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.

VicRoads Focus Group

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by boz, Feb 25, 2005.

  1. I know several other netriders (at least 2 of you anyways - glen and matt) have participated in the vicroads focus group sessions over the past couple of days. When arrived a group of older riders (most with ulysses badges) were leaving so they do seem like they were getting a good representative sample.

    I was just wondering what people's thoughts were on these?

    For information (for others who did not attend) the focus group seemed to revolve around 3 primary areas:
    1) What are the issues facing motorcyclists
    2) What are the key messages that need to be given to motorcyclists
    3) What is the best way to get information to motorcyclists

    For each of these areas there was first a brainstorming session where we thought of all the issues related to the area. Following the brainstorming session, the focus group leader (researcher) then showed a list of answers to these three issues presumably compiled by VicRoads. The group then commented on this list.

    From my view, the group I was with raised most of the standard points related to each of these 3 major areas (i.e. training, WRB, FNP, proper gear, hazard ID/perception (tied in with training), driver awareness).

    With respect to the prepared lists a few things irked me. First (in relation to area #2) they used the term "excessive speed" being an issue. That was quickly altered to innapropriate speed (we were told that almost every other group made this correction). When the issues of FNP and WRB were brought up they were quickly forgotten by the researcher (in fairness I think she was more interested and told to focus on the training and how to make motorcyclists more aware of the issues than the particulars of road safety design).

    Also on the vicroads lists they had the suggestion of only allowing the use of a motorcycle during the day and when it isn't raining. This was not agreed to by the group - it was pointed out that sometimes a bike is the only means of transport, that riders can not always predict the weather conditions 'later' in the day and if they have never (or rarely) ride in rain they are at a greater risk, etc. I was rather shocked that this was even thought of by vicroads. It was also pointed out that night riding is often helpful because it means the rider is more aware of the overall road and surroundings, rather than being able to concentrate on fine details that can distract them.

    In relation to delivering messages they asked if stats were valuable. the group said not really, because the stats collected are so unreliable. Things like the fact that quad bikes, unlicensed riders, unregistered off road bikes, etc. are all included in the stats really makes them misleading. We did discuss alternatives - for instance using advertisements or other media to show things we should be aware of (i.e. they have stats suggesting down hill curves tend to have a greater proportion of accidents. Instead of providing the stats they should inform us how to deal with down-hill curves rather than just telling us they are dangerous). The 'perfect day' ad by the road safety group in the UK was raised as a good example of positive and constructive information.

    The other thing that really bothered me was the motorcycle focus - they wanted to know only what the issues were related to motorcycles specifically. They did not seem to care that much that one of teh biggest issues is the disrespect that many drivers show motorcyclists, nor did they want to try to educate the driver and motorcyclists on how to be civil. They only wanted to teach us how we do bad things, or how we could be better.

    A few other things were brought up as well, but I think I have droned on long enough for people to get the point...
  2. Boz, these are my posts from another forum.

  3. Good to meet you Boz

    riding home and earlier today I thought a a few other things I should have said but I missed out.....jezz even now I can remember what they were.
  4. I totally agree with the points brought up against this!!! How they could even consider this :x People need experience in all conditions, so many people rely on bikes for their jobs (couriers, commuters etc), WTF????
  5. I did VicRoads focus group testing 2(3?) yrs ago now. From the above and everything else you said, the questions and queries haven't changed. Seems that take sweet FA notice of their focus group testing.
  6. And you were expecting?
  7. Well with all the money, time and effort that goes into these focus groups I would be expecting a lot more.

    Are PrickToads really interested in road safety? Or do they think that their idea of a band-aid solution is actually doing something for rider safety?
  8. I thought Vic Roads were your mates Vic?
    when they showed a list of the websites and asked if people went to them to check about safety and other issues , the only 3 non gov websites except for (mraa and Vmu ) was netrider and wima and MCNEWS.
    so they are even advertising for you .
  9. Ok so they did listen to my suggestion. I take it all back, well dont PrickToads :)
  10. Oh, that's interesting. So you mean to tell is the Vicroads is so smart that they are leaving themselves open to negligence claims? Last time I looked if you were providing a service that could have some kind of danger to it and did not inform the public then you opened yourself up to liability claims. It may not be the case at the moment - but it might only take one lawsuit to change the face of what the TAC is legally reposible to do forever.
  11. I have been to two so far although they were a while ago. Those two sessions were the same and judging by Glens and Jasons comments, they havent changed :roll:
    The only thing that I thought was good, is that I have almost got the levy back in payments for attending. A bit peeved that I didnt hear about these ones as I would have drawn even :LOL:
  12. Many "focus groups" are simply looking for proof to justify their intended actions. This can be done by asking leading questions, etc. In reality do you think TAC wants more bikes around? If a motorcycle was just now invented do you think Vic Roads and TAC would allow it to be registered?

    Did they ask if seatbelts would help on bikes??? LMAO

    On a more serious note I have delt with VR on many training issues and I do hope this focus group can achieve much more. Without naming names, some people in gov employment have no concept of reality or common sense. Did you know that some of them have even looked at a motorcycle!!! One day they may even sit on one!!!

  13. OK, it's late and I'm not very bright. FNP?

  14. Front Number Plates