Nothing but a tax grab

Photo: Contributed - hxdyl

"This is nothing but a tax grab!" 

These words are often spoken by drivers after signing to acknowledge receipt of a violation ticket. I can understand the frustration in these circumstances, but I wish there was a little thought behind it, rather than just parroting something inappropriate.

To me, a tax grab is an unscrupulous action by government at any level to extract money from taxpayers for general revenue. 

A violation ticket, on the other hand, is a tool in an attempt to modify driving behaviour, encourage compliance with the rules, and promote road safety. 

If you truly believe that this is a tax grab, then I invite you to reconsider. 

For one thing, voluntary conformity will eliminate the ‘tax’. Deliberate violation is a decision that you make, and means that you chose to accept the risk of being ‘taxed’. 

In simple terms: Behave and you won't get spanked.

The Traffic Fine Revenue Sharing program returns net revenues from traffic fines to communities in the form of an unconditional grant. Municipalities must use the money in ways related to community safety, and rural areas receive a reduction in policing costs. I would prefer to see the grants used to promote road safety and driver improvement exclusively.

Photo radar, red light cameras, and increased penalties for distracted driving are not examples of tax grabs. They are genuine attempts by the people that we elect to make our highways safer. I will accept that photo radar was politically unpalatable, but it may be a bitter pill that we should swallow in our own best interests. 

Think what you will about photo radar, but a report in Traffic Injury Prevention from December 2005 found that in 2001, the program saved the province of BC $114 million and ICBC $38 million through the reduction of collisions and injuries. 

Accident Analysis and Prevention reported in July of 2000 that photo radar was responsible for a 25% reduction in daytime unsafe speed related collisions, an 11% reduction in daytime traffic collision victims carried by ambulances, and a 17%, reduction in daytime traffic collision fatalities.

Red light cameras are also useful in reducing the types of intersection collisions that produce injury, according to both the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety and the Institute of Transportation Engineers. The drawback associated to these cameras is an increase in rear end collisions, both at intersections with cameras, and from the spillover effect at intersections without cameras. This is attributed to drivers who follow too closely, which is another epidemic problem in our province.

The effectiveness of higher fines is not as clear. While it does change people's perceptions of the hazard related to the act, it may not reduce the incidence of the behaviour. My experience shows that it increases the court's reluctance to impose them, which is likely why BC mandated minimums when tiered penalties for speeding were added to the Motor Vehicle Act.

The author is a retired constable with many years of traffic law enforcement experience. To learn more, please visit drivesmartbc.ca

Join the discussion

This article is written by or on behalf of an outsourced columnist and does not necessarily reflect the views of Castanet.