ACT Government gouges motorists, hoards $55m surplus

fnaah 15 November 2007 16

According to the ABC, our local bureaucrats have rejected calls for tax cuts after revealing an additional $55 million in budget surplus.

Well, perhaps that’s not such a bad idea, money could be well spent on expanding local services – but why the need to cry poor and gouge motorists with a $10-per-infringement levy, all in the name of improving support services for victims of crime?

Something isn’t right, here. I can’t see how the poor sods who can’t seem to manage to spot the revenue safety cameras in time are responsible for compensating robbery and violent crime victims.

What's Your Opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
16 Responses to ACT Government gouges motorists, hoards $55m surplus
Aeek Aeek 8:44 pm 18 Nov 07

My 20 year old car has numbers ever 20 and a notch every 2 (bigger ones on the 10s), and its been tested to be accurate. Thanks. Another reason not to waste money on a modern car when I can invest it in bicycles!

Mælinar Mælinar 8:25 pm 18 Nov 07

My speedometer at a speed of 100km/h is only accurately (with a number) marked at 80km and 120km.

This is a gap of 40km/h that the speed guage can travel before I know accurately how fast I am going.

I’m sure nearly every RA poster and lurker has the same design dial.

Since speed cameras are so accurate, the vehicle industry needs to catch up on this process and create more speed accurate vehicles. Never mind the bluetooth, bells and whistles – better designed vehicles is one that you tell it to go 100, and it does – exactly.

(I’m aware of cruise control – I’m talking more mainstream and user friendly)

Mike Mike 7:58 am 18 Nov 07

Watching the speedo all the time to make sure we don’t go over a set limit is stupid and dangerous. With a leeway of five km this has become necessary. I have work out that dangerous sections of the road are those where cameras can be hidden. Exceeding the limit is quite often the safer thing to do as is attention to the road rather than worrying about an idiot restriction. Yes there are idiot drivers but speed is only one indicator. In the ACT we should be proud of the fact in terms of road deaths it is lowest in the world. Speed cameras have not had any impact on this it was that low before they were introduced. An interesting facts are that deaths doubled in the ACT year after introduction and John Hargreaves opposed them.

bd84 bd84 10:18 pm 16 Nov 07

Hey, it’s not a compulsory tax, so I don’t care. If I don’t want to pay, I hit the breaks.

No point reducing the fuel excises, they are frozen at the moment anyway from memory, you just wont get the roads built. Plus we pretty much have the cheapest petrol in the western world, the prices are only going to get higher.

fnaah fnaah 1:40 pm 16 Nov 07

shanefos, waiting to vote. 😉

AG Canberra AG Canberra 12:43 pm 16 Nov 07

If we really want to help victims of crime how about we enforce the collection of fines levied by the courts. I’d love to know how many of these fines are actually collected. I’m sure we could raise the 500k by actually making the criminals pay up!

shanefos shanefos 12:10 pm 16 Nov 07

If you’re going to whinge about this, where have you been for the last few years when it comes to the Federal Government’s failure to reduce fuel excises?

Deadmandrinking Deadmandrinking 11:21 am 16 Nov 07

Obey speed limits. Problem solved. Stop whinging.

barking toad barking toad 11:08 am 16 Nov 07

How many of you kiddies really believe
that this new tax will go anywhere other
than consolidated revenue to fund whatever
is the new hippie project?

fnaah fnaah 10:23 am 16 Nov 07

My problem is not with compensating victims, but with who that compensation is extracted from. Yes, if you have a crash and injure someone, or if you’re done for reckless driving/DUI, or if you’re caught excessively speeding the fines and/or sentence should reflect the amount of damage/trauma you have committed (or could have committed), but where is the justice in being slugged an extra fee for a parking fine?

The government claims it will raise half a million dollars from this levy – i’d wager a hefty percentage of that will come from speed cameras and parking tickets, not DUI/dangerous driving.

Does anyone have figures on the number and nature of traffic infringements issued per year?

pierce pierce 8:54 am 16 Nov 07

So just to be clear, it’s ok for an adolescent to be bashed, killed, have his legs broken or be sent to prison with rock spider tattooed on his forehead for killing someone with a speeding car – but it’s a scam and an outrage that licensed drivers should be fined $133 for taking the chance that they might do the same thing.

(No matter how good a driver you might be/think you are, higher speeds = longer stopping time, that’s why we have speed limits)

Is that about the sum of it?

(And no, I don’t think that it’s right that the Clea Rose killer should be out and stealing cars again and I think that if he can’t be rehabilitated, he should be punished.)

VYBerlinaV8 VYBerlinaV8 11:29 pm 15 Nov 07

“especially when the limits are redefined, criminalising legal behaviour”

..such as on the Northbound side of the Monaro Hwy between the soutern entrance to Hume and Lanyon Drive. Scameras are here to stay because too many people are fooled into believing they contribute to safety.

miz miz 10:54 pm 15 Nov 07

I got a speeding fine in a main suburban thoroughfare with traffic lights on one end (Oxley) – I was going 60, with no other car (except the flashing van) in sight. Naturally it was at the bottom of a dip. I was ropeable, I have NEVER had any kind of infringement before as I am your typical ‘granny driver’. I got a speeding fine of $133! And this is the minimum – less than 15km/h over the limit. Frankly these fines are already exorbitant and seem to be a total money grab, not about safety at all.
I think they are just trying to justify their stupidity (and the backlash) with this ‘victim’ thing.

Impassive Impassive 9:27 pm 15 Nov 07

The gouging of motorists is this government’s standard approach to raising revenue. In a city designed around the car, we are all sitting ducks, and with a Chief Minister who has a thing for pushbikes and his mates at PedalPower we can expect more of the same.

Mr Stanhope seems to think that if he harasses motorists enough we will all ride bikes – the 35kms to work. This is not Amsterdam Jon!

bonfire bonfire 5:11 pm 15 Nov 07

especially when the limits are redefined, criminalising legal behaviour

les les 4:57 pm 15 Nov 07

would a victim of crime not include someone seriously, or even slightly, injured by a speeding car hitting them? If so then it’s only fair that people who are too important and busy to stick to the legal limits contribute to compensation.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter


Search across the site