No announcement yet.

Western Australian Road Safety Strategy 2008-2020

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Western Australian Road Safety Strategy 2008-2020

    Anyone else get an invite to this forum? Came in the mail today.

    Western Australian Road Safety Strategy 2008-2020 – Towards Zero: Getting There Together – Discussion Paper – Community Consultation Forum

    The Office of Road Safety, on behalf of the Road Safety Council, is currently developing a new road safety strategy for Western Australia.

    The new strategy will be based on the Safe System philosophy, which aims to improve road safety by putting safe road users into safe vehicles, travelling at safe speeds along safe roads and roadsides without impeding the road transport system unnecessarily. Of course, it is vital that the strategy is based on the best possible evidence and the Monash University Accident Research Centre (MUARC) has analysed the costs and benefits of different road safety measures within the Safe System philosophy to develop a series of scientifically sound directions and options.

    It is equally important that the road safety strategy is supported by and meets the expectations of the community. In developing this strategy,
    the Office of Road Safety is undertaking extensive community and stakeholder consultation. During the first phase of community consultation,
    the Office of Road Safety heard the road safety views of over 2,500 members of the WA community.
    Now, the results of the first phase of community and stakeholder consultation and the options presented by MUARC have been incorporated into
    the Road Safety Strategy for Western Australia 2008-2020 Discussion Paper. The paper provides an opportunity for the public to learn what other members of the community had to say about road safety and make informed comment on the options developed by MUARC on the basis of the
    best available scientific evidence.
    To give you a better understanding of the information contained in the discussion paper, you are invited to attend a forum (see pdf attached)
    on the proposals.
    For a copy of the discussion paper please visit the Office of Road Safety's website or email your postal address details to [email protected].
    You may also be interested in reading the sections marked 'research gems' in the discussion paper. These sections highlight the latest directions in research.
    I hope that you are able to participate in this consultation process.
    Yours sincerely

    Grant Dorrington
    Independent Chair, Road Safety Council

  • #2
    No, didn't get an invite.

    What's your claim to fame???

    Lucky bugger. O.K. So when and where is it????


    • #3
      This is the attached .pdf
      "Some people are like clouds. When they disappear it's a beautiful day"


      • #4
        No, I didn't get one, despite the fact that I registered. Then again they don't like me anyway.


        • #5
          Originally posted by Ken Oath View Post
          What's your claim to fame???
          Dunno. Last e-mail I abused him so ??


          • #6
            So everyone download the PDF and turn up...


            • #7
              They scheduled this forum during working hours, on a weekday.
              95% will be grannies (who know how to use the net) or stay-at-home mum's.

              Is it wrong to send them an abusive email with my thoughts of their strategy?

              Hi Chris,

              Please give Grant a giant "Fuck You" for me, because scheduling the Perth forum during business hours on a weekday means people with an actual interest and non-sensational view will be at work, whilst Grandma's and stay-at-home mum's will make up the bulk of the audience, and argue we should be driving slower, with more automated cars (ones that avoid accidents for you).
              The RSC know's what the fucking problem is, but can't figure out how to get speed cameras to take pictures of people not paying attention to the road. The proposal to decrease 110kph roads to 100kph is utterly ridiculous and goes against the NTC's reccomendation they are increased to 130kph where appropriate to avoid fatigue.

              The act of lowering speed limits does reduce the severity of an accident, but what I'm getting out of this is that they don't care how many accidents there are (speed is a precipitating factor in less than 10% of serious accidents), as long as they don't kill anyone. How about reducing the total number of crashes caused by people doing stupid shit such as running red lights, failing to give way to oncoming traffic, or just driving with a moronic IQ?

              And please, please, please ask the RSC & state parliament what killed the motorcyclist who was decapitated on the wire rope barriers. They seem to believe it was excessive speed, and not the separation of head from torso facilitated by the barrier.

              I'm sending this through because I'm well over the 1024 character limit imposed on the other form or reply. Maybe you could pass it onto the RSC, since you are pretending to be Grant Dorrington.

              Yours Sincerely,
              Last edited by Jonchilds; 17-10-2007, 11:08 PM.


              • #8
                they have set the time so they get the least resistance to their ideas and from there they can say "the public want these things implemented"......if anyone can go then turn up and have a say
                A site all parents should check regulary



                • #9
                  call in sick and attend. no use complaining, be pro-active
                  my pics


                  • #10
                    It's good to finally see our tax dollars being spent so wisely. For example, in the whitepaper at p. 5 it says (emphasis added):

                    • The number of people dying in crashes due to alcohol has risen
                    • The number of unrestrained drivers and passengers dying and being seriously injured is continuing to grow
                    Yet by p. 11 things appear to have improved markedly:

                    We have made significant gains in reducing drink driving and increasing restraint use and want to build on that foundation.
                    Road safety will definitely improve with these people leading the way .
                    "The facts are irrelevant" - Arwon


                    • #11
                      Casuals don't get sickies, and I'm buggered if I'm cutting $29/hr to attend something where any reason will get shot down by other audience members.

                      Strangely, I haven't heard anything back...


                      • #12
                        The fact that you included "fuck you" in the email means it probably got filtered to /dev/null and never even reached a human.

                        You're better off using a "fuck you" tone, but not actually including those words

                        Maybe replace the words "fuck you" with "proctology exam" for the same effect...
                        Last edited by thro; 18-10-2007, 03:09 PM.
                        “Crashing is shit for you, shit for the bike, shit for the mechanics and shit for the set-up,” Checa told me a while back. “It’s a signal that you are heading in the wrong direction. You want to win but crashing is the opposite. It’s like being in France when you want to go to England and when you crash you go to Spain. That way you’ll never get to England!” -- Carlos Checa


                        • #13
                          I've got a day off that day, because its the day after the PSB trackday.

                          Heh, Dorkington.