The Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 1999 contain Schedule 8 - Vehicle Standards - Part One Introductory - which is states This Schedule contains the Vehicle Standards that form the standards for registration under the Road Safety Act 1986.

Further the states that "The objectives of these Regulations are—

Within Schedule 8 - Part 3 - Australian Design Rules it states that if a Second or Third Edition "ADR applies to the design and construction of a vehicle, the vehicle must comply with the ADR."

The Victorian Road Safety (Vehicles) Regulations 1999 states in 202 Eligible vehicles at a vehicle is eligible for registration if it "complies with the with the provisions of standards for registration that apply to the vehicle", and evidence of compliance can be taken as stated in “203. Compliance with standards for registration - an identification plate relating to the vehicle ”. In general this is an identification plate which states it is Australian Design Rule compliant.

Within Schedule 8-Vehicle Standards it is stated that a vehicle complaint with Australian Design Rules is considered suitable for registration under the Road Safety Act 1986 .

Australian Design Rule 18/02 – Instrumentation specifies requirements for the provision and location of certain 'Visual Indicators' and also specifies requirements for speedometers and odometers. This document states "every vehicle must be fitted with a speedometer which must:, Indicate vehicle speed only in kilometers per hour; and indicate the actual vehicle speed, for all speeds above 40km.h, to an accuracy of ± 10%."

It is important to note that in the commentary at the start of Schedule 8 - Vehicle Standards it states that "In most cases, if a vehicle complies with the Vehicle Standards, it is suitable for road use."

Deduction - Motor vehicles qualify for registration in Victoria if they are fitted with a speedometer that is accurate ±10% and are then considered to meet safety standards and to be suitable for road use under the Regulations. The same Regulations that define a requirement to observe speed limits.

Are speed camera's and radar devices legal measurement devices?

In response to the Australian Governments Constitution responsibility it created the National Measurements Act.

As a consequence there has been set up the National Measurement Institute and the National Association of Testing Authorities, Australia (N.A.T.A.) to administer these laws.

The National Measurements Act states:

legal measuring instrument means a measuring instrument used, or intended for use, in the determination of a physical quantity:
(a) for:
(i) law enforcement; or
(ii) demonstrating compliance, or lack of compliance, with a law of the Commonwealth or of a State or Territory; or
(b) that is, or may be, relevant to a proceeding in which the quantity is an issue.

The Act also sets out requirements for registration of measuring instruments, certification of testing authorities. etc. more...

The Problem with the Law

On the 10th February 2005 in a case before the Melbourne Magistrates Court in William Street, Melbourne (Case Number S02748905), the defendant was found guilty of exceeding the speed limit of 60km/h by 6km/h, i.e. within 10% of the speed limit.

Submission by the prosecution cited the 1991 Victorian Supreme Case Kearon v Grant [1991] 1 VR 321 as establishing that speeding is an strict liability offence, and that motorists shall at their peril be aware of the applicable speed limit and shall then at their peril so govern their speed as to keep within it. If this is the case then prosecution only has to prove that the offence occurred. Consequently the motorist is held liable for ANY excess over the speed limit, regardless of whether it was intentional or not, and regardless of the fact that the instrumentation provided under the Regulations is inappropriate.

This is not a reasonable position. The Police are permitted the error legislated on their equipment when detecting a speeding motorist, however the motorist is not permitted error legislated on their speedometer. There is more on the argument to support this proposition here...

It was the defendants assertion that if a motorist has been using a Regulation approved and registered vehicle, and had not exceed the specified tolerances of the Regulation compliant safety equipment fitted to that vehicle, then it is not reasonable to hold a person responsible for being in breach of Legislation when they are using equipment made compulsory by that Legislation.

Infringement notices should not be issued when the alleged speed is within 10% of the speed limit.

In the 10th February 2005 case, taking into consideration the defendants submission, the Magistrate decided not to apply any fines or costs, but advised that as the defendant had been found guilt under law, he had no choice on that matter, and he was unable to prevent demerit points being applied. However he noted that a problem with the law had been highlighted.

This view is not unique and supported by Victorian Parliamentary reports, Monash Accident Research Centre and comment from Australian Standards.

The Problem with the Government

The first part of the problem is that the Government is incented to have as many motorist on the road as possible in order to maximise the return via taxes (motor vehicle taxes ($1,306m pa), regulatory fees ($159m), GST on vehicle sales, parts & service, fuel taxes, etc, registration fees $711m, duty $595m). In Victoria there were 3,538,822 registered vehicles on the road in 2004, traveling an average 14,900km per annum.

Now the problem is that with all of these vehicles traveling on the roads, how do we minimise the damage to both people and property due to accidents, with minimal outlay. Remembering that at some point the number of accidents cannot be reduced further due human nature and in particular the human tendency to make mistakes.

Solution is to slow them down. However there is a balance to be achieved, as the Victorian Parliament Walking Safely - Report of the Road Safety Committee noted "The main concern in reducing urban speed limits would be an increase in travel times and therefore congestion on our roads."

Consequently a set of speed limits are devised which are considered a compromise between travel times, congestion and accident rates. The enforcement is then undertaken using automated means which achieves:

• Additional revenue stream to the Government ( $343,495,000 in the Victorian 2006 budget).

• Government seen to be doing something about traffic safety.

• Expenditure on traffic safety minimised.

Then we come to the second part of the Government problem. They are also incented to minimise tolerances on speeding fines in order to maximise revenue and make the speed enforcement system viable.

We are heading for the same situation as the UK where Police traffic branches have been merged back into general Police duties, thereby boosting general Police numbers and leaving traffic safety to speed cameras.

Consequently the Government does nothing about:

• Ensuring motorists have appropriate skills

• Vehicles are safe to use on the road (In Victoria we don't even have an compulsory 12 month check-up to make sure even the basics are right, like legal tread on the tyres)

But can claim to have increased Police force numbers for general crime fighting.