My previous posting is deemed relevant.
On 30th October 2012, the UMNO Youth called on the government to defer the implementation of the Automated Enforcement System (AES) to review the weaknesses in the implementation of the system, and the suitability of the location of the AES cameras deployed.
Looking at my Twitter timeline, I see that many are afraid of how the AES might impact the livelihood of the road users. Which means that the implementation of the AES, albeit still in its infancy, has already begun to have an impact on the attitude of road users. Anyhow, of course there will be those who would oppose it for the sake of opposing.
According to MIROS, passenger cars including SUVs, and four-wheeled drive vehicles are the most common types of vehicles involved in the overall investigated cases for 2007 through 2010. Motorcycles are among the lowest vehicle type involved in the investigated cases throughout the said period. Straight and flat roads also contributed higher number of accidents compared to curved roads throughout the same period. 60 percent of those accidents were contributed by speeding, next highest was risky driving, both are factors/offences that could be detected by the AES.
Opponents may argue that the quality of our roads are not up to international standards. However, the World Economic Forum’s 2012 Global Competitiveness Report states that Malaysia’s road quality is ranked 21st out of 139 countries and scored a 5.7 out of 7. In comparison, save for Singapore, we scored better than Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam, so much so that the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) of the Philippines said that the government of the Philippines would look at Malaysia “as a benchmark in terms of quality of roads.”
Are our speed limits too slow then? Both Japan and Australia have speed limits lower than ours at 100km/h. As a matter of fact, you are only given a lee-way of three per cent over and above the posted speed limit before you are sent to jail. In the US, speed limit on the highways is capped at 70mph, a mere 2km/h more than ours.
What about our weather? Or lighting? Throughout the MIROS study period from 2007 through 2010, most accidents occur in fair weather and during day time.
Our only problem is enforcement. In my opinion, our enforcement of traffic rules has a lot to be desired. It is always a favourite talk that the traffic policemen are always out there to squeeze a RM50 note or two out of you when they stop you. The problem is, most of those who whine about this fact are mostly those who make no qualms about giving bribes. The AES allows enforcement to take place automatically. A habitual traffic offender or a habitual bribe-giver would not have the opportunity to “slow-talk” or bribe a policeman, and best of all, these traffic policemen can be deployed to help law-abiding citizens brave the jam better during rush hour times.
The argument that the locations of the AES cameras are unsuitable or may be overkill considering the number of cameras deployed versus the number of accident-prone areas listed by the police is without substance. Are those who argue on that point implying that drivers will not speed or accidents will not occur at other stretches where accidents are less likely to happen?
The other argument that AES cameras would contribute to more accidents happening is also baseless. Am I to believe that a driver would be looking out for the AES cameras rather than pay attention to the road? How many accidents have happened because drivers look out more for the more mobile policeman with the speed gun? Perhaps these people ought to provide the statistics to back their claim within the next 24 hours :).
And how effective is the AES in reducing the number of accidents?
In 2008 in the UK, Robert Gifford, executive director of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety said, “A four-year evaluation of their effectiveness concluded that 100 lives were saved every year.” The same study concluded that there was a 40% reduction in the number of deaths and injuries on roads with speed cameras. Road deaths, he says, fell below 3,000 for the first time last year and speed is a contributing factor in one in three road deaths. If you go back 10 years ago, “70% of drivers driving in free-flow traffic broke the 30mph speed limit. Now it’s 49%. There has been a big decrease in the deaths of pedestrians, and that is partly due to cameras in urban areas.” There are 6,000 speed cameras deployed in the UK.
In Australia, the New South Wales state government has conducted its first annual review of the effectiveness of speed cameras, finding more than 95 per cent of them are having a positive effect on reducing fatal crashes and injuries. Fatalities fell by 87 per cent and crashes by 38 per cent in the areas around fixed speed cameras, according to a report released in July 2012 by the NSW Centre for Road Safety.
In the five years before the cameras were installed, there were 3959 crashes in the zones around these speed cameras, resulting in 61 deaths and 2124 injuries. But in the recent five-year period, there were 2451 crashes, resulting in eight fatalities and 1344 injuries. The acting general manager of the centre, Marg Prendergast, said the report proved cameras were overwhelmingly effective. The report also found that the number of infringements dropped over time, suggesting the cameras motivated people to slow down.
So, why is there a call for a deferment of the AES? Why is this call made nine years after the study into its implementation was made? And what do the opponents of the AES mean by suggesting that the government ought to study the implementation of the AES thoroughly? Do they mean that the government had hastily jumped into doing something after nine years of mulling about the system? Is the speed of the implementation going to kill the Barisan Nasional’s chance of obtaining a simple majority during the next general elections? Or is the speed of the call for the deferment going to kill BN’s chance of obtaining a simple majority for flip-flopping on its drive to save lives?
What would kill with speed BN’s chances of obtaining a simple majority? The government flip-flopping on a policy laid out by an MCA Minister after being pressured by half-past-six young turks from UMNO. It would only mean the government thrives on a populist approach with blatant disregard for the voters’ safety; AND that UMNO has not shelved its perceived bullying of other BN component members (paragraph added at 0945 hours, 1 Nov 2012).
And for those who think that the AES will only enrich cronies because you have nothing better to think of other than using the same line for different BN-bashing lines, stop speeding, abide by the law, then you don’t get summoned, and none of your money will go to the cronies. Simple, right?
Implement the AES. If there is improvements to be done to its system, do it as you go along, for the journey towards safety is a never-ending journey.
Remember, speed kills. Someone might just hit your child or spouse, or parents and kill them, so think about it!
SeaDemon Says 
My few sentences will describe the attitude and mentality of all those who are less civic minded in their shallow thinking and perception of the recently implemented AES high technology cameras based on a long period of detailed studies since 2003 through different agencies and stakeholders, both local and overseas. AES is a Federal government project that had to be sieved through a number of assessments and technological tests over the last 9 years or so, before the government decided to take a serious review of the project based on the following criteria:-
1. To create public awareness that speech kills;
2. To educate road users to be more civic minded;
3. To minimize any human contact between the enforcement officers
and the motorists and cyclists and other road users;
4, To check reckless drivings especially among public and commercial
vehicles;
5. To check and reduce corruption and abuses of power being targeted
at reckless and inexperienced drivers and other road users;
6. To deploy enforcement officers (traffic police, City and Local Council)
to other enforcement and national security agencies;
7. To improve efficiency of relevant enforcement agencies in terms of
human capital, financial and accounting procedures, etc.
8. To relieve the capitalization and allocation of public funds from the
Treasury to finance the AES project estimated cost of more than
RM700 million.
9. To relieve the government’s subsequent liabilities on the heavy
and regular maintenance of the high-tech cameras.
10.Any other reasons and justification due to the nationwide
implementation of the AES project as it phases out over the
projected variation at various stages.
As far as the government and the majority public knows, the AES project had been deliberately politicized by the the opposition-led states and some other less civic minded individual or interest group. I am not a lawyer, but the government should examine the legality of a Federal initiated national project nationwide, including those governed by the opposition. The issue should be referred for a jurisdiction review to be assessed by the AG Chamber.
In this context DAP leaders through CM Lim Guan Eng had taken the matter in their own jurisdiction in suspending the implementation of the AES project in Penang, Selangor, Kedah and Kelantan. DAP has clearly politicized the AES project to suit their own administrative agenda. I dare say that the PR state governments are of no saint or less evil and corrupted to the core as reported on the mismanagement of human capital, enforcement of business licences, public tenders and other resources and services, I therefore challenge LIM Guan Eng to look at their own backyard, especially the PR states of Selangor and Penang,
The enforcement officers and relevant agencies in the City and Local councils are abusing their power and encourage more corruptions than the previous BN state government. Clear examples are the existence of thousands of entertainment outlets including reflexology centers, SPAs, dinning joints with PROs, social escorts and prostitutes, illegal or pirate taxis and cargo lorries and trucks and many other sources of obtaining corrupted monies. If DAP and their crony allies PKR and PAS are so adamant to exploit and sabotage the Federal projects, I advise that they should wait for the opportunity to win the coming PRU13 and govern this country, according to their wimps and fancies. Until then, I gracefully request LIM Guan Eng to stop harassing the BN government and stop being too personal in this blog comments against our BN Ministers and other corporate leaders,cronies and supporters.