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.

Victorian Speed Limits Illegal?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by Sir Ride Alot, Apr 9, 2010.

  1. Is it safe to say that a speed limit is law?

    If so in a democracy is it only the elected that can create or change law?

    Is it undemocratic for an unelected person or body to create or change law?

    Is it undemocratic for an elected person or body to delegate law to an unelected person or body?

    Has an unelected person or body that created or changed a law actually broken a law?

    Has an elected person or body delegating a law to an unelected person or body actually broken a law?

    Are Victorian speed limits undemocratic and illegal?

    Ask your elected state representative.

  2. An unelected body is empowered by legislation to enact such laws as speed limits
  3. pfft what makes you think we live in a democracy, try police state
  4. I was always of the belief that an unelected person or body may be empowered to maintain or enforce a law but not to create or change a law as the society would then cease to be a democracy.
  5. your elected officials vest power into these bodies via legislation to make them statutory authorities granted them limited powers pertaining to their charter

    its a proxy thing basically
  6. Go and test the speed limit law in court, you wont test it here.
  7. Google subordinate authority.

    That you must adhere to the posted speed limit is law.
    Vicroads have been given the authority to post the speed limit.

    In other words: applying a speed limit to a given area is not creating a new law.
  8. What he said.
  9. But without a referendum is it legal?
  10. Basically - yes. The authority to make and change the regulations is vested in VicRoads in this case.

    perhaps Tramp can explain it in words of one syllable or less. :)
  11. We aren't changing the constitution here!
  12. I am still of the opinion that delegating the ability to create or change law to an unelected person or body is illegal. Even if it’s legislated it doesn’t make it right.

    If the police are given the power to alter speed limits then they will profit from it. This is a given. Take the reefton spur for example. The police lobied VicRoads to reduce the speed limit. As soon as it was lowered they were up there with radar guns. It stinks to high heaven.

    The whole idea of democracy is to stop the sort of behaviour below. For example a dictatorship. Note the comments in the last paragraph by Ted Baillieu.

    Pipeline critic spied on, tailed

    MELISSA FYFE THE AGE April 11, 2010

    THE extent of the Brumby government's monitoring of protesters has been revealed for the first time, with previously secret documents showing a key north-south pipeline critic was spied on, filmed, photographed and tailed while driving.

    Her activities were tracked, noted and shared with the police over two years.

    The state's Privacy Commissioner is investigating the government's extensive monitoring of Jan Beer, 62, a Yea farmer and Plug the Pipe spokeswoman.

    Civil libertarians say privacy laws have been broken and the documents show the government has stepped on basic rights in its efforts to protect major projects from lawful protests.

    Using freedom-of-information laws, Mrs Beer asked Melbourne Water to release all information held about her. Melbourne Water, the government entity behind the construction of the controversial pipeline designed to deliver extra water to the city, identified more than 600 pages of material in 102 documents. It recently released 88 of the documents to Mrs Beer.

    The information in the documents - mostly monthly, weekly and incident reports shared between the water authority and its three private construction partners in the Sugarloaf Pipeline Alliance - was collected by private security officers and government pipeline workers. The notes record Mrs Beer's activities not only near pipeline sites, but also elsewhere, such as at a local wetland where she gave a talk to students last year.

    The documents frequently note that her ''activities will continue to be monitored'' and that the information was shared with Victoria Police and even the force's Security Intelligence Group, the division that does counterterrorism work. The released material included photographs and about 35 minutes of video footage of Mrs Beer at protests.

    In one of the documents, an Alliance worker records following Mrs Beer along the Melba Highway as the Yea farmer inspected the pipeline route. Mrs Beer's newspaper letters, talkback calls and media comments are also documented.

    Most notes taken about Mrs Beer do not accuse her of illegal behaviour - except for her arrest, with eight others, for trespass and obstruction, at a 2008 protest. The charges never reached court.

    The documents released to Mrs Beer also reveal a new level of government media monitoring, with the Alliance paying a company $17,500 to analyse whether print coverage was favourable and to observe the coverage of ''standout publications'' and ''standout journalists''. The names of the publications and journalists had been deleted.

    Liberty Victoria president Michael Pearce, SC, said it appeared Melbourne Water had breached privacy laws as it was not allowed to collect information about Mrs Beer without evidence she was planning an unlawful act. ''These people don't have a general right to spy on people who are opposed to what they are doing. This is a return to the bad old days of the Special Branch and ASIO snoops everywhere.''

    Anthony Bendall, deputy commissioner at Privacy Victoria, would not comment on the specific case, but told The Sunday Age that the law says a government entity must give reasonable notice to a person that it was collecting information about them; must tell them why they are collecting the information, and how they will use it.

    Mrs Beer says Melbourne Water never told her about the monitoring. ''If it was any other individual collecting this sort of information on me … they would in all likelihood be charged with harassment and stalking.''

    But Melbourne Water insists it did not breach privacy laws and was monitoring protesters under the Water Act, which allows for ''reasonable measures'' to stop the obstruction of infrastructure. A spokesman said the monitoring had nothing to do with the controversial Memorandum of Understanding the Alliance signed with Victoria Police. The MOU has not been released but, if it is similar to the desalination MOU, would provide for the public and private parties to gather intelligence on protesters and share it with police.

    Refusing to comment on Mrs Beer, Melbourne Water and the government said monitoring was necessary because the construction sites were numerous, potentially dangerous and subject to many threats and incidents.

    Government spokesman Luke Enright said: ''Pipeline opponents threatened to blow up the pipe, physically intimated, abused and swerved their cars at pipeline workers and in one instance threw a Molotov cocktail at the site, so monitoring them when they were seen around the pipe was more than justified.''

    Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu said the government had become paranoid. ''These revelations confirm many of our worst fears that the Brumby government is engaged in spying and harassment of opponents.''

  13. 1)They're not creating or changing the law. As explained above, the law says we have to obey the speed limit. The authority to set the speed limit is delegated to VicRoads.

    2)The police don't set the limit, nor do they profit from infringements. VicRoads set the limits, and fine income goes to the government - consolidated revenue I think. Police get funding to run operations, but they don't 'profit' as such.

    I'm not really seeing a relevant link between speed limits and surveillance of protesters, sorry...
  14. No... but there is a relevant link between overly politicised Chief Commissioners (plural... yes I'm looking at you Christine, you too Simon), and Government policies. :censored:

    Our Police should be there to 'serve and protect' the community, not to bow to to second rate ex-school teachers on power trips.

    Doesn't make it illegal though... just a bit dodgy.
  15. In Vic the motto is "Uphold the Right".
  16. Thats not a bad summary. ^^=D>

    The "Constitution argument" has been run many times and it's just plain wrong. And the few times it's been tried in a court it has failed.
    Speed limits are set by a body empowered to do so by the State Govt.
    As such they are legal and enforceable, end of story.
  17. Here is the basic fault in your argument. The law is exceeding the indicated speed limit.

    The setting of the limit is not a legislative device. Only the mechanism to prosecute those that have exceeded it is.
  18. Erk...

  19. Yeah... and it used to be 'Tenez le Droit' but people couldn't be bothered translating anymore. ;)
  20. It was probably also too confusing for our French visitors: "Hold it straight" (or upright)!....
    A bit like "GROCON".... they should have checked before writing this in big on their trucks!!:p