Plans for Graduated Speed Fines scrapped

_Kaiser_

According to the radio news there now, the idea for graduated speed fines that was approved (but not enacted) by the outgoing Government before the election is being scrapped in the current Government talks.

Seems to be true:
https://www.iradio.ie/speedlaws/
https://www.businesspost.ie/ireland/rosss-graduated-speeding-penalties-plan-to-be-dropped-b4bd1e40


Good news IMO!

Was a perfectly good idea. Ridiculous to let it be used as a bargaining tool.

Just heard it on the news, excellent news. Was a ridiculous idea and the bin is exactly where it should be.

El_Duderino 09

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

According to the radio news there now, the idea for graduated speed fines that was approved (but not enacted) by the outgoing Government before the election is being scrapped in the current Government talks.

Seems to be true:
https://www.iradio.ie/speedlaws/
https://www.businesspost.ie/ireland/rosss-graduated-speeding-penalties-plan-to-be-dropped-b4bd1e40


Good news IMO!

Why is it good news in your opinion? Sounds like a reasonable idea to me. If you're going 30 over the limit you get a €2000 fine. Nobody drives at 150 on a motorway by accident. Or 130 on a national road.

CrankyHaus

Presumably all of Shane Ross's proposals well be going the same way. He hardly endeared anyone to him while in office.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Why is it good news in your opinion? Sounds like a reasonable idea to me. If you're going 30 over the limit you get a €2000 fine. Nobody drives at 150 on a motorway by accident. Or 130 on a national road.

The theory's reasonable. The implementation was abysmal.

Micky 32

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Why is it good news in your opinion? Sounds like a reasonable idea to me. If you're going 30 over the limit you get a €2000 fine. Nobody drives at 150 on a motorway by accident. Or 130 on a national road.

2000 euro fine for 30 km over the limit on a motorway is a rediculous punishment.

Micky 32

Micky 32 wrote: »

2000 euro fine for 30 km over the limit on a motorway is a rediculous punishment.

It would be if it was unavoidable in any way.

El_Duderino 09

Micky 32 wrote: »

2000 euro fine for 30 km over the limit on a motorway is a rediculous punishment.

If it was in force it probably wouldn't happen very often. I'd feel like an idiot of I was caught for 2k.

I don't think it's ridiculous though. Just drive to the speed limit and you'd be grand.

El_Duderino 09

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

It would be if it was unavoidable in any way.

Yeah, imagine how driving 30 over the speed limit could be avoided...

Lundstram

I find it absolutely mental one could be caught speeding 4 times in a 3 year perod and be banned for 6 months. 3 years is a long time.

Ross has been an absolute disaster as transport minister, good riddance to him.

_Kaiser_

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Was a perfectly good idea. Ridiculous to let it be used as a bargaining tool.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Why is it good news in your opinion? Sounds like a reasonable idea to me. If you're going 30 over the limit you get a €2000 fine. Nobody drives at 150 on a motorway by accident. Or 130 on a national road.

Others have already responded as to why, but I'll echo it - the theory was OK, the implementation was the issue.

There's a vast difference between 20/30km over on a motorway like the M7 or M8 (quieter again), vs the M50 or N11 or in a built up urban area with a 50 km/h limit.

But, one thing the current pandemic has shown is that we have a bigger issue here with many of the public content to blindly follow whatever their "betters" tell them, without stopping to analyse the situation for themselves - easy generic mantras seem to be enough: STAY AT HOME or SPEED KILLS.

Speed doesn't kill - INAPPROPRIATE speed kills! Not as catchy though I suppose!

Still, right decision made today. If they come back with a moer appropriate solution I'm sure I'd be fully supportive.

Won't be getting into an argument about "speeders being worse than Hitler" so can save that one

Micky 32

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yeah, imagine how driving 30 over the speed limit could be avoided...

Everything is avoidable, just like not keeping your eyes on the road, not paying attention, being on the wrong side of the road. 2k is too much for 30k on the motorway especially when it’s not the main cause of problems on the road.

El_Duderino 09

CrankyHaus wrote: »

Presumably all of Shane Ross's proposals well be going the same way. He hardly endeared anyone to him while in office.



The theory's reasonable. The implementation was abysmal.

Yeah he really didn't endear himself to anyone. He got done for such an unpopular guy.

If implementation was poor then hey could just change the plan and fix it. Why was it bad?

In any case it seems they've dropped it. Not the end of the world.

_Kaiser_

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Others have already responded as to why, but I'll echo it - the theory was OK, the implementation was the issue.

There's a vast difference between 20/30km over on a motorway like the M7 or M8 (quieter again), vs the M50 or N11 or in a built up urban area with a 50 km/h limit.

But, one thing the current pandemic has shown is that we have a bigger issue here with many of the public content to blindly follow whatever their "betters" tell them, without stopping to analyse the situation for themselves - easy generic mantras seem to be enough: STAY AT HOME or SPEED KILLS.

Speed doesn't kill - INAPPROPRIATE speed kills! Not as catchy though I suppose!

Still, right decision made today. If they come back with a moer appropriate solution I'm sure I'd be fully supportive.

Won't be getting into an argument about "speeders being worse than Hitler" so can save that one

Anything over the speed limit of 120 on any motorway is inappropriate. You’re all cars first and everything else second so you’ll never agree with that but that doesn’t make you correct.

We can’t have a society where people can pick and choose which laws to follow to suit themselves. It would be bedlam.

El_Duderino 09

Micky 32 wrote: »

Everything is avoidable, just like not keeping your eyes on the road, not paying attention, being on the wrong side of the road. 2k is too much for 30k on the motorway especially when it’s not the main cause of problems on the road.

I'm pretty sure I've never driven 30 over the speed limit by accident. It takes a positive decision to drive at 150 on the motorway so I've no problem with a decent fine if someone's caught.

I really think most people would just make sure not to drive that fast if there was a real and decent fine for doing so. If they choose to risk it then let them take their chances and accept the fine if it comes.

I really can see the big deal or the reason to only focus on the motorway. Doing 130 on a national road is similar. I doubt anyone does it by accident ( and if they have that little control of their speed, then they would probably be more conscious of it if there was a fine)

Micky 32

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure I've never driven 30 over the speed limit by accident. It takes a positive decision to drive at 150 on the motorway so I've no problem with a decent fine if someone's caught.

That’s not the point though. You’ll find that most road deaths are caused by other offences that carry a quarter of the fine than someone getting a 2k fine for over 30km on a motorway that rarely cause road deaths. Fines should be graduated speeding vs road conditions.

Micky 32

Micky 32 wrote: »

That’s not the point though. You’ll find that most road deaths are caused by other offences that carry a quarter of the fine than someone getting a 2k fine for over 30km on a motorway that rarely cause road deaths. Fines should be graduated speeding vs road conditions.

Road conditions is just a massive grey area that you’d all hope would just get you off something. Things need to be black and white and a speed limit is black and white.

Can none of you wrap your heads around not doing these other more dangerous offences AND not speeding? It’s not one or the other.

El_Duderino 09

Micky 32 wrote: »

That’s not the point though. You’ll find that most road deaths are caused by other offences that carry a quarter of the fine than someone getting a 2k fine for over 30km on a motorway that rarely cause road deaths. Fines should be graduated speeding vs road conditions.

Why the exclusive focus on motorways?

Micky 32

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Why the exclusive focus on motorways?

It’s obvious you don’t drive or have much driving experience.

Lundstram

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Why the exclusive focus on motorways?

Perfect roads, driving in a straight line with no oncoming traffic. Accidents on motorways are caused by being in the wrong lane, lack of concentration/awareness (phone use from what I see) and lack of mirror use while switching lanes.

Speed is way down the list.

CrankyHaus

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Yeah he really didn't endear himself to anyone. He got done for such an unpopular guy.

If implementation was poor then hey could just change the plan and fix it. Why was it bad?

It treated doing 60 km/h in a 30 km/h zone the same as doing 150 km/h on the motorway.

The first increases risk significantly, the second not that much.
I don't do either myself. But I'm regularly passed on the motorway by people at those speeds and as a safety concern I'd put it below mobile use, lack of awareness, tailgating and other issues, none of which are really addressed.

It was part of a broader pattern of Shane Ross instituting harsh measures just to be seen to be doing something; rather than ensuring that the existing laws were properly enforced.
A harsh penalty inconsistently enforced is a poor deterrent, usually wielded as a sticking player to cover over a problem rather than address it with resources.

ReginaldSmythV

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

It would be if it was unavoidable in any way.

Limits are far too low in most cases so it’s unfair to be punished excessively for exceeding them.

El_Duderino 09

Micky 32 wrote: »

It’s obvious you don’t drive or have much driving experience.

Neither of those things are true. I think about my speed and it's easy to keep to the limit. But keeping to within 30 of the limit is something any driver should be able to do.

Why the exclusive focus on motorways.

BrianBoru00

Delighted. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid rule.

AFAIK people need to be 10% over the limit to get pulled.

What WOULD have been sensible is to dish out fines based on income or net worth.
So someone out of work in social housing exceeding the limit would have to pay €100 fine - pretty draconian for them.
The CEO of a large company on €150 000 a year should pay €6000 for example.

Thats for a first offence. Double or treble if they repeat within say 5 years

Mara Beautiful Muslin

Mara Beautiful Muslin wrote: »

Limits are far too low in most cases so it’s unfair to be punished excessively for exceeding them.

Even if they were lower there’s no excuse once you know what the limit is.

El_Duderino 09

CrankyHaus wrote: »

It treated doing 60 km/h in a 30 km/h zone the same as doing 150 km/h on the motorway.

The first increases risk significantly, the second not that much.
I don't do either myself. But I'm regularly passed on the motorway by people at those speeds and as a safety concern I'd put it below mobile use, lack of awareness, tailgating and other issues, none of which are really addressed.

It was part of a broader pattern of Shane Ross instituting harsh measures just to be seen to be doing something; rather than ensuring that the existing laws were properly enforced.
A harsh penalty inconsistently enforced is a poor deterrent, usually wielded as a sticking player to cover over a problem rather than address it with resources.

I see it as just getting rid of any culture of speeding. Why complicate it by having the fine for some roads and not others. Seems like a easy rule to understand and simple to never break without a positive decision to break it and run the risk of the fine.

I think you're making it a lot more complicated than it needs to be. Caught 30 over the limit = €2000 fine. Simple.

BrianBoru00

BrianBoru00 wrote: »

Delighted. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid rule.

AFAIK people need to be 10% over the limit to get pulled.

What WOULD have been sensible is to dish out fines based on income or net worth.
So someone out of work in social housing exceeding the limit would have to pay €100 fine - pretty draconian for them.
The CEO of a large company on €150 000 a year should pay €6000 for example.

Thats for a first offence. Double or treble if they repeat within say 5 years

Hardly fair to punish someone more just for not being a waster.

El_Duderino 09

Lundstram wrote: »

Perfect roads, driving in a straight line with no oncoming traffic. Accidents on motorways are caused by being in the wrong lane, lack of concentration/awareness (phone use from what I see) and lack of mirror use while switching lanes.

Speed is way down the list.

But it would also be so simple avoid the fine. Like, really simple to the point that a novice driver should be able to regulate their Speer to within 30 of their target.

Can you honestly say you could think you're at 120 but actually be at 150?

ReginaldSmythV

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Even if they were lower there’s no excuse once you know what the limit is.

I have very little heed for speed limits either way. Some are too high most are far too low. 150kmh on a motorway is a very safe and comfortable speed and should be fully legal.

Micky 32

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Neither of those things are true. I think about my speed and it's easy to keep to the limit. But keeping to within 30 of the limit is something any driver should be able to do.

Why the exclusive focus on motorways.

You still are ignoring my point. The punishments don’t match the crime. You are safer travelling at 30km over on a big long straight motorway than mobile phone use, lack of attention, going over a white line ( that can have devastating consequences if a head on happens) and yet you’ll get the full 2k fine for the least dangerous of what i just listed above.

Mara Beautiful Muslin

Mara Beautiful Muslin wrote: »

I have very little heed for speed limits either way. Some are too high most are far too low. 150kmh on a motorway is a very safe and comfortable speed and should be fully legal.

As I said before, this picking and choosing to suit yourself is where all the problems lie.

El_Duderino 09

Mara Beautiful Muslin wrote: »

I have very little heed for speed limits either way. Some are too high most are far too low. 150kmh on a motorway is a very safe and comfortable speed and should be fully legal.

Ok. But it isn't legal. And we all know what the limit is. So if you want to speed any take the risk of being caught, then that's your business. If you pay "very little heed for speed limits" or any other law, then you know the risks you're taking.

I really can't see the fuss. Just stick to within 30 of the limit to avoid the fine. What's the big deal? Seems like a law that nobody should ever need to worry about unless they choose to.

Micky 32

Micky 32 wrote: »

You still are ignoring my point. The punishments don’t match the crime. You are safer travelling at 30km over on a big long straight motorway than mobile phone use, lack of attention, going over a white line ( that can have devastating consequences if a head on happens) and yet you’ll get the full 2k fine for the least dangerous of what i just listed above.

Why can’t people not use a phone, pay attention, stay within the lines, AND stay within the speed limits? Hardly rocket science.

CrankyHaus

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I see it as just getting rid of any culture of speeding. Why complicate it by having the fine for some roads and not others. Seems like a easy rule to understand and simple to never break without a positive decision to break it and run the risk of the fine.

I think you're making it a lot more complicated than it needs to be. Caught 30 over the limit = €2000 fine. Simple.

Fair enough, it's no skin off my nose either way as I don't speed. I suppose I'm just irritated by this focus on speeding, parroting 1980s catchphrases while burying the head on serious road safety issues.

I'd rather see a focus on technology solutions, ever cheaper and more available, than pointless legislation.
IMO roadside drug testing, ANPR and mobility app are genuine advances in road safety. A focus on expanding these and adding further solutions like red light cameras is the way to go.

Micky 32

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Why can’t people not use a phone, pay attention, stay within the lines, AND stay within the speed limits? Hardly rocket science.

No one is disputing that but you are still missing my point. You get a 2k fine for doing 30 over on a motorway but yet you get a lesser fine for the offences that are likely to cause more road deaths.

El_Duderino 09

Micky 32 wrote: »

You still are ignoring my point. The punishments don’t match the crime. You are safer travelling at 30km over on a big long straight motorway than mobile phone use, lack of attention, going over a white line ( that can have devastating consequences if a head on happens) and yet you’ll get the full 2k fine for the least dangerous of what i just listed above.

If there was a good way to find people doing those things then I'd be ok with fines for them too. Speeding is a really easy one to measure and travelling at 30 over the limit has to be a deliberate decision by the driver.

It's about getting rid of the culture of speeding. You're defending speeding and that's part of the issue. If everyone agreed that travelling to the speed limit (when safe) was the way to go, then the fines for being 30 over the limit would be extremely rare.

1 sheep2

I suppose it would probably be challenging for the first generation under the graduated fines scheme, but breaking the speed limit should be something that is never done. Like driving on the right-hand side or stopping on the motorway, there should be an overwhelming resistance to doing it. It will only develop for speeding if the punishment is significant.

As well, people say that losing your license after only four speeding incidents in three years is very stringent, which is true, and you could get very unlucky. But it is exceedingly unlikely that you are caught each and every time you break the limit. In reality, someone caught that many times is likely a serial breaker of speed limits.

Micky 32

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If there was a good way to find people doing those things then I'd be ok with fines for them too. Speeding is a really easy one to measure and travelling at 30 over the limit has to be a deliberate decision by the driver.

It's about getting rid of the culture of speeding. You're defending speeding and that's part of the issue. If everyone agreed that travelling to the speed limit (when safe) was the way to go, then the fines for being 30 over the limit would be extremely rare.

No i’m not defending speeding, but people like you are brainwashed into thinking that speeding is the main cause of deaths on the road which they are not.

I have a lot experience on irish roads , i’m heading for the 3 million miles mark since i started driving 30 years ago. I see what goes on the road every day so i’ll stick to my opinion that 2k fine for 30km over on the motorway is too high and it’s good that it has been scrapped.

El_Duderino 09

CrankyHaus wrote: »

Fair enough, it's no skin off my nose either way as I don't speed. I suppose I'm just irritated by this focus on speeding, parroting 1980s catchphrases while burying the head on serious road safety issues.

I'd rather see a focus on technology solutions, ever cheaper and more available, than pointless legislation.
IMO roadside drug testing, ANPR and mobility app are genuine advances in road safety. A focus on expanding these and adding further solutions like red light cameras is the way to go.

I'd have no problem with any of those things being introduced either. But you can be sure that they'd be opposed for all the same reasons as this is being opposed (plus the tinfoil hat, Big Brother argument)

senordingdong

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If there was a good way to find people doing those things then I'd be ok with fines for them too. Speeding is a really easy one to measure and travelling at 30 over the limit has to be a deliberate decision by the driver.

There are good ways to find people doing these things though, you can see them in use in the uk and other places.
Why are they not in use here? Too much effort to roll them out, much easier for our quick buck political class to inaccurately target a single issue and derive cash punishments from it.

mickdw

2000 for first offence was nuts.
Have I done plus 30 on a variety of occasions, its likely yes but id be driving more to the conditions than the speedo tbh.
Id feel very hard done by to get a 2000 fine for driving on a motorway with a good car on a dry empty road at 30 over.
Remember, while it might not be a good idea, the speed limit is legal in a **** box of a car on a wet crowded motorway so there is surely room for some tolerence when driving to match the conditions.

mickdw

mickdw wrote: »

2000 for first offence was nuts.
Have I done plus 30 on a variety of occasions, its likely yes but id be driving more to the conditions than the speedo tbh.
Id feel very hard done by to get a 2000 fine for driving on a motorway with a good car on a dry empty road at 30 over.
Remember, while it might not be a good idea, the speed limit is legal in a **** box of a car on a wet crowded motorway so there is surely room for some tolerence when driving to match the conditions.

So just stay under it in all conditions then if you’re worried about safety. Wet being more dangerous isn’t an invite to drive like a headcase when it’s dry.

ReginaldSmythV

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

So just stay under it in all conditions then if you’re worried about safety. Wet being more dangerous isn’t an invite to drive like a headcase when it’s dry.

The punishment is far too severe for the rule that is broken simple as that.

80 euro is just about right for the very minor offence of breaking the speed limit, 3 points is too severe though and should never have been changed from 2 which in itself was borderline on fairness.

Mara Beautiful Muslin

Mara Beautiful Muslin wrote: »

The punishment is far too severe for the rule that is broken simple as that.

80 euro is just about right for the very minor offence of breaking the speed limit, 3 points is too severe though and should never have been changed from 2 which in itself was borderline on fairness.

It’s not minor though. People aren’t all the amazing drivers they think they are.

ReginaldSmythV

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

It’s not minor though. People aren’t all the amazing drivers they think they are.

They don’t have to be driving modern cars and speed limits set decades ago.

mickdw

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

So just stay under it in all conditions then if you’re worried about safety. Wet being more dangerous isn’t an invite to drive like a headcase when it’s dry.

My point is that if it is deemed legal to drive at 120 on a wet crowded motorway in a car that is only just good enough to pass an nct, someone doing 30 over the limit in a car that can handle it on a dry empty motorway is not the devil and is no threat to other road users and is surely being over penalised if fined 2000 for such an offence.
Your response doesnt address my point at all.
I would further add that the old 70 mph motorway limit was brought in at a time when car handling, braking and crash structures were nowhere close to what we have today further demonstrating that perhaps it is possible to move faster than limit in a safe manner.

alias no.9

I don't necessarily disagree with graduated speed fines but I feel that any graduated speed fines should be based on the % over the speed limit rather than the nominal km/h above the limit.

A €2k fine for 150km/h on a motorway should correspond with a €2k fine for 62.5km/h in a 50km/h zone where hazards are much more frequent. If the latter is excessive, so is the former.

Experience_day

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Why is it good news in your opinion? Sounds like a reasonable idea to me. If you're going 30 over the limit you get a €2000 fine. Nobody drives at 150 on a motorway by accident. Or 130 on a national road.

150km is not unreasonable. Cars have gotten substantially safer over the years.

Personally I think they should teach better discipline on roads and remove speed limits on motorways...with the caveat that causing an accident is treated far more severely.

But doing 150 on a quiet broad road with excellent visibility should not be a crime.

Experience_day

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Why is it good news in your opinion? Sounds like a reasonable idea to me. If you're going 30 over the limit you get a €2000 fine. Nobody drives at 150 on a motorway by accident. Or 130 on a national road.

150km is not unreasonable. Cars have gotten substantially safer over the years.

Personally I think they should teach better discipline on roads and remove speed limits on motorways...with the caveat that causing an accident is treated far more severely.

But doing 150 on a quiet broad road with excellent visibility should not be a crime.

senordingdong

"Experience_day wrote: »

Personally I think they should teach better discipline on roads and remove speed limits on motorways...with the caveat that causing an accident is treated far more severely..

But that places the responsibility on the state. Far easier to regurgitate a tired old mantra and shrug their shoulders, regurgitating the old classic "should have been driving slower".

LuasSimon

The government should be more focussed on drug dealers destroying communities and family’s all over Ireland rather than hammering people a small amount over a speed limit .
Traveller burglary gangs should be priority for any incoming government also destroying the fabric of rural ireland with fear .