The RSA *All RSA Discussion Here*

Gary ITR

Before we start I would like to hear the opinion of each poster on the RSA, include things like the effectiveness of their campaigns, the quality of their publications, their spokesperson, anything you can think of really. I'm running back and forth here all morning so I'll get my own views up asap.

For the first while can we not respond to one another and just put our own opinions down on this, it would just be interesting to see the outcome

Cookie_Monster

opinion of each poster on the RSA,

Just another Gov quango that is not really needed. All the the stuff they do can and should be under the remit of the NTA. There is no enforcement of the rules they are always pushing which makes them seem even more in-effective (I know it the Gards job). Obsession with speed killing people to the point where all other forms of dangerous driving is ignored is infuriating.

include things like the effectiveness of their campaigns

Campaigns are very very poor and predominated by two types:

1) In-effectual teaching based ads like how to overtake on a motorway or use perfect 4 point exit roundabouts. Little consideration of real world driving conditions or infrastructure. Even in the add, information is basic and not that clear that this is the was is has to be done, not just if you feel like it.

2) Loud shouty blame orientated adverts telling us we all drive to fast and will kill everyone one day. Invariably a young male driver (they aren't the only ones to speed you know!))

the quality of their publications

The ROR is pretty good at the basics IMO, needs more detail surrounding certain areas, non standard roundabout interaction and similar.

their spokesperson

muppet. For a man who was once so respected for the Late Late, I really can't believe some of the utter crap he now spouts.

Zubeneschamali

I'd like the RSA replaced by a facts-based organization. I'd like them to spend their budget on improving our knowledge about deaths and injuries on the roads by funding studies and then publishing them.

Then I'd like the Government to act to reduce the major causes of those deaths and injuries in priority order.

Because there is so little data available, it's hard to know exactly what policies this would mean, but I'm pretty sure that speed cameras on safe roads wouldn't be part of it.

While I'm at it, I'd like a pony for my daughter, and one of those Marine exoskeletons from Avatar for my son. Thank you.

Atomic Pineapple

In my opinion the RSA are a welcome addition to road safety and other road matters, I feel having an organisation like the RSA is the way forward, I have no issue with there existence and I realise that having a body like the RSA is needed to help with implementing rules of the road and keeping the road network from being chaotic.

My issues with them revolve around how they try to get messages across to in particular young males, but also the general public and also what seems to be a general attitude of making driving a necessity rather than something enjoyable.

Their campaigns lack any sort of genuine impact, they have recently had decent adverts in using the doctors and families to talk about accidents but also have left out the other half which should show the accident in utter realism in real time and leave out any unrealistic slow down or over dramatic rolls etc...

The way they try to tackle the issue of over confident young males by demonising them is utterly idiotic in my opinion, young males will not listen to authority figures telling them they are not good enough to drive, it only has the opposite effect, they need to interact and engage with the highest risk group on the road and treat them as equals to get any sort of success.

Their selective quoting of statistics is also very annoying, a full open and transparent way of collecting and calculating all data from crashes should be published and a software model created that the data can be fed through to determine the real factors in a crash and not just speed. This model may exist already but it should be made public and be transparent.

Gay Byrne has a negative effect as a spokesperson when it comes to road safety and highlights the backwardness that seems to be within the RSA, I dont think I need to comment on why, its clear to everyone.

Overall I welcome an RSA type body but think the RSA as it is today needs an overhaul, needs to get talking to Irish motorists and needs to take proper new direction that is not politically fueled in anyway.

sean1141

The RSA as it stands is pretty pointless IMO. They need to change how they address road users. Personaly I change the channel or switch off when most of there adds come on as I cant stand the B.S they come out with about speeding and always blaming young drivers. They seem to think its only young males that speed. On there website it shows that for 2010 in every month up to november the highest number of offenders are drivers with nor irish licences Eg northern and overseas licences! http://rsa.ie/en/RSA/Road-Safety/Our-Research/Penalty-Point-Statistics/ I have yet to see or hear about an add highlighting or targeting this. If the RSA wants young males to take them serious they need to get in people who they can relate to (rally or race driver types) and they also need to interact with them..

The RSA can save many lives if they go the right way about it but so far they are not

AugustusMinimus

Gay Byrne has never passed a driving test for a car yet pontificates about the hazzard of learner drivers driving on the road who are untested.

Deeply embedded hypocracy, ageism and deeply rooted sexism as shown by their He drives, she dies campaign" says it all about this government quango.

GTE

My Opinion
Their mission is as follows:

The aim of the Road Safety Authority is to save lives and prevent injuries by reducing the number and severity of collisions on the road.

Fair enough, I am all for that.

Their objectives

Providing a safe environment for all road users and promoting the efficient use of our road network are our twin aims.

No problem with that myself.

Their Key Functions

The RSA works to improve road safety in Ireland by:

Developing and implementing information and education campaigns to increase awareness of road safety and promote safer driving

They develop these campaigns however I feel they are not thought through or put together by the best people for the job. They seem to feed of stereotypes to attempt to achieve their aim.

These stereotypes are stereotypes because many people do feel they are true so if they see a RSA poster which feeds off one of these stereotypes they will seem in the majority of the public eye to be doing a good job.

In my opinion the actuality is that even if the majority are happy with this generalisational (made up word ) approach it doesnt mean that the majority are safe drivers. Its just feeding off the puplic like a cheap tabloid newspaper.

Improving vehicle standards

DRLs are nice and I approve of those but I dont hear of much else.

Establishing and monitoring a standard for driver instruction

They havent done this yet in my eyes.

Overseeing the system of driver licensing and undertaking certain enforcement activities

No evidence of that yet for me. At least nothing worthwhile.

Working with stakeholders to ensure a co-ordinated response and ensure our collective resources are used wisely and efficiently

Just a blurb to me. Means nothing.

Undertaking accident and road safety research in order to develop measures and recommendations to improve road safety

I dont believe it is done with an objective mind hence the sexist campaigns over the past year or so.

Advising the Minister for Transport on road safety policy

That cant be good considering my opinion on the above.

Producing road safety strategy documents and monitoring their implementation

They do but again I have to question the quality of the work undertaken by the RSA as a whole.

Effectiveness of their campaigns

Touched on already in my post but I personally dont believe that they look at the real world in any of the work they do. It seems very by the book stuff which assumes that every roundabout is the same and no one encounters a difficult situation when joining a motorway.


The quality of their publications
Very by the book if that makes sense. Good for starting out but maybe a second volume should be published with more advanced, real worlds, less ideal situations.

Their spokesperson
Poor.
Ignorant of driving.
Knows that we need safe roads but this overpowers his knowledge of the roads and driving completely so we end up with one sided and narrow minded results.
Theatrical - Seems he was only employed to strike a chord with a certain subset of the Irish community and even at that he is a very bad broadcaster IMO. No respect for his opinions and I am the 18 to 22 year old bracket that they want to slow down and take care so much.

L1011

Spokesperson: They need to either change their spokesman/chairman, or make him publically sit - and pass - a driver theory test and driving test for all categories of vehicle he uses, car and motorbike (if he still has one). He has no credibility as it stands due to having never done this.

Publications: The ROR needs revision to cover actual real life driving, and it needs referencing. As it stands, it states things as rules which have no basis in law. Other publications, such as the 'share the road' leaflet sent out with tax renewals, should be reviewed also - in light of the massive changes to our road network in recent years I'd suggest changing that specific leaflet that we've all got repeatedly to one about motorway driving.

Advertising: Their seasonal advertising aside, their standard campaigns focus far too heavily on a small range of issues. The seasonal ads - drink/drugs and tiredness ones - serve a purpose. They also need to address the preachiness level and at this stage realise that the shock factor has worn off with the blood 'n' guts approach in TV ads.

stealthyspeeder

Was goin to post about what I think about them, and then read draffordx's post

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=69587657&postcount=4

(not going to quote it all)

I dont think I can add anything to that. Perfectly sums up how I think, and written a lot more coherantly than I could hope to manage.

Xios

I don't watch tv, so i never see anything they ever produce. Only info i get about them is from people supporting or complaining about them here.

Last year the RSA safety truck thing came to my college, they had the most useless motorbike simulator in the world, felt like i was playing road rash, honestly that bad. The controls may aswell been a playstation joy pad.

From my experiences i found them to be very ineffective in achieving much.
I really want them to get a complete re-organisation and a new approach to their campaigns.

More education driven campaigns is what i want from them. The way i see them, they're like a parent saying "You need an education so you won't die!!1!:mad:" without giving any advice or help on how to get it.

GTE

I look forward to seeing what they would have to say about a concentrated thread like this.

I am still waiting on the RSA, Irish and British transport departments to get back to me on their stance on Winter tyres.

Going Forward

Going Forward wrote: »

Have a look here:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+WQ+E-2010-010163+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN

here

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68666119



and here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=67461327




not much of an "Authority" then IMO...

I'm also skeptical that whilst the motives of the RSA are impenetrable, it looks like it was set up at the behest of:
A. Insurance Companies who were forking out millions in claims every year, and who also seem to sponsor every road safety event; just look up the reports of financial costs per road death, not nice I know, but they are businesses after all.
B. The EU, cos there seems to be a safety statistics league going on, and we want to be the best. Fine, please provide decent roads, signage, services etc. etc.


PS- Get Gay Byrne to make a TV series about taking the test.

Going Forward

bbk wrote: »

I look forward to seeing what they would have to say about a concentrated thread like this.

I am still waiting on the RSA, Irish and British transport departments to get back to me on their stance on Winter tyres.

Would you go back and ask them about snow chains aswell, just for the craic!!!!!!!!!!!!

- Dont hold your breath waiting for the "AUTHORITATIVE" answer either!!

Sorry to be so smart about it, they just dont really have a clue about anything other than the basics- What was wrong with the Department of Transport anyway?

bbk

bbk wrote: »

I look forward to seeing what they would have to say about a concentrated thread like this.

.

14 posts in 10 days (including this one), I reckon they would not be overly bothered by it

I reckon the Gardai could be doing a lot more, in the last few months I've seen loads and loads of high end 4x4s with tyres that are bald. Also the Gardai should be making insurance checks on all those modifed cars that congregate in towns and cities all over the country, no way are all of those lowering springs and roll cages declared. That would get a lot of muppets off the road. I've seen very few TV adds about drink driving etc over the last few weeks too, has the RSA advertising budget been sliced or something. That Saxo add was utterly retarded too, they must have gotten the Green Party to contribute to it.

GTE

Going Forward wrote: »

Would you go back and ask them about snow chains aswell, just for the craic!!!!!!!!!!!!

- Dont hold your breath waiting for the "AUTHORITATIVE" answer either!!

Sorry to be so smart about it, they just dont really have a clue about anything other than the basics- What was wrong with the Department of Transport anyway?

The question was what was the their stance on non snow grade tyres being used in these weather conditions.

Thank you for your email enquiry which has been passed on by the Department of Transport for our attention and direct reply to you.
Awh, you're welcome!


Your only contact with the road surface is your tyres so it’s vital that they are up to the task in icy and snowy conditions. We advise that you should check your tyres regularly (including your spare tyre) for excessive wear or damage, and we recommend that you replace them if the tread depth falls below 3mm (the minimum legal thread depth is 1.6mm). You should also check that tyres are inflated to the correct tyre pressure.
Nothing addressing the issue here.


Tyres fitted to vehicles either in the form of original equipment or as replacement components that are approved for use on motor vehicles and their trailers must meet the standards specified in Directive 92/23/EEC in order to be placed on the market in the EU. They will have the appropriate ‘e’ or ‘E’ mark; a check for which is now part of the roadworthiness testing which is carried out on vehicles tested at both NCT & the VTN.
Nothing addressing the issue here.


In addition to normal tyres, this Directive also specifies the standards for snow tyres which are defined as ‘a tyre the tread pattern and structure of which are primarily designed to ensure in mud and fresh or melting snow a performance better than that of a normal tyre. The tread pattern of a snow tyre generally consists of groove (rib) and/or solid-block elements more widely spaced than on a normal tyre.’ These tyres will be marked with the inscription "M+S" (or alternatively "M.S" or "M&S") if the tyre is classified in the Category of use "snow".
I know that but I did ask them what was the opinion of people not using those tyres.


It is up to individual Member States to decide whether or not they wish to mandate the fitment of snow tyres to vehicles operating in their territory during certain months of the year.
Nothing addressing the issue here.


Currently there are no specific requirements in Irish Road Traffic Regulations mandating or prohibiting the use of snow tyres, traction aid devices designed for fitting to a tyre in snowy and icy conditions, or tyres fitted with studs as our relatively low annual snowfall amounts has not warranted the introduction of such regulations here so far. Consideration may be given to mandating such components in the future; however this would involve conducting a public consultation, coupled with a detailed cost benefit analysis in order for us to make an informed decision.
They dont have a position on this issue.


Irish Road Traffic regulations prohibit a driver from using a vehicle on Irish roads if their control over the vehicle has been reduced and if the vehicle presents a danger to other road users. This is important with respect to traction aid devices and studded tyres. While such devices may increase a vehicles grip where the road is uniformly covered in snow and ice they may have reduced performance compared to a correctly maintained car tyre on dry road surfaces free from snow and ice.



In many cases such devices should not be used on roads which are not covered in snow and ice. Therefore it is very important that a driver take great care when using such devices, abide by manufacturers instructions and adhere to the maximum speed rating specified for such a device and the conditions under which it should be used. Care must also be taken to ensure that fitting them will not invalidate warranties / insurance etc.



Irish Road Traffic Regulations also prohibit the use of vehicles and tyres that damage our roads. As a result care must be taken if fitting a traction aid device on a tyre or using a studded tyre as these can damage the surface of a road where there is no snow and ice or the depth of the snow or ice is below a certain level. As above it is essential that a driver abide by manufacturers instructions and only use such devices under the specific conditions they are designed for.



The following link contains some useful general information for driving in snow and ice.

http://www.rsa.ie/Utility/News/2010/Road-Safety-Alert---SNOW-AND-ICE/



I trust that this clarifies the situation for you.

I didn't pay much attention to it as it is the season to be jolly and all.

I only ever emailed them for the craic to see what their answer would be. I never expected anything quality from them.
Though Ill read now and no doubt have a quick edit to make

And now the EDIT:
I added what is bold in the quote.
Ill reply with a more focused response to studless Winter tyres and road temps.

Going Forward

bbk wrote: »

The question was what was the their stance on non snow grade tyres being used in these weather conditions.



I didn't pay much attention to it as it is the season to be jolly and all.

I only ever emailed them for the craic to see what their answer would be. I never expected anything quality from them.
Though Ill read now and no doubt have a quick edit to make

And now the EDIT:
I added what is bold in the quote.
Ill reply with a more focused response to studless Winter tyres and road temps.

You wont get any answers other than what is in the legislation if it suits them, that is, all for fear of legal implications.

If it doesnt suit them they will tell you that they are studying the issue with a view to bringing it to the Minister's attention to get it changed/amended to suit themselves.

I have read that they pay 5000e a day for technical advice though so your enquiries will dropped into that slush fund for "Direct reply to you"

PS The more obscure the questions the better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Going Forward

It would be a bit unfair to keep referring to the fact that the man never passed a test unless it is actually known for definite.

So, is it? Has he actually publicily acknowledged that he:

A. Never Passed A Driving Test,
B. Has been driving around for years not having passed a test.
C. Did he get one of those "Amnesty" licenses years ago then subsequently pass a test?

If the man has passed a test like the rest of those to whom he "preaches", fair enough, please drop the subject and correct the misconception.

On the other hand, if he has never passed a driving test, I for one would question his credentials for being appointed as a Chairman of a publicly funded body, which unless I am mistaken is a remunerated and expenses paid position, and if so, I believe his position is, as they say in modern day parlance, "untenable", as high standards and value for money must be seen to be offered by all strands of the public sector in the current economic climate.

As an aside, Shane Ross's book "Wasters" is an eye opener on the skills and qualifications one is required to possess in order to be appointed to such boards...... The word "Croneyism" springs up again and again and again.

Going Forward

Onkle wrote: »

Before we start I would like to hear the opinion of each poster on the RSA, include things like the effectiveness of their campaigns, the quality of their publications, their spokesperson, anything you can think of really. I'm running back and forth here all morning so I'll get my own views up asap.

For the first while can we not respond to one another and just put our own opinions down on this, it would just be interesting to see the outcome

It might be worth people knowing what they are dealing with here.
Heres a link to the legislation governing the setting up and operation etc of the RSA. Its detailed stuff, but interesting
too

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2006/en/act/pub/0014/print.html

Dempo1

I had some respect for the RSA was trying to achieve but it seems to me they spend 90% of their time focusing on Driver's actions as a cause of the majority of fatalities. Whilst i accept speeding and careless driving both play a large roll in the causes of fatalities and indeed crashes it would seem to me absolutely no account is taken regarding the appalling state some of our roads are in. Sure road conditions are primarily under the remit of local authorities by way of the Appalling NRA, but there is not much point in promoting the virtues of road safety until road conditions are at least addressed as an overall strategy.

Whilst off topic a little, i am incensed at the mis truths advertised about these new Speed Camera's which i believe and despite the RSA opinion to the contrary, this initiative is nothing more than a revenue generating exercises. We are led to believe these Vans are to be highly visible when clearly they are not, we are led to believe their locations are in locations where accidents have occurred and they are clearly not, in fact it is abundantly clear these Vans are located in easy catch locations such as area's where speed limits reduced dramatically. Whilst i accept this initiative was Government policy, led by the smiling FF ministers who are now departing, the RSA Whilst not terribly excited about this initiative have clearly led false advertising about the implementation and locations o the speed Vans.

As an aside, I have also noticed a mysterious drop in the presence of the Traffic corps since these vans were introduced, I along with the rest of the country were led to believe the introduction of the traffic corps was to focus on Road safety and the implementation of laws pertaining to same. Now they seemed to have disappeared from the Road network with occasional check points in evidence.

I could cynically surmise that the speed Van initiative was firstly a revenue raising exercises coupled with a savings/cut back in Garda resources exercise, indeed i suspect that despite the awarding of a €60m contract to one of FF's favorite son's, just like the E Voting machines, this initiative will end up being another expensive debacle. This said we can at least relax in the Knowledge that one of our most infamous and colorful developers has ample room at his storage facility (earning substantial rental income from the government) when the time comes to store these ludicrous and pointless speed camera Vans!

Gophur

This thread is dripping in derision. The RSA are pilloried at each and every opportunity, with no intelligent debate on any alternatives.

The onus on providing safe roads rests with the users of the roads. The RSA can only do so much, and what they do, they do well. All this negativity does nobody any good.

As for Gay Byrnes' driving test? Absolutely irrelevant. Gaybo is insulted, derided, mocked and ridiculed at every opportunity. This constant negativity does nobody any good, and only undermines your argument.

How about lobbying the young drivers' representative (There is one. Go check?) on the RSA? From what I've seen, he's proven to be 100% useless.

Going Forward

Gophur wrote: »

This thread is dripping in derision. The RSA are pilloried at each and every opportunity, with no intelligent debate on any alternatives.

The onus on providing safe roads rests with the users of the roads. The RSA can only do so much, and what they do, they do well. All this negativity does nobody any good.

As for Gay Byrnes' driving test? Absolutely irrelevant. Gaybo is insulted, derided, mocked and ridiculed at every opportunity. This constant negativity does nobody any good, and only undermines your argument.

How about lobbying the young drivers' representative (There is one. Go check?) on the RSA? From what I've seen, he's proven to be 100% useless.

If you were a Teacher, would you be happy if the head of the INTO had no teaching qualifications, or would a farmer be expected to accept a carpenter appointed as the head of the IFA?

I dont think so, and as a motorist I will accept someone who has at least passed a test to preach to me, and not someone who, because of their celebrity status, has been gifted a position in a state board.

Mr. Byrne's occasional comments are hardly wisdom soaked gems either.

Personally, f I had been offered the position of Chairman and I had never passed a driving test, I would have to consider whether that point would affect my credibilty as being a public spokesperson, but thats just me.

Off topic, but part of the reason the country is down the Swanee is because people with no qualifications, or the wrong ones, were appointed to Ministerial positions and Government jobs that they had not got a hope in hell of ever understanding due to a lack of experience in the real world.

Anyway, did he pass a test or not?

Going Forward

Going Forward wrote: »

If you were a Teacher, would you be happy if the head of the INTO had no teaching qualifications, or would a farmer be expected to accept a carpenter appointed as the head of the IFA?

Not at all relevent really, so what if Gay B has actually passed a test or not, he was appointed as a responsible figure that was well liked by most of the public. Boy racers are obviously not the sole target audience of the RSA, would you prefer if they appointed The Stig or someone like that ?

Going Forward

RoverJames wrote: »

Not at all relevent really, so what if Gay B has actually passed a test or not, he was appointed as a responsible figure that was well liked by most of the public. Boy racers are obviously not the sole target audience of the RSA, would you prefer if they appointed The Stig or someone like that ?

"he was appointed as a responsible figure that was well liked by most of the public."- true, a safe pair of hands etc.

Though no fault of his own, I would question his relevance to younger people and whether his post in the RSA is even nesesary or whether any surveys have ever been held to discover such information.

I dont think a UK based personality such as the Stig would readily be accepted here in Eire, but he could have a bit more street-cred for the younger generation I suppose.

I still think it's important to know about his license status, because IF he never passed a test, it certainly brings to my mind occasions over the last few decades of people preached at by some who were in no position to do so, along the lines of Charlie and his "way beyond our means" speech.
If other people want to turn a blind eye to it, thats their perogative of course.

It wont keep me awake at night either!!

I've just read here:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056128301&page=3

that he's also previously admitted to driving while under the influence!!

Now, I dont know if any of this is true,

But If It Is....................

Gophur

What, exactly, has Gay Byrne to prove to you by virtue of he having, or not, either a driving licence, or having passed any particular test?

Using this ridiculous logic, the Chairman( note, not the Chief Executive Officer) needs to be licenced for every type of vehicle on the road. Using this logic, he has no mandate to speak to bus or lorry drivers.

As, even, a pedestrian, he's perfectly entitled to be Chairman of the RSA.

I said before, how about something, apart from silence, from the young driver's representative on the board of the RSA. He's been useless.

L1011

The bus comparison isn't valid, neither is the pedestrian one.

The man is the chairman of the organisation responsible for driver testing and licencing. He drives a car. He has not passed a test for this. Seeing as he's meant to be 'in charge' of testing this is a very serious issue.

If he drove buses without passing a test, that'd be valid. But he doesn't.

2 stroke

I'd be much happier with the rsa if they took their job seriously and tackled the problem of dangerous roads. It seems ok for councils to put up signs like "dangerous bend" "accident blackspot" "road liable to frost" and not do anything about the problem. Complain to the rsa about a dangerous bend and they will tell you its not their responsibility and to contact your council.

Going Forward

Sorry Dont wish to hog this thread!!!

But what will happen to the RSA in terms of it's 50million funding when the target reduction (30%) of acceptable road deaths has been achieved?

And, by the way according to the National Safety Council in 2005:

"According to a recent Goodbody report ‘Cost Benefit Parameters and Application Rules
for Transport Project Appraisal (August 2004)’ road fatalities in 2004 cost the state
€852,720,000 and serious injuries cost €911,363,200.
The cost to the State is most clearly seen in relation to the use of scarce resources of the
Hospital and Emergency services and the impact of so many injury admissions as a
consequence of road collisions."

- so the RSA's relatively small budget (in terms of the financial costs of Road Traffic Accidents) would seem to be money extremely well spent, but will it become a victim of it's own success, surely it will have to be given another "raison d'étre"?

Gophur

MYOB wrote: »

The bus comparison isn't valid, neither is the pedestrian one.

The man is the chairman of the organisation responsible for driver testing and licencing. He drives a car. He has not passed a test for this. Seeing as he's meant to be 'in charge' of testing this is a very serious issue.

If he drove buses without passing a test, that'd be valid. But he doesn't.

With respect, that is balderdash.

1. Gay Byrne is NOT 'in charge' of driver testing.

And

2. A blind man could be Chairperson of the RSA.

Gay Byrne's driver testing pedigree is irrelevant. He is 100% entitled to do what he does for the RSA and is eminently qualified for his position.

If he had the supposed qualifications, as demanded by the 'experts' on here, the same 'experts' would find something else to knock him with.

ninty9er

While the functions of the RSA are necessary, it should be a section in the Department of Transport rather than an authority, similar to the NRA.

Spokesperson
The spokesperson and person responsible should be someone who has many years experience in driver eduaction who is hired on contract for a period of 5 years at a time. Rosemary Smith springs to mind.

Campaigns
I don't think the targetting is right. "If you're a young lad you don't want your mum to meet me doing my job"

The overtaking is fine, but one on the use of motorways would be gladly welcomed sponsoring Coronation Street or something.

Youtube is where you want to target younger drivers.

However in terms of adverts, they should be targetting drivers, passengers, cyclists and pedestrians. Sub-categorising isn't helpful as there are plenty of idiots of all ages out there. "If you're a young lad" to be replaced with something like "if you drive a truck"

A rear seat passenger seatbelt campaign. A driver and passenger overloading campaign. A light up campaign for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians. A basic vehicle check campaign (lights, oil, tyres, washer fluid, brakes). These are things I'd like to see.

L1011

Gophur wrote: »

With respect, that is balderdash.

1. Gay Byrne is NOT 'in charge' of driver testing.

He's the chairman of the organisation that does it.

Gophur wrote: »

2. A blind man could be Chairperson of the RSA.

True. But they wouldn't be driving without having passed a test. Byrne does.

You seem to be failing to get the point here.

_Kaiser_

I can't stand Gay Byrne anyway (never got the obsession with him in this country!), but I don't see how a publicity-hungry former chat show host, who talks about "retiring" - but never actually does so - more than Alex Ferguson :rolleyes:, and who by all accounts has never actually passed his Category B test is qualified to be the spokesperson for an organisation charged with improving road safety??!


As for the campaigns - sexist, discriminatory drivel that does nothing to address the thousands who can't manage basic concepts such as turning your (dipped - not just parking) lights on if its dark, indicating on a roundabout, keeping a safe distance from the car in front etc etc etc

Actually on the campaigns.. the latest "crashed lives" ad features a mother talking about her son who's been killed in an accident.

Now while I have every sympathy for this woman and her family, I feel the need to point out that - by her own admission - the guy had had a few drinks and "swayed out onto the road".... no mention is made of the driver who hit him who may very well have just been on their way home when this guy jumped/fell out in front of their car!

We see a lot of slow shots of the grieving mother, but no mention of the agony and guilt the driver may well have (and may still be) going through!
Instead the message is the usual "slow down you murdering drivers" :rolleyes:


The underlying problem is - as usual in this country - that it's easier to be seen to do something than ACTUALLY doing something! So instead of having an effective Garda Traffic Corps out there pulling people for some of the muppetry I mentioned above, we get TV ads highlighting stuff that if you don't know you shouldn't be driving anyway, and constant harping about how speed is the root of all evil - nothing about how in fact it's INAPPROPRIATE speeding and an inability to adjust your driving to the conditions that's the bigger problem!


But this being Ireland are we really surprised that yet another state agency is proven to be incompetent/ineffective?

peasant

Taken from the driving test price hike thread (and from the Irish times article)

...Mr Dempsey .... has also asked the RSA to consider increasing fees for other services it provides, such as commercial vehicle licence testing and the NCT.

“The fee increase will have to cover the €5.5 million shortfall in [RSA] funding. I have sent a query asking why they are not considering some of the other areas for a fee increase to spread it more evenly.”

The Minister said the increases were part of a policy – outlined in the Government’s four-year plan – to reduce the reliance of State agencies on exchequer funding.

“In the longer term we want a lot of these agencies to become self-funding. We increased the price of the driving test last year, and that almost made the RSA self-sufficient in that area.”

quote from the Irish times http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/1227/1224286317434.html , highlights by me.


WTF ...I thought the NCT was a separate organisation?
So now we're facing NCT price hikes to pay for the rubbish RSA ads and keep Gaybo in biker gear???

Stheno

Don't like their instructional ads dealing with normal junctions so to speak, try driving in the like of Portlaoise where they have double three sided roundabouts and take that advice!


Also hate their campaigns, tend to focus only on male drivers and young ones at that, and tend to always have female victims (they did have one with a biker that was an exception)

Their current round of doctors and parents telling of how awful it is to suffer the impact of a crash/motor related death is something I can see on CSI

I'd like to see much much more on driving, why can't they have ads in place for the likes of the recent road conditions that advise people to be aware of the road conditions, and include images of driving in snow/ice? Why not deliberately (if legal) show someone driving after four pints and the impact on their driving ? Why not show how a bad decision overtaking results in a pile up? Why not show that drivers should keep close to the advised speed limit in good conditions rather than behaving as Sunday drivers do?

Doubtless the argument will be that recently we seem to be seeing a decrease in road deaths year on year.

Does that not indicate that younger drivers and those in their 30's and 40's who actually did the test, and tend to be less likely to drink drive ( I saw stats on this recently) are safer drivers than their older peers?

Nothing the RSA has advertised has ever appealed to me as a mid thirties female driver to change my driving behaviour whatsoever, seeing the chaos caused by bad driving on the roads has.

legendal

Road deaths have almost halved since the RSA was established. Key to this has been a change in driver behaviour, brought about by harsher penalties and the RSA's efforts at making people more aware of the consequences of bad driving.

Has the RSA been effective? The fact that about 150 fewer people have been killed in 2010 compared to 2006 speaks for itself.

I'm a male in my early 20s and I don't have a problem with the 'He Drives, She Dies' series. It's a demographic that regularly does reckless, dangerous things on the roads. It doesn't mean I do, but that's a proven fact I can't argue with. If half the energy pumped into complaining about the 'sexism' associated with those ads went into looking at why they're necessary in the first place, we'd have a debate that would have a much greater benefit to society.

bongi69

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Actually on the campaigns.. the latest "crashed lives" ad features a mother talking about her son who's been killed in an accident.

Now while I have every sympathy for this woman and her family, I feel the need to point out that - by her own admission - the guy had had a few drinks and "swayed out onto the road".... no mention is made of the driver who hit him who may very well have just been on their way home when this guy jumped/fell out in front of their car!

I only just heard this ad on the way home in the car a few mins ago. Can someone tell me what is the point of it? There's no usual RSA tagline at the end of it, and from the way it's told the driver is not at fault. Is this aimed at pedestrians? Because if it is I may have some new found respect for the RSA because something has to be done to tackle the attitutde of some pedestrians out there who don't bother looking before crossing etc. and just have a general disregard for their duties as road users

Seth Brundle

MYOB wrote: »

True. But they wouldn't be driving without having passed a test. Byrne does.

You seem to be failing to get the point here.

I seem to be also.
He has abided by the law at all times in terms of possessing his licence.
The fact that when he got his licence to drive a car, he didn't need to pass a test is somewhat irrelelvant. He did sit and pass a test to get his motorbike licence as when he wanted a licence for this it was a requirement. IMO anyone who can stay on a bike with the amount of fuppwits out there means that they are quite competent to drive.

However, since the RSA's inception, the driver licencing and testing procedure has changed completely. The test that I sat was crap compared to the one in place now. So would I be competent enough to become the mouthpiece (and that's all he is!) for a road safety organisation?

Eoin

Technically that might be all totally correct; by some ridiculous loophole, he is legally on the road. But his role is all about public perception, not just that he is technically qualified. If the RSA are trying to get through to young males, then I think a relic like Byrne is a very poor choice. Even back when he was a relevant public figure, his popularity was far from universal.

Seth Brundle

I agree.
I'm not for a moment suggesting that he be an idol for anyone under 70 but people should fault him for proper reasons.

However, I don't think we have anyone that would convince motorists of all ages (noting that possibly the younger ones are a more important target audience) - anyone "big" enough would have had the sense to leave this country when they could!

Getting back to the RSA, I wonder how much of their work is done to appease perceptions amongst the likes of the minister, etc. Is part of their problem (and I believe that a problem exists) that they don't try to unerstand or is it that they genuinely cannot understand the motorists' psyche?
I believe that a large problem exists. Actually several problems. Firstly there is an apparent need for continuous driver education in Ireland based on the general lack of knowledge currently in use on our roads - its no wonder that people die.
Secondly, funding is a big issue. There needs to be continuous marketing, especially since my first point won't happen for a long time. Good quality morketing campaigns cost money and based on the campaigns so far, they need to invest a hell of a lot more.
Also proper research needs to be done into the rates of incident causes. End this mantra of "Speed Kills" and find out the reasons for the incident and not just why it was made worse as a result of driving "too fast".
I could go on but tbh, I don't see the point as the political will to make it happen isn't there!

Iwannahurl

Onkle wrote: »

Before we start I would like to hear the opinion of each poster on the RSA, include things like the effectiveness of their campaigns, the quality of their publications, their spokesperson, anything you can think of really. I'm running back and forth here all morning so I'll get my own views up asap.

For the first while can we not respond to one another and just put our own opinions down on this, it would just be interesting to see the outcome

Interesting? Not so much.

Predictable? Pretty much.

bmw535d

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Interesting? Not so much.

Predictable? Pretty much.

your post needed? not so much.

most of your posts in general interesting? not so much.

your posts predictable? pretty much.
:D:D

Going Forward

bongi69 wrote: »

I only just heard this ad on the way home in the car a few mins ago. Can someone tell me what is the point of it? There's no usual RSA tagline at the end of it, and from the way it's told the driver is not at fault. Is this aimed at pedestrians? Because if it is I may have some new found respect for the RSA because something has to be done to tackle the attitutde of some pedestrians out there who don't bother looking before crossing etc. and just have a general disregard for their duties as road users

I have just "properly" listened to that ad, and it is definitely a poorly executed communication. Firstly, I'm always a little uncomfortable listening to real people being used in these kinds of ads, for the reason that they will invariably be the subject of debates like this, which they had probably never envisaged. The ad was a terrible missed opportunity to remind pedestrians of their duties and responsobilities when using roads and of the implications of not doing so.

The RSA seems to be content to tackle head on the "Pointable" mass road user, while quietly steering away from tackling those who Walk, Jog, Excersise Horses, Cycle, etc on our roads and who seem quite content to do so wearing dark clothing and possibly drunk or sober throughout the year.

Strange that the RSA based in a rural part of the country wont tackle these issues, if they did, they might earn a bit more respect from motorists trying to abide by the rules.

Iwannahurl

bmw535d wrote: »

your post needed? not so much.

most of your posts in general interesting? not so much.

your posts predictable? pretty much.
:D:D

No worries, you're keeping the standards high.

bmw535d wrote: »

buy a jeep, girls have a thing for lads in jeeps! i kid you not!

-Chris-

I've deleted some posts relating to a specific traffic incident. Please keep the discussion in this thread general about road behaviour or specific about the RSA.

barney 20v

I agree totally with the need for the RSA but i feel they have missed the vital points in what is needed.. the 3 E's
EDUCATION.
ENGINEERING .
ENFORCEMENT.
The level of education the RSA are providing is very limited and too focused on a few repeated issues.
The condition of our roads and the signs used on them are of a very poor standard and this is a major factor in road deaths/injuries.
The level of enforcement by the cops is just not good enough. we have a dedicated force specifically formed to deal with this problem but they are understaffed and over stretched.
In relation to Gay Byrne, i feel he is genuine in what he wants to achieve but he is not the correct person to front this campaign .

finally it frustrates me no end to see the issue of suicide being largely ignored even though it results in more deaths each year than all the road deaths combined...

Seth Brundle

barney 20v wrote: »

finally it frustrates me no end to see the issue of suicide being largely ignored even though it results in more deaths each year than all the road deaths combined...

But suicide isn't part of the RSA's remit

-Chris-

barney 20v wrote: »

finally it frustrates me no end to see the issue of suicide being largely ignored even though it results in more deaths each year than all the road deaths combined...

There are two issues with bringing this into the argument:

1) as kbannon says, it's not a part of the RSA's remit and therefore is technically off-topic

2) Journalists don't report suicides because of the Werther Effect and the tendency for a publicised suicide to lead to an increase in the number of suicides in the area in which the original suicide is reported.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide#Journalism_codes


Certainly either reason should be enough to say that this is a tangent which will inevitably lead to a conversational cul de sac.

barney 20v

-Chris- wrote: »

There are two issues with bringing this into the argument:

1) as kbannon says, it's not a part of the RSA's remit and therefore is technically off-topic

2) Journalists don't report suicides because of the Werther Effect and the tendency for a publicised suicide to lead to an increase in the number of suicides in the area in which the original suicide is reported.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide#Journalism_codes


Certainly either reason should be enough to say that this is a tangent which will inevitably lead to a conversational cul de sac.

sorry if i seemed to be dragging the thread off topic but to me it seems to be a legitimate point... we hear every day about the amount of young males losing their lives on the roads but hear nothing about the numbers of deaths associated with depression and to clarify i meant it is being ignored on a government level and not in the media as such.
Once again sorry if veered off topic.

-Chris-

No worries whatsoever, it's just worth noting that there are legitimate reasons for giving suicide less coverage than car related deaths. It doesn't make it any less devastating or important.

bmw535d

Iwannahurl wrote: »

No worries, you're keeping the standards high.

i have no standards my friend. none what so ever!

Going Forward

Why does the RSA not be overlooked by the Freedom of information and Ombudsmans office?

Nothing much about customers rights on their site either.

It's also, like other bodies "under the aegis of the Department of Transport" -bit opaque that.

Cookie_Monster

Going Forward wrote: »

It's also, like other bodies "under the aegis of the Department of Transport" -bit opaque that.

that just means they are doing the depts job for them.
Actually what does the DoT do these days, theres a specific quango vaguely under its control for every aspect of transport anyway.