No more (//) signs in the territory?? - Page 2

xbgs351 · 27-09-2006, 02:44 PM

I would be surprised if a 110 km/h speed limit would make people drive any slower. It will just mean that ordinary people will become law breakers. Out in Western New South Wales, if you sit on 110 km/h most cars will pass you. Not just young male 'hoons', but people of both sexes and the full range of professions.

Sitting on 110km/h may make sense for people living in major metropolitan or regional cities when trips are just a few hours and there is plenty of scenery, but when you have a 600 km trip with boring scenery, I for one feel far safer driving at higher speeds and completing the drive before fatigue becomes a serious issue.

clontarf_x · 27-09-2006, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xbgs351

Sitting on 110km/h may make sense for people living in major metropolitan or regional cities when trips are just a few hours and there is plenty of scenery, but when you have a 600 km trip with boring scenery, I for one feel far safer driving at higher speeds and completing the drive before fatigue becomes a serious issue.

Seconded

Lord knows if I sat on the speed limit between towns on my down-south cruises (about 2.5 thousand k's in 4 days) I'd be knackered, therefore putting myself and other road users in serious danger of injury or death...

LTDHO · 27-09-2006, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 05MkIIFutura

I would be a supporter of a blanket 45km/h speed limit in built up areas (excluding arterial roads obviously)

I would support this if it saved lives.

Quote:

Originally Posted by davway

thats funny....OF COURSE!
theres a lot of $$$$$ to be made off of speeding fines.

I know, I live in Vic too!! :P But on roads in the middle of the outback??

Jack, what do you think, will local cops worriy about this or more important things?

desGT · 27-09-2006, 03:23 PM

Can someone point me to an official statement (did a google search, but obviously using the wrong terms)? A few of us were planning a trip mid-next-year.

FORGET THIS, JUST NOTICED ALL THE REPLIES - YOU WERE ALL TOO QUICK FOR ME.

4.9 EF Futura · 27-09-2006, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 05MkIIFutura

That letter doesnt make much sense to me

Ford and Holden dont develop or engineer their cars with the intention of catering for the NT residents who account for less than 1% of Australia's population (and prob even less of the overall car market considering the concentration of corporations on the east coast). 99.9% of Falcons and Commodores are AT BEST cruising at 115km/h on the Hume, but even this speed is very over-optimisitic. If NT reduce their max speed, Ford and Holden wont do one thing differently.

I can see what you are trying to get at here, and thats if people spend less time on the road the they will have less accidents. Yeah, you are opening a can of worms there, that is the age old scientists argument of "do you stay drier from running in the rain", plus i would argue the ability to avoid accidents at lower speeds is far better. But we wont go into that one.

No personal offence intended, but your reply sounds like you didnt read the draft letter terribly well. It is not the representation of the NT population that was being questioned.

The letter draws logical conclusions from logical observations, is very well written (i just fed it into MS Word and the readability statistics are almost perfect... i'd suggest Iphido writes a lot of letters in his/her chosen profession?)

Have another read....

Dazza XLT · 27-09-2006, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orsomxc

I have a customer who bought a truck cheap from NSW because it was busted 3 times doing over 160kph.

The same truck is now running free in QLD.

There is a whole fleet of Kenworths that haul to Darwin. And I know for a fact that they travel with 3 trailers at over 140 on some roads.
One was caught between Charleville and Cunnamulla last year... 143kph with 2 loaded trailers of steel.
All their trucks, trailers and dollies are maintained to an excellent standard, and instead of having the usual 3rd Trailer Sway, these road trains run straight as a dye.
But it's way too fast for 100t of Road Train to be travelling at full stop, straight or not.
I know that Queensland Transport now has the ability to log into the trucks computer and download all the relevant information to check travelling speeds, and they have caught a few out around this area already.

Cheers

**Professor Farnsworth** · 27-09-2006, 03:55 PM

I'm surprised it's taken this long for the suggestion to become more than just a suggestion. I don't support it, as with many others i was looking forward to a 'leisurely cruise' up to and through the NT. I support it in a radius of say, around 10km from minor and major towns, and incidental black spots/winding areas, but on flat open desert roads, i think unlimited (or maybe 160ish limited) roads are fine.

I've never been up there, so i couldn't say how many NT residents actually take the unlimted signs literally (flat out) and how many people just sit on 120 or so.. so it depends on the percentages of those two populi as to whether the law will be a favoured move by the government in the eyes of the people, or not.

When i was in high school, we had an annual trip to the alice for the Year 11's. My older sister's year level went up there, she didn't go though, we weren't financial for it at the time. This proved to be a god send, as the bus crashed up there, killing the student up the front, paralysed some, and left others as amputee's. This however happened on one of the dirt roads, which i believe was also unlimited. Apparently the bus hit a pot hole on a corner, and rolled at high speed. Some of you may have seen it on the news back in the day, i believe it was around 1993-4 ? That was a shocking time.

Having said that, i still believe in the unrestricted (or partially restricted, 160ish) limits in the Territory as a whole, but only on sealed roads, and out of the limits of towns.

Dazza XLT · 27-09-2006, 03:59 PM

I always used to travel at 140kph. I was comfortable to cruise at this speed. Most people I knew or worked with, would sit on around 140kph too.
I sat on 160 heading across the Barkly, as its basically straight.
But there are some sections from Katherine to Darwin which should have limits imposed. You cannot take some of the bends safely at more than 140 IMO.

Cheers

Outbackjack · 27-09-2006, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LTDHO

I would support this if it saved lives.

I know, I live in Vic too!! :P But on roads in the middle of the outback??

Jack, what do you think, will local cops worriy about this or more important things?

I think that the cops will try and do important things. But their political master will force them onto the highway with a quota to fill. Now I know why the NT labor government is recruting 90 odd new police. Man, these polititions are sleazy sneaky SOB's.

Outbackjack · 27-09-2006, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darran

I always used to travel at 140kph. I was comfortable to cruise at this speed. Most people I knew or worked with, would sit on around 140kph too.
I sat on 160 heading across the Barkly, as its basically straight.
But there are some sections from Katherine to Darwin which should have limits imposed. You cannot take some of the bends safely at more than 140 IMO.

Cheers

I think that they have limits (110) on those roads that you are talking about. I usually cruise on the 140 mark unles I am in familiar territory, then 150 to 160 is punched into the cruise control.

flappist · 27-09-2006, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fantz

I'm surprised it's taken this long for the suggestion to become more than just a suggestion. I don't support it, as with many others i was looking forward to a 'leisurely cruise' up to and through the NT. I support it in a radius of say, around 10km from minor and major towns, and incidental black spots/winding areas, but on flat open desert roads, i think unlimited (or maybe 160ish limited) roads are fine.

I've never been up there, so i couldn't say how many NT residents actually take the unlimted signs literally (flat out) and how many people just sit on 120 or so.. so it depends on the percentages of those two populi as to whether the law will be a favoured move by the government in the eyes of the people, or not.

When i was in high school, we had an annual trip to the alice for the Year 11's. My older sister's year level went up there, she didn't go though, we weren't financial for it at the time. This proved to be a god send, as the bus crashed up there, killing the student up the front, paralysed some, and left others as amputee's. This however happened on one of the dirt roads, which i believe was also unlimited. Apparently the bus hit a pot hole on a corner, and rolled at high speed. Some of you may have seen it on the news back in the day, i believe it was around 1993-4 ? That was a shocking time.

Having said that, i still believe in the unrestricted (or partially restricted, 160ish) limits in the Territory as a whole, but only on sealed roads, and out of the limits of towns.

Go up there, have a look around and you will see how it is at the moment.
All towns have limits, unlimited highway traffic flows at 130-150 or so.
The roads a much better than most other states.

The most interesting thing about NT is the way that no one tailgates like they do on the coast. Everyone seems to space themselves out. Maybe the knowlege that once past you can go as fast as you want makes more speed and less haste.

The speed limits on the bush tracks are irrelevent because no one in their right mind would be going at high speed on them and really anyone who was going at high speed would not care about any speed limits.
Do you think they will have highway patrol landcruisers doing speed patrols on the Tanami?

Dazza XLT · 27-09-2006, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

I think that they have limits (110) on those roads that you are talking about. I usually cruise on the 140 mark unles I am in familiar territory, then 150 to 160 is punched into the cruise control.

Just before Hayes Creek. Big S Bend with the overtaking lanes.
Straightens up after Douglas Daly turn-off. Quite tricky if taken at the wrong speed.

Dazza XLT · 27-09-2006, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

The most interesting thing about NT is the way that no one tailgates like they do on the coast. Everyone seems to space themselves out.

Unless the tourists are in "Convoy" Mode. 4 or 5 nose to tail!
Easily passed at 150 though.

IMO the NT Government has a few other issues it should attend to rather than worry about this.
A few years ago, Claire Martin stood up against Canberra, and said that the NT would not change the open speed limits.
I wonder what changed her mind...
Eh....thats too political for me, and I am not going into it here!

Grasshoppr · 27-09-2006, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 05MkIIFutura

That letter doesnt make much sense to me

Ford and Holden dont develop or engineer their cars with the intention of catering for the NT residents who account for less than 1% of Australia's population (and prob even less of the overall car market considering the concentration of corporations on the east coast). 99.9% of Falcons and Commodores are AT BEST cruising at 115km/h on the Hume, but even this speed is very over-optimisitic. If NT reduce their max speed, Ford and Holden wont do one thing differently.

Why doesn't it surprise me that the well structured and concise letter missed the mark for you :MrT_anim:

Both Ford and Holden test in hot weather on the NT roads to ensure the vehicles they sell ALL AROUND AUSTRALIA perform above and beyond the normal operating levels of the common consumer

This includes some high speed testing on public roads for suspension calibration etc etc etc...

It makes me angry just thinking that some people believe the crap that pollies dish out to Joe Public.

Outbackjack · 27-09-2006, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darran

Unless the tourists are in "Convoy" Mode. 4 or 5 nose to tail!
Easily passed at 150 though.

IMO the NT Government has a few other issues it should attend to rather than worry about this.
A few years ago, Claire Martin stood up against Canberra, and said that the NT would not change the open speed limits.
I wonder what changed her mind...
Eh....thats too political for me, and I am not going into it here!

The grey brigade can sometimes be in a column of up to about 7 or 8 caravans. But this is generally not an issue. In fact it can be a welcome distraction. Just wait for a nice straight stretch of road (not usually a long wait :evil_laug ) kick the loud valve and your away. And you dont have to look over your shoulder feeling guilty because you have gone over 110kph. But not for much longer it would seem.

Outbackjack · 27-09-2006, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

The speed limits on the bush tracks are irrelevent because no one in their right mind would be going at high speed on them and really anyone who was going at high speed would not care about any speed limits.
Do you think they will have highway patrol landcruisers doing speed patrols on the Tanami?

This true Flappist, but these roads are where the horendous figures for our road toll come from. Usually (but not restricted to) drunk community folk that have to come into town because their community is dry, get a belly full of grog at the Todd tavern, then load 9 or 10 mates into their beat up falcon wagon and head back to their community on dirt roads in the dark and almost always going too fast. In my letter to Delia Lawrie, I asked her to explain to me how putting speed limits on the Stuart Highway would help this situation. If I get a reply, and I wont hold my breath, I will post it on this forum. I am really interested to hear her informed answer.

05MkIIFutura · 27-09-2006, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLKPhoon

Both Ford and Holden test in hot weather on the NT roads to ensure the vehicles they sell ALL AROUND AUSTRALIA perform above and beyond the normal operating levels of the common consumer

This includes some high speed testing on public roads for suspension calibration etc etc etc...

My point was that if the speed restrictions are imposed it will not change the development of our future models (ie Ford wont go changing the final drive ratios in the Falcon because of it), they arent developed with 160km/h NT cruising as a priority.

Outbackjack · 27-09-2006, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLKPhoon

Why doesn't it surprise me that the well structured and concise letter missed the mark for you :MrT_anim:

Both Ford and Holden test in hot weather on the NT roads to ensure the vehicles they sell ALL AROUND AUSTRALIA perform above and beyond the normal operating levels of the common consumer

This includes some high speed testing on public roads for suspension calibration etc etc etc...

It makes me angry just thinking that some people believe the crap that pollies dish out to Joe Public.

Dead right, we often see holden, ford, nissan, and even boeing!! testing their products in hot weather over long distances out here.

05MkIIFutura · 27-09-2006, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLKPhoon

Why doesn't it surprise me that the well structured and concise letter missed the mark for you :MrT_anim:

No need to get personal, geez

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLKPhoon

It makes me angry just thinking that some people believe the crap that pollies dish out to Joe Public.

I dont believe everything people tell me, i do however believe the laws of physics

Grasshoppr · 27-09-2006, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 05MkIIFutura

No need to get personal, geez

Point taken

Quote:

Originally Posted by 05MkIIFutura

I dont believe everything people tell me, i do however believe the laws of physics

So you would also believe in Education then.... this alone would prevent more deaths across the country, but the pollies will not invest one dollar of the millions they take annually from our pocket (touch wood, not mine in over 3 years) for a simple 3 klms over the limit here in Victoria. :jab:

By increasing the knowledge and driving skill of the "lowest common denominator driver" that they are so quick to change these rules for we would all be in a happier place. Higher speed limits, lower road toll and lower road rage to boot.

05MkIIFutura · 27-09-2006, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nugget378

Good on you mate.
Is it any wonder governments can get away with enacting rediculous law's.
there is always some stooges handy for a sound bite that helps them,or that believe there tripe,and scewed statistics...

There is no doubt in my mind that the Govt skews stats to help their argument - but are you honestly convinced none of that happens here??

Like i said, i agree with lower speed limits in built up areas where travel distances and times are not large. After doing some work on the whole speed thing with tests and the like on how it affects car performance and road suer safety (which mind you, i went into with the same thoughts as you on the matter), it becomes very clear very quickly how reducing your speed from 60 to 50, or 55 to 45 makes a HUGE difference.

Mind you I also bat for increased speed limits on motorways, where conditions are controlled and you wont get toddlers running out chasing balls. However while our vehicle fleet is so old, we have drivers who are convinced it is OK to stop on the side of the motorway and get out by stepping INTO the lane, i can appreciate why govt's are keen to keep a handle on speed.

Unless the government can be shown that extra speed wont mean extra deaths there is no way they will be willing to risk paying the premiuim for every extra dead person the increased limits make (isnt it about $500,000 per death??) Its not all about revenue raising, they genuinely want to keep you alive to vote them in next election cause if you die, they will lose!!

Keepleft · 27-09-2006, 07:00 PM

Longish response, sorry -

I have never been totally 'comfortable' with NT's blanket,-'geographically open' and legislated, speed derestriction application.

It works this way; NT has a seperate traffic regulation to the ARR-Rule 25(3)(b) which basically 'opts-out' of the national rural default, as applied to light vehicles. In effect for these; no absolute speed limit applies outside ALL town areas in NT, regardless of road quality and regardless of (//) signs being posted or not, except if a speed restriction sign is used on the length.

It is simply ludicrous to allow no absolute limit on the vast majorty of NT dirt roads, and some lengths of poorer quality asphalt.

I am very Germanic in my speed management advocacy. I'll remind that one of the key NT proponents on the NT Road Safety Council is NT's Police Commissioner, lord only knows his background, mind you, - some of his crash investigation colleagues are not so enthausiastic. Other proponents of this are Harold Scruby and the Commonwealth.

Now, this all said - there is NO valid reason why NT's remote key asphalt, wider lengths of highway, such as major length portions of the Stuart should have a speed limit.

Further, in my own correspondence to the Minister some weeks ago, I mentioned to NOT fine drivers for exceeding a default rural speed limit when the driver had passed a speed derestriction sign. The Commonwealth is contracturally bound to not mis-represent the UN meaning of the sign.

(//) = END OF ALL LOCAL PROHIBITIONS IMPOSED ON MOVING VEHICLES.
Some respondents mention vehicle testing; It is true this happens, but not just with Australian domestic makes, foreign vehicles are indeed taken to NT for testing for NVH, sealing and so on. Australia exports vehicles increasingly to the HOT middle east, where an increasing number of progressive governments are signposting 160km/h speed limits.

My only suggestion to such governments is to derestrict instead, this will reduce the 'bunching-up effect' you get, even at 160km/h maximums.

We could debate this much. I have seen back in late 1978 - NSW drop its speed derestriction allowance, - open allowance in July 1978 and by July 1979 was a maximum 100km/h. This period therafter saw a big increase in police radar use and ever increasing fines for transgression, WHAT WAS LEGAL AND QUITE SAFE ONE DAY AND YEAR - WAS ILLEGAL AND 'PUNISHED' THE NEXT. Each year your states Attorney General 'predicts' fine income.

Speed restriction 100km/h application had proven to cause ever frustrated people to drive like a-holes and not take the care or polite manner that they once did in their driving when under derestriction.

The road toll dropped here, (well not quite on some ex (//) roads) but did so in every other western developed country too on the same timeframe. Shortly after the dropping of NSW's (//) - we had fuel strikes often for weeks on end into the early 80's, less discretionary travel = less exposure = less crash outcome.

Modern speed managers will be relying on 'The Hall Matrix' and other academic tools to further the cause of a speed limit, try and not laugh - *some* of this is reasonable.

UNLESS each and every NT fatal is examined to ISO standards and practice, then I accept none of the 'expert research', each incident should be fully investigated right down to tyre compound, as such we do in Germany. I could write thousands of pages advocating this.

We see greater and greater restrictions, the result creates precious little desire in helping one to motivate oneself to improve his or her driver abilities and behaviour. I see public service employees ever determined to ride 'road safety agenda' over a tired but increasingly angry public; as one WA ALP MP said a few years ago to me, 'its the Perth based road safety nazis that are the concern, they live here in Perth, but control regions thousands of kilometres away'. Similar feelings from the LIB opp member too.

Give me free reign people, and I'd sack many an employee, the last few years has seen these people NOT interact with the public. In politics, we call it 'arrogance'. I'd thouroughly overhaul my own jurisdictions road agency, indeed would break it up, serving highway patrol police would have no option but to either work with 'speed' as a given', just like in Germany, Dubai, Iran, India, Italy, Hungary, Italy and Austria OR find other employment. I would (and will) adopt as law my Euro standards as to vehicle equipment and driver requirement, and we'd have some balanced 'allowances'. One day.

Hell, one of NT's employees is just 'dumb', some time ago I wrote text for NT's previous "Road Users' Handbook", read to prohibit the use of rear fog lights except under hazardous weather conditions, that wasn't included after an update. Why? "I've never seen or heard of rear fog lights, and if they exist - we don't get fog in Darwin' anyway!! THESE are our "experts"????

She failed to comprehend monsoonal rain, dirt roads and dust, bushfire smoke etc and so on, I thought had she forgotten the crash where a Nissan Patrol ran into the rear of coach on a dirt road, causing a 14 yo girl to fall out the back of it (through the window) onto the dirt road only to be killed?? (Mandate rear fogs and it would not have occured, or its severity of impact much reduced).

I accused it of deliberately dumbing-down the NT populace, of 'keeping your readership in the dark', particularly when such folk would visit interstate where we actually actively fine for the offence of using rear fogs in clear weather. It really ****es me there are stupid, incompetent people who cannot fathom very simple things, yet have such yeilding power over the populace by virtue of long-term held employment, that if so used wisely, could improve road user knowledge substantially.

One thing these people know; they have career jobs, and they know MP's and Ministers come and go, - and they DO play on that, - usually to further over time their own agency agenda. Only takes one bad egg to stuff things up for all fellow employees and a generally decent public.

I will say this; speed derestriction signage might well be seen one day, to full effect, on some western remote NSW roads, turn off such onto another road - and it'll be the default 100km/h, unless again signposted (//). It is agency desired, is appropriate, and will arrive one day, but managed properly.

Quote:

05MkIIFutura wrote: Mind you I also bat for increased speed limits on motorways, where conditions are controlled and you wont get toddlers running out chasing balls. However while our vehicle fleet is so old, we have drivers who are convinced it is OK to stop on the side of the motorway and get out by stepping INTO the lane, i can appreciate why govt's are keen to keep a handle on speed.

Sympathetic - but we will not raise inter-urban motorway restrictions until all medians have barriers and the emergency U-Turn bays are 'gated' to stop people using them as intersections.

IF we are serious about road safety and allowing greater speed allowance - we *will* make it l.a.w, just like in Germany, France, Italy, Hungary - as at 2005, - that if you leave your vehicle to attend a crash or breakdown, you *must* now throw on a safety vest, no ifs, no buts, the fine in Germany approaches I am told $400 in our money. We will also mandate the UNECE triangle, one per MA, MB and MC, anything less is negligent as a failing in mduty of care by government in giving us all the freely available tools specified as standard equipment OS.

We get stuff all and it is very, very 'wrong'.

NB - A road death is put at over 1.8million dollars, this figure will havencreased. (BTRE).

Outbackjack · 27-09-2006, 07:29 PM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What you said keepleft. What you have written made perfect sense. They put a speed on the Lascetter highway a couple (maybe 4) years ago. Guess what? Hasn't changed the number of people killing themselves at all. And still it is community cars that are over crowded with a drunk driver and bald tyres. But I am sure that a limit on the stuart highway will stop all that.

Keepleft · 27-09-2006, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What you said keepleft. What you have written made perfect sense. They put a speed on the Lascetter highway a couple (maybe 4) years ago. Guess what? Hasn't changed the number of people killing themselves at all. And still it is community cars that are over crowded with a drunk driver and bald tyres. But I am sure that a limit on the stuart highway will stop all that.

I was involved in that discussion, you will recall at Mt Ebenezer a particularly bad stretch where 70km/h was posted. Basically an issue of road quality and elsewhere of wandering livestock and resultant impacts with motorists.

Properties were offered by the Commonwealth years prior, 'funds' to fully fence their boundries, the smart agents took up the offering, those that hadn't, or legged behind - had stock hit.

Thing was, like duh! - the motorist's would then RIGHTLY sue the NT government, the station owner, and the commonwealth for negligence. The panic merchants then championed the joys of speed restriction.

We can both agree, that sometimes a stretch of road needs a speed limit, and that the limit shall stay till the road is upgraded, but by christ they are not implementing them on 85th percentile.

An NT 110km/h IS NOT 85th percentile. Great for $$$ but bad for behaviour, good however for nervous tension and resultant cancers as you drive daily gnawing in tension in a fear of being booked for doing 122km/h.

Outbackjack · 27-09-2006, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keepleft

An NT 110km/h IS NOT 85th percentile. Great for $$$ but bad for behaviour, good however for nervous tension and resultant cancers as you drive daily gnawing in tension in a fear of being booked for doing 122km/h.

Ha ha ha.... I can relate to that, when ever I go down to Vic, I really notice all the scared little people gripping their steering wheels with white knuckles shining through.... swinging thier heads around like meercats scanning for, police, speed camera's, red light camera's, radar guns, patrol cars. It's a wonder anybody down there lives past 40.... :hihi:

GT-E · 27-09-2006, 08:36 PM

This is just another pathetic example of politicians looking for a quick fix *** covering.
We should firstly make out politicians accountable for any decisions they make and also put them in for 6 years so they look further ahead and actually try to fix things.

Outbackjack · 27-09-2006, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZapXR6T

This is just another pathetic example of politicians looking for a quick fix *** covering.
We should firstly make out politicians accountable for any decisions they make and also put them in for 6 years so they look further ahead and actually try to fix things.

No no.... we should give then 3 months trial. If we dont like what they are doing.... out they go!!!!

Yaw · 27-09-2006, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4.9 EF Futura

So, so, so, SO true. Big $$$ insurance companies who, well... dont even pretend to front up as motoring advocates any more.

Yes... every new law imposed upon Australian motors is another avenue for an insurer to deny a claim.

You'll find the majority of insurance companies are not motoring advocates anyway. The actual motoring clubs themselves have little to do with the insurance arm of the business.

RACQ insurance is 51% owned and run by Suncorp
NRMA Insurance is owned 100% by IAG (same owners as CGU)
RAC (Western Australia) is owned by Promina (same people that own AAMI)

Keepleft · 06-10-2006, 04:31 PM

An update to this.

NT MP's are receiving strong opposition to an absolute speed limit. NT GovCo will release soon a report to the public for consumption, that outlines ALL proposals, example, demerit points implementation etc and so on.

I expect them to place this on the website soon and will advise when this is the case.

People *must* continue writing.

Iphido · 06-10-2006, 09:13 PM

Just to clarify my letter, my local MP's are all in extremely safe liberal seats and are extremely conservative.

Not much will move them except economics. So this is the emphasis of my letter.

Sure there are legal issues, issues of freedom, issues of safety and issues of science. But at the end of the day, risking a countries only major industry means jobs, means money and means massive political weight.

Im also sure its a diffrent tact to keepleft, and as such might find support in diffrent groups.

Im glad to hear that things are being reconsidered. Thanks for keeping us updated Keepleft.