then follow up with some hard hitting questions.

    Interestingly, they support stationary traffic filtering. That came out of the blue. But they lay claims about splitting being dangerous... ask them to prove it!
    • Like Like x 1
  7. I've always been a member of NRMA/RACV etc purely for the roadside assist, I'd go with others if they were available. Maybe if Repco could add roadside assist from each of their centres or something.

    Never have/will hold a RACV policy though, they seem to think that people are members because they want to be. The letters in their newsletter are always good for a laugh, usually grey nomads complaining about p platers and such.
  8. NSW Motorcycle Alliance - Don't let the name fool you, they will cover you anywhere in the country. http://www.motorcycling.com.au/
    • Like Like x 1
  9. RACV board pressured by outside candidates

    Date September 19, 2013 - 3:48PM Adam Carey and Marnie Banger

    Wealthy and influential motoring club the RACV is facing intense pressure from a handful of outside candidates vying for election to its exclusive board.

    The candidates are pushing the conservative organisation to do more for country Victorians, younger members and public transport users.

    More than 1 million Royal Automobile Club of Victoria members started receiving their ballot papers for the election late last week.

    A number of board seats come up for election every year, but last year fewer than 7 per cent of 1.13 million eligible members bothered to vote. All sitting board members up for re-election last year were returned.

    Ballots for the 2013 election were mailed to eligible RACV members last week, with six positions on the 16-member board open.

    Fairfax Media quizzed each of the six incumbent candidates and the six outside contenders on their priorities.

    The six sitting board members declined to answer, pointing to a list of commitments already published online.

    Despite the low active engagement of its members, the RACV has used its clout and wealth – it has annual revenue of $430 million – to lobby forcefully for major road upgrades on behalf of all Victorians.

    Atop its wishlist is the full east-west link from Sunshine to Clifton Hill, which it considers Victoria's No. 1 transport project, followed by the completion of the ring road from Greensborough.

    It also advocates building the Melbourne Metro rail tunnel, but board candidate and Darebin Greens councillor Trent McCarthy said the RACV's transport agenda was overwhelmingly pro-motorist.

    "The RACV claims to be a leading voice on transport issues so it should have a sustainable, 21st-century vision," Mr McCarthy said.

    "You can't fix Melbourne's congestion woes with a six-kilometre tunnel, but you can make a difference by extending train and tram lines, removing level crossings and improving cycling infrastructure."

    Regional candidates Julie Green and Tom Houlihan both called for a better deal for country members, with Ms Green pushing for safer country roads and Mr Houlihan calling for more roadside assistance in remote areas.

    The six sitting members' combined statement can be read at racvelection.info.

    The six other candidates' statements can be found at theage.com.au.

    Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/racv-board-pressured-by-outside-candidates-20130919-2u1k0.html#ixzz2fKNcaZW7
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. Malaysia has front number plates for motorcycles.

    Malaysia also has a totally abysmal road safety record on par with other big smashers like mainland China and India.
  11. Is it all bikes or just the taxi bikes with FNP's?
  12. Candidates for RACV board are being interviewed by Jon Faine on ABC AM. Several of them have voiced policies of replacing private vehicles with public transport and bicycles.
    Seriously, is this in the organisation's charter?
  13. All bikes as far as I've seen. Next time I'm there I'll check but I'm pretty sure it is all bikes.
  14. Yet another "representative organisation" that's run by a bunch of muppets with the government's hands up their arses!
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Sorry? What? Have I missed something? I always thought that RACV stood for Royal Automobile Club Victoria.

    Well, all I can say to you Victorians is that you are truly fcuked when the body that is supposed to be on the side of the Automobile is declaring it's love for push bikes, buses, trains and trams.
  16. Too big a question to be answered here, but I do wonder what exactly are the benefits to the 'members' that this definition implies...
    It ain't in significantly cheaper pricing than for-profit competitors.
  17. I haven't followed the fnp thread at all so this may have been discussed. But a non number ID such as a QR code would be a lot less difficult to implement and not intefere significantly with the aesthetics of a motorcycle. A 5 × 5 black and white grid has 50 times the encryption as a standard number plate. Obviously I'm not suggesting to not fight frontal identification but it's worth discussing more palatable ideas for if the case is lost.
  18. I think people do not want frontal identification. Even car owners are talking about how bad their cars look with front number plates especially on the sports cars.
  19. What the?!?!?! Oh... I get it... You're only joking! Carry on! :p
  20. The Malaysian front number plate system is there for identification and won't work here because they want Motorcycles to have FNP for speed cameras. While scooters have the "knife" style number plate mounted parallel to the bike. Sports bike normally have a sticker on their windscreen or fender. As the size is not regulated, I have seen some as small as 3x3cm for each letter.