THE response from Road Safety Advisory Council chairman John Gledhill to the editorial by Martin Gilmour regarding the implementation of the 90km/h speed limit on certain roads failed to produce any hard evidence to support the proposal.
Instead he focused on an emotional argument, which would suggest the proponents of the proposal are desperate to get the message over the line in the face of growing opposition from councils and the public at large.
Eighty per cent of the submissions to the Legislative Council Select Committee were opposed to the proposal, but it would seem the Minister is hell- bent on progressing the changes.
The more recent letter by DIER secretary Norm McIlfatrick also avoids providing hard evidence to support the proposal and instead raises the spurious argument of scientific data as the criteria instead of looking at the real world situation.
Have any of these scientific data experts ever driven on the Cradle Mountain link road at 90km/h as just one example? It’s a recipe for inattentive driving.
Like many other drivers I am not convinced that a reduction in speed will achieve the claimed objective of 100 less serious injuries and fatalities over six years.
As I said previously – commonsense needs to prevail as well as a rational look at the real facts.
– BARRY OLIVER, Newnham.
This story Administrator ready to work first appeared on Nanjing Night Net.