Three Australian states are noteworthy when it comes to road safety.
West Australia stands out due to enforcement of the keep left rule. Countries with low accident rates such as West Germany seem to be almost characterised by their lane discipline. By removing the primary cause of road rage, it can only have a positive effect on the death rate once drivers adjust. Also,the public put up such an outcry when they introduced speed cameras that West Australia is the only Australian state where citizens can legally use radar detectors. This will allow West Australia to take advantage of life saving technology used in other countries. This technology results in emergency vehicles and road hazard sites (eg. road works)sending out signals that can be picked up on any modern radar detector. Unluckily, in spite of the above innovations the road toll is currently rising. The reason for these deaths appears to be that the Chairman of the Road Safety Council, Grant Dorrington- a buffoon with no grasp on road safety- seems to have too much political clout. This has resulted in a shift away from road safety to revenue raising. Mr Dorrington opposes booking drivers failing to keep left, opposes raising speed limits to the 85th percentile, and supports warning motorists of the locations of booze buses.
Victoria stands out because it has made major progress in reducing the road toll. In 1990 the Federal Government sponsored a major Black Spot Program. This coincided with (and contributed to funding of) a huge attack on drink driving by the State government. Beginning in 1990 there was a major drop in the road toll. There was also a major drop in drink-driving. Victoria now has the lowest incidence of drink-driving in Australia. It also stands out due to appropriately increasing many speed limits in 1993- although Queensland has since outdone it (see below).
Queensland has followed Victoria's lead as regards road improvement. According to Queensland newspaper "The Courier Mail" (11/3/98, p2), the previous government spent an extra $744 million on the road system during its reign. (It got voted out mid 1998.) This in conjunction with increased breath testing, targetting pedestrian blackspots, and increasing many speed limits toward the 85th percentile has resulted in a substantial decline in the road toll.
Queensland police last year (1998) doubled the number of random breath tests undertaken compared to the previous year. Also, an innovative method is used at pedestrian blackspots. Posters are located at these sites warning pedestrians to be careful in the area. This was introduced in 1998. Note also that 1998 saw the introduction of passive alcohol sensors to that State and a sharp reduction in the road toll. My theory is that the passive alcohol sensors scared many drunk drivers into behaving themselves. However, predictably, the authorities estimate that the decline is due to the effectiveness of speed cameras- notwithstanding the fact that the road toll went up in 1997 when speed cameras were introduced until they started an anti-drunk driving campaign in October of that year.
Particularly noteworthy in Queensland is the sensible raising of a number of speed limits closer to the 85th percentile the lowering of some residential speed limits to the 85th percentile. Queensland is rapidly becoming the leading state as regards road safety. Apparently they recently shifted their focus from revenue raising to road safety and the change appears to be a long term change. Some roads still have incorrect speed limits thus resulting in revenue raising but the situation is continually improving because speed reviews of roads are ongoing.
Note also that in South Australia the shadow Transport Minister- Mr Terry Cameron MLC- proposed that drunk drivers with blood alcohol levels of above 0.15 three times or more would be banned from driving for life. The policy accurately described speed cameras as "revenue raisers" I justify this assertion by noting that I was reading recently in a Federal Office of Road Safety publication that speed cameras have no effect on average speed. Thus politicians who introduce them can only have one motive.
The Northern Territory (not quite a state but big enough) stands out because there are no speed limits on the open road. Reportedly the result in less driving rebelliousness. Reckless drivers are unheard of. The road toll is lower in the Northern Territory but the low population reduces the significance of this. Unfortunately they introduced speed cameras in 1998 thus resulting in the characteristic rise in the road toll.
Queensland
has a website discussing speed cameras.
The Sydney Morning Herald article discussing motorists attitudes toward speed limits.
In Queensland they put out a pamphlet about "driving too fast for the unexpected" that states that people driving alot faster than other traffic are more likely to crash. It neither mentions that going the same amount slower makes vehicles even more likely to crash nor that the speed limits are usually 10-20kph below the 85th percentile. Thus, since the average reader is not going to notice that it says "other traffic" not "speed limit", it leaves them with the impression that driving above the speed limit makes one more likely too crash even though the safest possible speed to be driving at is slightly above the 85th percentile and the second safest speed is right on the 85th percentile. In other words it gives the impression that driving at the statistically safest possible speed greatly increases your chance of crashing.
Note that I am not condoning breaking the speed limit laws but I am certainly not condoning this type of dangerous misrepresentation.