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 TAC boss talks waffle to the very end

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by cjvfr, Jul 31, 2015.

  1. The TAC boss Janet Dore is moving on from the position. One of her final badly researched, unsubstantiated pushes is to lower the drink drive limit to 0.02. In one of those breathtaking leaps from one statistic to an unsupported conclusion the TAC is renowned for she states alcohol is involved in 25% of accidents therefore lowering the limit to 0.02 will have magical accident reduction rates. How these people get their jobs I don't know. Goodbye and Good Riddance Ms Dore.

    Where alcohol is involved, what BAC levels do the majority of accidents drivers have, I would say well over 0.05 Ms Dore so lowering to 0.02 is a worthless exercise in self gratification.

    Rant Over.

    Nine News Article
    • Agree Agree x 4
  2. Didn't she start banging on about FNP again too?? What a joke.
  3. Fortunately the news seems to have latched onto the alcohol part of the story and elected not to beat up on riders. The HUN definitely featured talk about FNP's.

    Janet Dore said she can't understand why FNP's haven't been implemented. *insert roll eyes emoticons* which means she hasn't read the VMC's FNP policy paper which she was made aware of.

    Have a gander at this:

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. Ah yes I missed her FNP rant. The HUN has a story

    Herald Sun
  5. Farken.

    0.02 - might as well be 0.0002 - might as well be 0.00002

    Point is - there are people driving completely stone cold sober who are fundamentally incapable.

    Personally I don't drink and ride/drive (to excess).
    I'll ride to a mates BBQ and have 2-3 beers over a couple of hours and ride home - no problem.

    In this scenario I'm way more capable than a sober Taxi driver.....
    Just sayin'
    • Funny Funny x 2
  6. Interesting piece about Ms Dore;

    Deakin 40 Years - Janet Dore

    "....continues to push the Commission's TAC2015 six-year strategy to cut $600 million in liabilities."

    And then of course there's this;

    No Cookies | Herald Sun

    "The Transport Accident Commission’s chief executive Janet Dore, who is paid at least $460,000, even billed the public for a return trip to London from a quick private getaway to Venice."

    And then there's this;

    New TAC chief appointed as Janet Dore brings forward retirement | Geelong Advertiser

    “Janet is leaving this organisation in very strong shape. One of the things I love about the TAC is that it has got ambition hardwired in its DNA. There’s really two big goals: to make the next transformational step in road safety and accident prevention, and looking what we can do to improve our service to our clients.”
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. This second part seems to be aspirational rather than a targeted goal. When you read here and speak to people who have suffered at the hands of the TAC in their inept handling of medical injury this part would be laughable if it wasn't for the misery they cause.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  8. Heard this on the radio today (3LO, shows how old I am..lol) and thought to myself 'good riddance - so long biatch - don't come back any time soon'..
    but reading further here to find out one of her lieutenants is to take over, all I can think is fcuk no, not more of the same bullshit and vindictive attitude from the klunts...

    the day just got a little worse.....
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Janet Dore should NEVER have been the head of the TAC. She is nothing more than a third rate financial manager by training and has shown she doesn't understand the implications of the fairytale policies she and her juvenile executive have pursued.
    Good riddance and feel free to let the door smack your arse on the way out, loser.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Like it or not, the financials of the TAC are probably the most relevant statistic in regards to road trauma. Other metrics count accidents and injuries of varying severity, but only the bottom line for the TAC counts the cost accurately. That's not to say their policies have been reasonable, for example suggesting lowering the BAC limit for all drivers despite other countries having nearly twice our BAC limit and less enforcement of the same reporting similar alcohol related crash figures per capita. Idiots will be idiots regardless of legislation or regulation, there is no way to legislate against stupidity as evidenced by the sheer amount of ice addicts showing up in hospitals.

    Driver training for the majority is the only way to lower the cost in the long run, however it is far less difficult to increase training requirements for people who use the road less than cars such as motorcycles or trucks rather than simply add more infractions to legislation or tighten regulation for the majority. Most drivers in Australia think of driving as a right rather than a privilege afforded to them by showing competency in the skill.
  11. #12 Nightowl, Aug 1, 2015
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2015
    TAC doesn’t calculate any cost accurately. Its actions and conduct in the context of ‘statistics’ increases the real costs to the community (both direct & indirect costs) of road trauma by failing to provide what it’s mandated to provide in a timely and efficient manner, its deliberate lumbering ignorance & dubious practices.
    It is an extremely toxic entity whose influence infiltrates and poisons other sectors.
    It has a vested interest in increasing fear mongering, in cultural conditioning that results in implementing ineffective policies etc so as to increase the amount it’s mandated to leech out of the public pocket so as to play the stockmarket in order to return dividends to gvt.* It’s not committed to reducing road trauma, it’s a contributor to it.

    *When it comes to the TAC, I'm reminded of the early McDonalds business model (popular in courses studied by business/MBA grads of late 80s through 90s). Most people would see McD as being in the business of burgers, chips etc (fast food, devoid of much nutritional value until it came under pressure to change), whereas in reality its real money-making engine, its real business, was its little known real estate business behind the scenes.
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. Always love to hear from you Nightowl :)

    Even if increasing costs could be relied on as "accurate", that statistic would still need to factor in rising costs for almost all services.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Thanks minglisminglis , likewise, great to find you're still here. :)
  14. Much like the Catholic Church......

    Always a pleasure NightowlNightowl - been too long.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. The catholic church has a much longer view to realestate than McDonalds. 100 years, 300, 500 ...
    • Agree Agree x 2
  16. I'd like to say FUKKER, but looking at her pic I couldn't wish that on anyone.
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Im so tired of this government. What next? How much deeper can they stick it in us?
  18. We have had a change of government and the new mantra is the same old tired one. It would appear to be the senior public servants that are pushing this rubbish.
  19. This government has not been in long, it's government in general and the senior bureaucrats I'm sick of, bring on the revolution!