Perfect politics Readers of “Selling the Circus” may recall how a major super-market chain promoted the story that they were reducing product choice because “research had shown widespread customer confusion.” Truth was, they were camouflaging their attempts to blackmail their suppliers into preferential pricing and/or repackaging their market leading goods in the supermarket’s own livery. Well, it seems that at least two State Governments liked the subterfuge and are now using the same PR template: Each has issued a statement declaring that they are examining ways to INCREASE speed limits. In themselves, these headlines cast doubt on the validity of their regular statements that “road users” (note how the word “driver” is avoided) support lower limits. The statements continue to explain that “long overdue” reviews are also intended to remove the confusion caused by multiple/inconsistent speed limits. Only upon questioning have “spokesmen” mentioned that the reviews may also lead to increased restrictions in some areas. Far be it from me to suggest that the reviews will result in a token increase to 120KPH on one or two stretches of motorway and a decrease on a great many others or that someone has to pay for the increased police numbers promised during election campaigns. Perfect politics:- 1) Appear to empathise with motorists (voters) by expressing a desire to increase speed limits where possible and to reduce confusion caused by multiple or inconsistent speed limits. 2) Appear to care about safety by announcing that “after careful evaluation, increased limits will not be feasible until the completion of major road upgrades (subject to Federal grants). Feign surprise and disappointment when admitting that the reviews exposed a number of areas where safety demands speed limits should be lowered. Indignantly explain that, if speed limits are to be standardised on longer stretches of road, they must obviously be to the lowest safe speed within the entire zone - and no one wants that... Alternatively, impose consistent but reduced limits “in accordance with the public’s wishes” on longer stretches of road in the knowledge that they will increase driver frustration, inattention and consequent accidents - thus justifying your decision to lower the limits and increase fines. 3) "Unrelated to the above," tell voters how law and order are high priorities and how you intend to ensure more police “hit the beat”. Use increased revenue from 1 and 2 to pay for 3 until natural attrition returns numbers to present levels, thus leaving the increased revenue for other projects.
Posted on: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 03:54:09 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015