Insurance companies are talking about reducing insurance premiums for people who don’t drive much, on the basis that they’re less likely to have accidents and cause pollution. I’m not sure why insurance companies inherently care about pollution, but bring it on!
But hey, I can say that — my average driving in the car has dropped to about 50km per week while Marita’s staying during her house renovations. Surely for it to be revenue neutral, it would mean people who drive a lot would see premium increases?
In fact there are arguments for also bringing rego costs down, with the income moved onto fuel taxes, which would not only help reduce driving, but also help reduce the use of inefficient cars.
Meanwhile Toyota has found that 90% of 4WDs never leave the bitumen. Are we really surprised by that one? But with petrol prices on the way back up, I suppose 4WD owners will be paying for it in dollars, even if most haven’t worked out yet that they’re also in more danger on the roads, particularly from single-vehicle accidents.
And at this point I might just note that last weekend I spotted:
- a 4WD driven by a middle aged woman merrily rolling down Centre Road with its hazard lights on for no good reason
- another 4WD whose driver apparently reckoned the 60 speed limit was in fact 80
- and a driver in a little white Ford Laser (the opposite of a 4WD?) who not only reckoned the 60 speed limit was 80, but that tailgating and overtaking on the left (where there were no line markings; lucky I checked before I indicated/moved left to avoid a car up ahead) was a good idea
Idiots come in all shapes and sizes.
5 replies on “Road things”
With regard: “bringing rego costs down, with the income moved onto fuel taxes”. It would make great sense. But with one level of government (State) getting revenue from registrations and another level (Commonwealth) raking in petrol taxes, I can’t see Comm-State ever agreeing to do this. Also, the road transport lobby (heavy fuel users) would campaign against any party brave enough to suggest it. But it does make great sense!!
You may well be right Roger.
Some of the thinking behind it can be found here — Click on “Road user and congestion charging  PTUA position paper (March 2006)”
Roger,
I’m pretty sure that both States and the Comm have taxes on fuel. Last time I heard Qld doesn’t put state tax on their fuel therefore it’s the cheapest in the country
Sven,
Only the Comm has a tax on fuel. The state fuel taxes were abolished around the time the GST was introduced. Qld has a 8c petrol *subsidy* which costs them several hundred million $pa (wouldn’t want taxpayers dollars going to fund a decent healthcare system now would you?).
Thanks for the clarification cam :)