The Global Financial Crisis is like a huge wall that no-one is
able to effectively scale. Governments keep offering ladders to the population, but the ladders would appear to be made of balsa wood.

Aided by Hollywood engendered
conspiracy theories, consumer trust has almost disappeared. The consumers are concerned. They
no longer believe the media reports that the recession is over.  They no longer believe that the Government can
make a difference.

We have been hearing a lot lately about open and transparent
Government with some excellent initiatives beginning to be deployed by the Australian Federal
Labour Government.

Transparency is about ensuring that the public obtain the
maximum benefit from their Government and not necessarily that the Government
obtain the maximum possible dollars from each member of the public.

There needs to be something left over from the weekly pay
packet AFTER taxes, mortgages, petrol and grocery purchases, otherwise the
economy will never revive.

Therefore I would suggest that additional revenue generation
methods also need to come under the microscope of  transparency.

Parking tickets? Fair enough.

Speeding Tickets? Fair enough – especially in the 50 zones….. (I am sick and tired of the hoons at the end of my street doing 120 past all the houses with small children).

But what about in the 80 zones where the traffic is
instructed to slow down to 70 for 500 metres, for the sole benefit of the speed
cameras.

There is something wrong with a system that needs to use
devious methodologies to wring additional monies from the citizens.

Politicians are usually ideologically inspired individuals
that believe that they can make a difference. Unfortunately they only receive
the mantle of responsibility in short 4 year terms. (Unfortunately for the good
ones, fortunately for the bad ones).

Four years is not really enough time to make a difference.
It’s barely enough time to form a committee to research the results of a policy
change.

Eight years, or two terms is a much better period.

Added to this, they depend on the Public Servant advisors to
tell them what is good for the people and what is bad .

Unfortunately, some of these advisors, don’t really care
about the people of Australia.
They have a very different agenda. Promotion, recognition and maintenance of
tenure.

This results in sometimes the wrong information being passed
upstairs.

For example, who was it that suggested revenue generation by
deliberate planned entrapment of motorists?

I understand the need for speed limits.

I understand the desire for revenue generation.

What I don’t understand is the need to change the speed
limit from 70 to 60 or from 80 to 70 for 500 metres on either side of the speed
cameras.

(An example? Sure in NSW – the 80 – 70 – 80 speed zone just
before the M5 entering the tunnel under the airport. – no houses, no pedestrians
– just two speed cameras.)

The resulting entrapment fines may well be a windfall for
the State revenues, but what about the loss of trust?

Every person so fined knows that the entire system is
designed more to part them from their money than to catch genuine speedsters.

Do politicians really believe that a system such as this
builds consumer confidence?

Will the people vote for an elected official that approves
of a system that is obviously crooked?

Sometimes the system has to change at a basic level, for
trust to be rebuilt between the elected officials and the voters.

I think a good place to start is by removing the obvious public
rorts.

Like the re-zoning of speed zones so that the speedsters
will be caught and fined and not the casual motorist that didn’t see the 60
sign on a road that everywhere else is posted 70.

Unfortunately, State Governments are responsible for local
speed zones.

However, in 1996, the Federal Government intervened on the
open road speed limit in the Northern Territory,
enforcing a maximum limit of 130 when previously the limit was – as fast as the
road conditions, kangaroos, donkeys and camels would allow you to drive in a
safe manner.

Intervention was via the Federal road building funding.

So when the Federal Government wants to intervene in State
matters, there are methods.

Just possibly, a Government that effected this level of
basic trust-building change would get the opportunity for another four years.

And the lost speeding fines?

They’re not lost. Just redistributed into the economy in a
different way,

like mortgage payments – ensuring less foreclosures.

Food – ensuring less social welfare handouts.

Entertainment – ensuring a happier, healthier and more trusting
population.

Savings – yes, some of the lost speeding fines might find
their way into savings accounts. Now, wouldn’t that fix the GFC?

Yes, consumer savings would fix the GFC – faster than any other Government hand-out would.

This entry was posted on October 8, 2009 at 2:56 am. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Posted in Main Page by Tom Koltai No Comments Yet