Good day minister Michael O'Brien,
I've visited lately your road safety webpage. Lots of words, no substance and lots of lies and fantasies. This is not a page created/run by anyone who knows the subject, who is responsible and mature and wish to serve society in road safety.
You do not impose dictatorial governing, imposing your will on society, you are a servant to society therefore your webpage is one way communication. You tell society whatever you wish and society have choice to visit your page or subscribe to it. No, society does not need to express it's will and expectations, you know what society need and you tell us. There is also no need to give you a feedback because whatever you do, is perfect, so no need to modify, give ideas, or criticise.
I hope you will not seek to punish me harshly when I dare to criticise you and your department. As I said, your page either contain no substance, lies or contradictions.
Another Michael that is Attorney General have expressed his views that cyclists are not treated as more vulnerable road users, they have and must have same status as all road users, not special ones - the more vulnerable users with some protection, like children on the road are vulnerable and there is no excuse to run on them.
So minister, perhaps it is right to correct the Attorney who disagree with your statement, or perhaps you conform to Attorney.
But the new road rules draft go against both of you. The new road rules demand that cars have a special status and cyclists must give them way and care on them. Below given link will lead you to my webpage with number of issues posted. There is provision for your comment.
This page is being updated often. By the way, this message is intended to by published because this is not private but public matter and public should have free access to scrutinise action/inaction of ministers.
Minister, the new road rules you mention in your webpage are not ordered/compiled by sensible and mature people who do know safety issues nor care for safety. They are in number of places conflicting one another, are illogical, are unclear, and the most important - they are not intended to be known by all drivers in 100%. They are to be rejected immediately.
Minister Michael O'Brien, you are the first minister who does not know 90% of the proposed or even existing rules in 100% accuracy. No other minister knows 90% of rules nor the Premier. I dare to state that at least 90% of police officers does not know 90% of new (draft) or existing rules in 100%.
Minister, no senile driver nor mentally sick, nor 16 year old driver know 90% of the rules in 100% accuracy. All because the rules are not meant to be known by all drivers in 100% but are meant to be used to punish innocent drivers.
Perhaps you do not fully understand what I mean. It's simple; every driver must know all the rules by heart that is in 100% in every situation and without thinking but must make correct decision in a split second. Simple but logical rules must be invented. We do not have nor ever had such rules.
Rules conflict one another and I made comments on the official draft which is posted on the given website of mine. The rules promote road danger and conflict.
In addition to the fact that rules are not designed to be known by all drivers, the external to rules factors confirm government intention do not care for safety but to care for raising revenue and punishing innocent drivers.
All drivers are innocent because they do drive with license which entitle them to drive. However the license makes nothing to ensure that person is fit for safe driving nor that one is trained properly for such driving.
I will not explain in one email all the aspects. I do explain on the given website.
The GP is untrained and unsuitable to decide weather his patient is fit for driving. There must be appointed a specially trained commission which will be trained and independent to assess people for fitness to be safe drivers.
This also does mean that most elderly drivers are unfit to drive.
The system is all wrong because every change to road rules must be rigidly linked with retraining all drivers. Yes it is logical. Another logical issue is to make such a rules which do not need modification or frequent one. The license must not be a matter of money but retraining every few years.
The number of problems like mismatch of brain and car power is explained on my webpage under a,b,c licenses.
Whatever you say about cyclists, is nonsense. Government actively does everything to put cyclists in great danger. This is and will be dealt with on the mentioned page.
The ACC refuse to compensate for my damaged bicycle wheel a result of their negligence.
The government refuse to create the bicycle lanes and road shoulder on known spots dangerous to cyclists even when I asked government to do so. An example is the Golden Grove Road and McIntyre Rd and many other. So many road sections are very dangerous to cyclists due to many factors like extremely bad surface and made obstacles as well as very dangerous drivers. The medieval storm drains by the kerb (photos on webpage), the horrible and dangerous section of kerb and bitumen sections like on NE rd next to Holden Hill police station are extremely dangerous plus lack of bicycle lane and dense traffic and refusal to grant cyclists priority and some privileges, and hostile drivers. All make cycling out of rich by most potential cyclists.
Whole government system starting from you minister, and through the police and courts do not care at all for cyclists nor even for safe and innocent drivers. When driver through careless driving hit the cyclist, your government make sure it will continue. The driver is not charged automatically nor cyclist is compensated, nor driver is checked for actual cause of his dangerous driving and crash, nor to order such driver to improve his/her driving skills to prevent any more crashes.
Police refuse to take reports of dangerous driving forwarded by public, police openly state that they refuse to enforce the safety rules like tailgating and other say cutting in front, failure to indicate for more than 2s before changing lane etc.
Please acknowledge that police call centre 131444 number of times refused to take my reports of very dangerous driving. Sometimes the operators do comment the situation showing their lack of knowledge of road rules and what is safe and what is not. Often the management refuse to accept number of incidents calling them bulk reporting. This does mean that government tells us that if there is little problem they are happy to take notice but when there is lots of problems the government is not interested.
But facts behind that are that even when all the reports from public are taken properly, they are wasted. Nobody check thoroughly for facts nor make sure that alleged offending driver upgrade driving skills.
The very high rate of dangerous lady drivers in particular young ladies does mean that there is no proper training of drivers nor proper policing. Young lady drivers are clearly much worse in that respect than their male peers. Ladies do tailgate extremely persistently and very close, they in kamikadze style cut in front on car they decided to overtake. They behave like on computer game. For young lady to speed between traffic light to over 80 in 60 zone is nothing. Males also do it but not so readily as ladies.
Tailgating is a plague in SA and is in the range 55% to close to 100% of all drivers as is shown on my webpage.
What government does to improve safety?
declare to be serious on safety
refuse to take reports of more dangerous driving incidents
police refuse to enforce the rules
refuse to create bicycle lanes and improve otherwise road surface safe for cyclists
refuse to create simple and logical road rules known by all fit drivers
refuse to compensate damages to bicycle as result of road and path negligence
refuse to introduce 1m space for cyclists
refuse to ensure that all drivers participating in crash are not addicts of a substance, are medically fit and have upgraded driving skills
continue to waste lots of public money for so called research which produce not much more than gossip, and for departments which openly refuse to care for road safety
raise revenue at every fair or unfair opportunity
refuse to cooperate with society in order to improve safety
ensures that killing,injuring or traumatising on the road remains high and with no consequences to offender
traffic lights, parking and traffic management have nothing to do with safety or convenience. Crashes and offences are often induces by deliberate mismanagement.
I cannot say all the rest is ok, it isn't. I hope that if you minister sort out those points you do a good job.
Road safety campaigner
Minister's wisdom in his reply as presented in the media. I highlight and comment in square brackets.
Article from The Advetiser
GREG KELTON, TOM ZED
September 26, 2009 12:01am
P-PLATERS will be banned from driving popular high-powered cars in tough road laws the State Government will try to push through the Parliament before Christmas.
Provisional drivers aged under 25 will be banned from driving vehicles with eight-cylinder engines or more, turbocharged or supercharged engines and cars with modifications aimed at increasing performance.
They also will be prohibited from driving specific high-performance vehicles, details of which will be outlined under regulations once the legislation is passed. [Minister treat all young drivers with P plate as stupid or irresponsible, and somehow miraculously they become sensible immediately after advancing to normal license. It is quite irrational because minister does absolutely nothing to address the problem]
Road Safety Minister Michael O'Brien said a list of vehicles that would be restricted in South Australia was still being worked on but it would be based on those vehicles restricted in Queensland.
P-platers in Queensland are banned from driving V8s, including the Holden Commodore SS and Ford Falcon XR8, non-diesel-powered turbo and supercharged cars such as the Subaru Impreza WRX Turbo, Nissan Skyline R34 and Holden Monaro V6. [I'm sure that the list of cars would have to be fair bit bigger but more about it on my webpage above]
DO YOU AGREE WITH THE NEW P-PLATE LAWS? Have your say in the poll to the right of this page and in the comment box below.
Cars with engine power outputs of more than 200kW, such as the Porsche Boxster S and BMW M3, and rotary-engine cars with a capacity of more than 1146cc, including the Mazda RX-4 and RX-8, are also on the restricted list.
The proposed legislation will be introduced into Parliament when it resumes on October 13.
Mr O'Brien said he hoped the "compelling logic" behind the moves would ensure it was passed before Parliament rose for the Christmas break. ['compelling logic' of minister is irrational, there is no logic. I propose to solve the problems by educating drivers. Minister does not propose education but restrictions and hope. How can you failing to educate drivers properly can hope in their better driving??? only if you believe in miracles, minister. If you happen not to have a proper solution, than why you reject a good solution of mine? My solution addresses many problems and is less complicated than Mr O'Brien's plan which does not address any problem. Likely that minister rely on “science” that is opinion of Road Safety Research team at University of Adelaide, headed by prof. Mary Lydon. That scientist openly preach that “there is no evidence that driver training improves their driving ability”. Mary have told me that education of drivers is not a solution; in person and also in public presentations.] Other key measures in the proposal include:
INCREASING the supervised driving time required by learner drivers from 50 to 75 hours. [good but far not enough]
INCREASING the minimum time on a learner's permit from six to 12 months. [good but not enough]
TIGHTENING the curfew on novice drivers when they return from a serious disqualification by restricting them from carrying passengers between midnight and 5am. [in my opinion it is childish rule treating drivers as children rather than enabling/encouraging them to actually acquire skills and maturity in safe driving. It does not address the problems (source)]
A PENALTY of two demerit points to replace licence disqualification as a penalty for failure to display P-plates.
Mr O'Brien said the measures would strengthen the graduated licensing system, which is aimed at better preparing young drivers for when they proceed to full licences. [nonsense, minister fail to understand my proposition which actually address most the problems and provide excellent solution. Minister's proposal does not solve any problem but maintain likely to provide means to raise revenue]
He said too many young people were dying on our roads.
"On average, 27 per cent of all fatalities in SA each year are aged between 16 and 24," Mr O'Brien said. "There are more than 76,000 P-platers on our roads and these new drivers, particularly those aged between 16 and 20, are up to three times more likely to be involved in a serious road crash." [all irrational, as for instance the government fail to take all the necessary steps (described on my webpage as per link above) to find out actual cause of crash or dangerous driving (drugs, alcohol, fatigue, poor driving skills, medical problem etc) and to take all the necessary steps to ensure that driver which caused and/or contributed in crash or dangerous behaviour will occur in the future. This is simply done by addressing addiction, driving training, medical problems. Failure to address the source of the initial crash almost guarantees such driver to continue dangerous driving. Further more, it is well known in neuroscience that lack of punishment can be seen by offender as acceptance or even endorsement of the behaviour which only reinforce it. The dramatic raise in violent driving and worryingly more by women does confirm that idea. Many if not most drivers do drive exclusively the way as others do, rather than according to rules and common sense. Minister O'Brien along with government system does not allow common sense driving nor common sense rules]
Mr O'Brien said the proposed legislation was tough "and mums and dads will appreciate it". [nonsense, as mums and dads are also not trained properly in safe driving]