Revenue for Road Works.

[Snowman]

Ok,

I got to thinking the other day after that "Budget Leak" that mentioned that all the money raised from speed camera's was being used to finance Road Works in Victoria.

As much as I hate out Speed Camera laws that fact remains that revenue has to be generated from somewhere. This revenue isn't just going to maintaining our current roads but also goes towards funding our new freeways and the likes.

I think back to what has been made since I can remember and the list includes the Monash (including City Link), Western Ring Road, Eastern Freeway, The Monash Extention... just to name a few. I can still remember that getting to the Airport from where I live involved having to go down Kingsway and onto Flemington Road to the start of the Tulla. Now I can get on the FWY at Thompsons Rd and go the whole way.

In a few years we will have the Mitchem Fwy and I know personally I can't wait for it to open.

The reality is all these roads - plus ongoing maintenence - costs money.

Another country that has some great road systems IMO is the UK. Their series of M freeways are great. However - in order to fund their road systems they pay a HUGE price on fuel. Taking into account our exchange rates the last time I was in the UK their fuel prices worked out to be around tripple the amount of what we pay here. The increased prices was mostly in fuel taxes to fund the Road Works.

So the point of this thread is not to bitch about the cops or speed camera's or anything else negative. More of just a question - taking into account the revenue has to come from SOMEWHERE.

Would you prefer revenue came from fines do to extreme tight tollerences - but where if you drove completely within the law you could avoid the extra costs - or would you prefer to go back to the old levels of tollerence and be hiked with an increased fuel bill with high taxes added on?

[R32Big_boy]

I havent had a speeding fine in 3 years, the only time i ever got one was when the speed suddenly changed when i was going through the burnley tunnel. I believe that getting money off those people who do speed is the correct way to go. I am sick of being paying through the arse at the bowser it makes driving more and more expensive as time goes on. if you are silly enough to get caught speeding then then you should help pay for the roads our great city needs. thats my opinion anyway.

[Jamezilla]

Ah - but here's the thing.

The revenue generated from camera and the like doesn't go over-and-above the budget dedicated for roads.

ie: Govt says roads get $1b budget - based on taxes and last year's state revenue

Then the fines bring in a further $500m - which is additional to budget.

The way it stands at the moment - roads still get only $1b - but $500m of that is from the camera fines, the other $500m from budget... which gives the government an additional $500m (what was originally dedicated to roads) to spend on hair wax for Steve Bracks - or whatever they want.

Creative aren't they

I'd much prefer the roads budget to be a total of $1.5b (in the example above).

Fuel excise tax does go to road funding (apparently) as does rego fees... but since the government will always use 'creative' accounting practices - we'll never know if they in fact do.

[Zahos]

If speed camera's were actually placed in accident blackspots and hotspots, and followed the ADR + or - 10% on tollerances, then it would not bother me.

But the fact that they are placed on long straight stretches of road where an accident attributed to speeding is about as probable as Steve Bracks licking my ass hole means i dont condone the current operation of these camera's.

Price of fuel should be kept as low as possible me thinks!

[Snowman]

See thats the catch. From what I understood from the last budget thingy was that they have budgetted $500m of the $1b for the roads from speed camera's. So they need to put lots of camera's in dodgy places and have stupid tollerances in order to get that $500mil.

If they put the tollerences back to 10% and only put camera's in black spots chances are they would only raise say $100mil or less. Its a stupidly high amount of cases of fines in the region of above 3km/hr but less than 10%.

So to raise that extra $400mil they might have to increase fuel taxes. So this was my point. I think I'd still prefer to run the gauntlet and have the revenue from fines than having to pay a lot more for fuel every day.

James mentioned revenue from Rego's. There is somewhere in the world where rego fee's are based upon power to weight. The larger the more you have to pay each year for rego's. That would suck - especially if your leewang! LOL.

[TurboX]

I often think

"I wonder what I would think about roads/freeways/tollways and speed cameras if I still lived in the country"

i.e. NOT in a capitol city where 99% of all the money is spent.

Probably 99% of Australians live in the capitol cities, but it seems to me that the country people are getting a raw deal.

Dont forget that all those great drivers roads ARE in the country areas!

[Jamezilla]

I wouldn't mind seeing a greater rego fee for larger vehicles - ie a kerb-weight based tax.

Would discourage people buying Landcruisers for the sake of it... also a regular licence test/renewal system would be good, perhaps even varying levels of licences - one for city/urban driving, one for country driving, one for freeway driving (or something).

Just thoughts...

And as Snowy says - it's sad that the Govt disguises revenue raising as 'road safety'. I think some form of justification for camera placement would be good, show that the government is actaully trying to lower the road toll (which they haven't) instead of just wanting to line their pockets.

The whole thing needs to be reviewed... Snowy for PM!

[saff_cossie]

Kerb weight would be good which is now how it works in the UK. Yes fuel is massively more expensive but what about the detrimental effects on the car industry here. Most of the larger vehicles there are diesel, virtually all ML Class Mercs are diesel, diesel is cheaper than unleaded also.

How would owners of V8's here afford fuel and then the knock on effect as people started snapping up Excels, Festivas and maybe even a pink lada or two.

I am happy for it to come through cameras as long as it is done in the right way. Again difficult to Police. Snowy I think you have opened a can of worms here!

[predator]

Well we have plenty of good freeways, most of 'em aren't toll (or if they are they are simply pay as you go, not stupid etag bullshit).. and the police aren't obsessed with speeding. No many more lives are saved.

Now your petrol is about 10c/L more expensive than up here most of the time (due to state taxes), stamp duty on things such as property, etc is much higher, and if anything there is a larger population in VIC, so there should be a lot more people spending money available. I don't understand the massive reliance on camera revenue, nor how it should even be relied upon as a quantifiable part of a state budget.

True, registration is $200 more expensive a year up here.. and you pay more acccording to whether you have an 8, 6cylinder, or 4 cylinder. But I would rather pay $200 more a year, than get fined at least $200 a year (or the stress of thinking about it), and/or pay easily that in extra petrol taxes.

How about some better financial planning in government eh?

[Duncan]

No fuel tax, no speed cameras, just toll roads until the road is paid off + a commercial return for the developer

[NickR33]

I'd much prefer the roads budget to be a total of $1.5b (in the example above). Fuel excise tax does go to road funding (apparently) as does rego fees... but since the government will always use 'creative' accounting practices - we'll never know if they in fact do.

this is the truth right here... the government gives creative accounting a new meaning... the recent hike in petrol prices and the state governments 'unexpected windfall' in speeding fines are way over what would be considered a normal rate of inflation... so where does the money go? damn right it should go back into the roads!

With the amont of money spent on rego, petrol, fines etc I better not see a single pothole! in fact it should feel like I am driving on a rainbow, all colourful, with the pot of gold and all :headspin:

[R31Nismoid]

I love debate

Remember, the gov't maybe spending "so" much but out of them, one is a toll-road.

And the mitcham one is going to be the same also.

Its one good thing to have nice freeway's all over the place like spagetthi.

But i would much prefer my neighbourly streets to be address first as they:

1) Are more damaging to my car

2) More frustrating to me due to the sheer kidney bashing i get daily.

3) I'd rather be sitting in an extra 10-15mins in a congested road once every so often because of no larger arterial if it meant i had nice roads to drive to and from my milk bar on

[ferni]

Ash beat me to it - but a large portion of the freeways you listed snowman are all tolled... They are private, the government doesn't/shouldn't have to look after them, they are private, and we pay tolls on them for a reason. What pisses me off is that we had the part of the s.e freeway after Toorak road to the city, free, and had been paid for, for years (probably by most of our parents), yet they give it away to a private company who now charges us to go on the road that has been already paid for by us (the tax payers)....

Speed Cameras should be used to deter people from speeding where it causes accidents/damage/injury... which is why I think permanent speed cameras in bad intersections/roads are good, people get to know they are there and they slow down for them - in turn reducing the accidents created from that road/intersection... but that wouldn't raise the government as much money... Do they want our money or do they want to reduce accidents? They are 2 separate things, and I think its pretty low of them to pick money over reducing accidents. I think its unfair to make people who don't use the roads as much as others pay the same, so I guess the only fair way is the more you use the roads the more you pay - easiest way to do that is to put more taxes on fuel I guess.

I should also mention that I haven't had a speeding fine for the last 5-6 years, I've only ever had 2, both were <5k/s over, both were speed cameras, 1 was when I was on my L's!! and one was 103k/h in a 100 zone (sth gippy hwy) which was back in 98.

The people speeding shouldn't be doing it, but them speeding doesn't wear our roads out more. I think maintence of roads should come from fuel tax (or something similar) and fixing up blind spots and bad intersections could use the finance from speed cameras.

What about that guy the other day on the news that pulled over in front of the speed camera and started waving to traffic to warn them, the police rocked up and warned him for it - said it was distracting to motorists and was obstructing justice! WTF?!? What do you think speed cameras are? they are the biggest distraction, every time I see a car parked on the side of the road I think could be a speed camera I'm automatically slowing down, checking my speed and looking to see if its a speed camera, regardless of if I'm under the limit or not - speed cameras are a distraction by themself.. no more than this guy was that was warning motorists. Obstructing justice? The idea of the speed camera is to slow people down, he was doing the same thing, how is that obstructing justice? Moron.

[GTRgeoff]

Snowy are you mental mate?? No it's ok, I see where you are coming from but disagree violently.

Roads are a user pays system so fuel or rego or tax should be the basis of revenue, not fines that come out of the blue without warning. That concept is both morally and constitutionally corrupt. This attitude and the fact that there are Victorians who would even consider it appropriate are one of the elements that makes Vic so damned unattractive to me as a place to exist. Gordon has it on the head although being back in Qld just a couple of weeks ago I found fuel the same or cheaper, the roads good and the sense of relief to be able to drive without staring at the speedo and worrying about every car on the side of the road an absolute pleasure, even though I was there to bury an old mate. Point to note, I haven't had a fine in over 10 years.

I'm active on a couple of forums where we are in the process of developing the data to challenge the governments that have this speed kills BS as a cover for revenue raising. It is governments, not police, as our target.

Now I'd suggest the government start to learn proper economic management instead of leaning on a select group of citizens who are really only guilty of not following what should be a firm guideline based upon the 85th percentile of road users average speeds, as opposed to a hard law imposed and policed with an innappropriate 3kmh tolerance unsupported by the engineering community. This policy only makes everyone in the community who drives a criminal (and everyone finds themselves speeding occasionally), with subsequent increasing disrepect for the police and government. Once upon a time criminals were the lesser element of society, about 3%, where now up to 70% of us are breaking the law.

In GB the anti speed kills movements and uni studies are starting to gain momentum and data that shows the equipment inaccurate, the locations fraudulent, the operations suspect, the impact overall not decreasing the road toll but increasing it and the people starting to get jacked off. Sound familiar? A number of countries they have abolished cameras with the effect a reduction in the toll and people driving are looking at the road, not the speedo. People are on the whole good, so lets focus again on just dealing with the truly bad people.

This is not the simple poll you have proposed but a far reaching problem that has the potential to destroy the faith of the community in government and police, and bring economic hardship to those who can least afford it. I don't individually have the mental capacity to completely diagnose the problem and find a solution, so I am relying on the power of group effort and assisting in the areas of driver training and technology. Not all of us are victims of govt corruption but have the clarity of thought to oppose this rubbish.

I'll leave it with a scenario. The electorate does nothing or starts to accept the policy so the govt thinks it apporpriate to continue, but they start to "toughen up" and close tolerances to make a little more money, then they implement a random algorithm or "fail" to apply a rigorous testing program when the "accuracy" slips in their favour, where a motorist is fined for no reason but the hardware meets the bogus standards developed without industryand scientific input. The secrecy that they hold over their equipment and operating policies is tightened even more than now where it is almost impossible to obtain any data through FOI and govt transparency disappears. I don't want to live there, and I am a law abiding citizen but this is already happening and that scenario was just in the late 90's.

Sorry to go outside your guidelines for the poll, and I won't vote either, but I think you have missed the issues. Good effort though in your argument and I appreciate the thoughts you have worked through, but this is an intense issue that shouldn't be fuelling the governments agenda.

[Interloper]

I agree with Geoff, so sorry but i can't vote either.

[Greg]

A tax on fuel would be more equitable given the more petrol you consume the more you drive. ie a user-pays system.

oh..just read what geoff said :werd:

[saff_cossie]

Very good response there SkylineGeoff and some interesting points raised.

[Snowman]

Tell us what you really think Geoff! :j/k:

I dont have a problem with anything that you have said. I guess presonally I am happy with the continued development of the roads in Vic. Yeah I know we have to pay tolls for some of the roads but for the limmited times I use then I am happy to pay with the times they save me. Might be different if I used them every day.

But I would hate to see the development and improvement of our major arterials stopped. I am not sure how much the state budget on roads in Queensland allows for to compare. I was only comparing to the roads in the UK which I found to be awesome and with the future development of the Eastern Link (Mitchem) it's only going to further improve the traffic flow in our ever increasing Melbourne population.

My thoughts are that this continued development isn't coming for free. The Mitchem is reported to be costing $2b - which is 2 years complete road budget on one stretch of road. Thats a farken lot of money - and it has to come from somewhere.

I was only really throwing up a couple of optioned based upon 2 different possibilities. Which was simply people thoughts on revenue being paid fairly by having those that use the roads more paying more - or by having those that break the road laws financing it.

Its funny how people complain about the tolls on the Citylink - yet that is a 100% way of getting those that use it to pay for it. That would be the same thing as fuel increases per say. No doubt in my 2 option world the "fair way" is probably the right way - yet so far most that have voted have gone the other way.

[TurboX]

I wholehartedly agree with Geoff in principle, (hard not to, with that rationale)

BUT I voted for the fines to pay for the roads because there are obviously a significant proportion of motorists who are going to contribute the bulk of the funds,

AND I HAVE THE CHOICE wether to be part of this group or not!

If I have to pay increased Fuel/Rego/Other taxes and charges, I HAVE NO CHOICE!

And yes, I have been pinged a few times.

[R31Nismoid]

Its funny how people complain about the tolls on the Citylink - yet that is a 100% way of getting those that use it to pay for it. That would be the same thing as fuel increases per say. No doubt in my 2 option world the "fair way" is probably the right way - yet so far most that have voted have gone the other way.

They put tolls on the tulla section that was not part of the redevelopment and creation of the "citilink" in the first place.

They are tolling a road that was already there from many years before.

Fair enough if it was new. But dont toll something thats already paid for