'This is not a road safety strategy, this is a budget strategy, and this Government has now become completely dependent on windfall gains from Victoria's motorists'
Robert Doyle, leader of the Victorian Opposition
'If you get fined [and] lose your licence, you should actually consider yourself lucky, because you could have lost a lot more'
Andre Haermeyer, Victorian Police Minister
During the last Victorian election campaign, the Liberal Opposition suggested that a 10 percent leeway should be restored in speed-camera prosecutions. In other words, that if the speed limit were 70km/h motorists should only be fined once they exceeded 77km/h. The Government's leeway of 3 percent was said to be too low. In November 2002 Mr Doyle stated, 'Our concern has been that the speeding fines that this government has come to rely on to prop up their surplus is not about road safety, it's about revenue collection.'
A similar claim has been repeated several times over the last twelve months and has been taken up in a more subdued form by some representatives of the RACV.
In September 2003 Mr David Cummings, the RACV manager of government relations, stated, 'While we recognise the need for enforcement, we are concerned that our members and the public have come to see enforcement as a revenue measure, rather than as a legitimate road safety measure.'
The RACV is not suggesting that the Government are using traffic fines as a revenue device, rather it is concerned that there may be this perception in the public mind. Underlying this appears to be the fear that the public may come to resent speed restrictions, rather than sensibly comply with them.
Developments over the course of 2003 seem to have fed popular dissatisfaction with speed restrictions, speed cameras and fines.
The Government has extended its campaign against speeding, phasing in reduced speeds in the vicinity of schools. It is phasing in dual purpose cameras at 85 high risk...