Does Govmt really care about road safety?

RobAMerc

I ask my self this question all the time so now I'm gonna oput it out there.

If the govenrnment really cared about your safety on the roads why don't they scrap VRT and VAT on items such as Airbags, ABS, ESP, etc. They could also introduce VAT reductions on driver education courses you choose to take.

Or they could pay lots of lip service, introduce new revenue generation devices ( read speed cameras ) tackle the perception rather than the truth and all the while feel safe in the knowledge there escorted top end Merc has a dozen or so airbags and two squad bikes that most drivers will avoid easier than a 747

Sleipnir

"Sorry, but there's money to be had!"

kluivert

Its everyone for themselves.

No matter what area of politics a TD will never put the country before politics.

I was listening to the radio in the car on the way to work this morning. TD's did not attend half of the cabinet votes and they get paid 100k+ a year. I think this is a joke in all fairness however theres not much of an alternative either.

So to answer your question, no the government dont care.

peasant

If the governement REALLY cared about road safety, it would pump the revenue generated from double and triple taxation (VAT, VRT, VAT on VRT, VRT on VAT, etc:D ) into the following areas:

- proper driver training, no more L-drivers, no waiting for tests
- proper accident investigation
- making known accident black spots safer by improving road conditions there, building less dangerous crossrads, de-sharpen bends, improve road markings, surface and signage, set an appropriate speed limit (for dangerous spots) and control it
- instead of building landing strips for roads with hard shoulders wide enough for a truck that invite everybody do drive in 5 Lanes and happily crash into each other, build 2 - 1 lane roads with alternating two lane sides, so that a safe overtaking area is provided every two to three miles and risky overtaking is eliminated. (see the newish road across the Curlews from Boyle to Sligo)
- finally get their act together and make random breath testing reality
- subsidise community schemes to provide on-call minibuses to get people in and out of rural nightclubs, pubs and discos

then ...and only then ... I wouldn't actually mind so much having to pay VRT

Oh ...and all of the above measures are tried and tested in other countries for years ...t'wouldn't actually mean something like re-inventing the wheel or so ...

Seth Brundle

What on earth would make you think that the authorities care about road safety?
Politics is all about short term measures. Road safety requires long term objectives which is why nothing has been done!

colm_mcm

you don't pay VAT on VRT

crosstownk

Of course they care - haven't they given us good oul Gaybo to sort it all out:rolleyes: Muppets:mad:

Diamondmaker

Exactly Uncle Gay will sort it out. A man most respected by young Males 18-25, I just hope they dont put him on an add campaign with a nice geansai on!
Why in gods name is a qualified, experienced, professional not appointed instead of a retired TV presenter....the mind boggles!

MrPudding

colm_mcm wrote:

you don't pay VAT on VRT

No. You pay VRT on your VAT. And you pay both of them on safety features installed in cars.

MrP

mike65

Gay Byrne was appointed cos he is a known figure and NOT a professional who will be tied to an agenda and have vested interests. Gaybo is a free agent who can speak as he finds.

Mike.

crosstownk

Given the very serious problems in Ireland regarding road safety, I feel it would have been much better to appoint a professional rather than a celebrity to address the problem of people being killed unnecessarily on our roads.

mike65

Remember the Road Safety Authority is'nt a one man band there will be "profesionals", truth is a boards.ie brains trust could tell em whats required.

Mike.

crosstownk

mike65 wrote:

Remeber the NSC is'nt a one man band there will be "profesionals", truth is a boards.ie brains trust could tell em whats required.

Mike.

Your right, Mike. And thats why I think the whole thing is a PR stunt. I hope it works. I don't care who chairs it as long as lives are saved. Best of luck to Gaybo but I don't think he'll be quite able to 'steer' the NSC. They will steer him.

colm_mcm

MrPudding wrote:

No. You pay VRT on your VAT. And you pay both of them on safety features installed in cars.

MrP

VRT is seperate to VAT

You pay VAT on food as well, that doesn't mean the government want people to starve. Revenue has to come from somewhere, and abolishing VRT and VAT on safety features on cars isn't going to make the country safer.
VRT is calculated on the open selling price (naturally this price will include VAT) but isn't paid on VAT as such.

VRT is only paid specifically on factory extras that increase the projected selling price of the car, If more standard safety equipment makes cars more expensive, then the government will get more VRT.

If the government abolished VRT on safety features, what would you add to a normal car like an Avensis which comes with 9 airbags and ABS as standard?
And how do you define a safety feature

junkyard

The last time I checked a safety feature is something which saves lives or reduces injury in a crash situation, i.e. airbag, seatbelt pretensioner or abs brakes. I honesty believe the government has only one interest in the running of this country and thats to generate money, they don't care how many people get killed on the roads they just make sympathetic gestures and slap the motorist with another tax for rocking their boat. As I've said on other threads I wouldn't bother my a**e voting for any of them ever again when you see how much money they have robbed from the motorist and taxpayer in general, in way of taxes over the years the returns are and most likely will be pitiful.

colm_mcm

all that money that they "robbed" is paying for our education and health systems and all the other financial black holes that our country has. If you want tax exemption for car safety features, where do you draw the line.

I'm not a fan of over taxation of motorists, but you have to look at where all the money is going, some people are doing very well out of our VRT and other taxes, until this is sorted out, don't expext any reduction in taxes

junkyard

My argument is why doe's the motorist have to cough up all the time and indeed more of their fair share? When you consider the horse industry and the art industry and even gambling, their all getting away with murder when it comes to taxes and the majority of those involved can well afford to pay for their "little" hobbies.

colm_mcm

exemptions for the equine industry are on their way out. I agree that motorists shouldn't be regarded as a soft touch, but it's not just motorists that are being hit, I for one contribute a big portion of my salary to the government, as do home buyers, car buyers, and anyone else likely to have money. The fact is, if we are to deliver a first world health service, keep people on social welfare happy, pay our teachers and nurses - the money has to come from somewhere........

junkyard

Yeah and the next disaster in the world and our government are the first to donate our money to aid them when their own countries are so corrupt that their leaders have plundered that particular countries wealth. I think that each country should look after their own first. I remember reading that a lot of the larger countries only donate a tiny amount to world compared to Ireland.

colm_mcm

That's fair enough, but you only have to look at how much the public donated to the tsunami appeal on new years eve a few years ago to see that Irish people don't mind donating to charity. We're not badly off here, people can afford new cars, most have good jobs. Think back to the 90's,

junkyard

If people want to donate to charity thats fine but its up to them not our government, it would be more in their line to run our country than worrying about every other country. I'm not being mean here far from it, I just think that we have enough issues here to look after and there are going to be plenty more by the looks of things. We mightn't be badly off here at the moment but remember the 90's was only a few years ago and it could all happen again and very swiftly if the interest rates get out of hand when you consider all the borrowed money thats out there.

colm_mcm

I suppose that's true, I'm not an economist or anything near that. But if VRT was abolished, there would be a huge shortfall in revenue, this would have to be made up by income tax. They're not going to raise corporation tax and scare multinationals away, so you can be sure that they're gonna tax you and me to get their money

junkyard

Unfortunately were not going to sort it out here anyway, thats why my solution was to buy a new jeep and get it commercialised so VRT is now only 50 euros and road tax is only 252 euros a year and I don't feel the potholes as much anymore.:)

colm_mcm

Yes it's always nice to waft along in your €42,000 machine and think what your monthly repaymnts would be had you plumped for the €68,000 passenger equivelant!

junkyard

The only snag is when you get all the toys and extras it costs as much as a base model with the seats.:( But at least its nice to know your not paying taxes on it.:)

colm_mcm

jaysus you'd want to be getting a sh1t load of toys. By my reckoning:

Long Wheelbase Land Cruiser €41,700
Leather €1,250
Auto € 2,200
Park Sensors € 550
Phone Kit € 280
A Bar € 550
Spare Wheel Cover € 220
Sat Nav €1,550
CD Changer € 660
Sunroof € 1,350


Total Price: €50,310 ( or 41,578 plus VAT)


Base 5 seater, cloth interior, manual gearbox, €65,000 plus!

hmmmmmmmmm

peasant

Long Wheelbase Land Cruiser €41,700
Leather €1,250
Auto € 2,200
Park Sensors € 550
Phone Kit € 280
A Bar € 550
Spare Wheel Cover € 220
Sat Nav €1,550
CD Changer € 660
Sunroof € 1,350

As this is a road safety thread, your A-bar is hereby cancelled !!



scnr

Gurgle

peasant wrote:

As this is a road safety thread, your A-bar is hereby cancelled !!

Call it what it is: A pedestrian bar.
You'll still get your expensive new SUV covered in blood but at least the shattered bones won't damage your paintwork.

colm_mcm

I'm just being realistic and mentioning popular extras

MrPudding

colm_mcm wrote:

VRT is seperate to VAT

I know that. You correctewd another poster when he said you pay VAT on VRT. I was agreeing with you that this is wrong. The VAT is applied first therefore you do pay VRT on the VAT.

colm_mcm wrote:

You pay VAT on food as well, that doesn't mean the government want people to starve.

All food?

colm_mcm wrote:

VRT is only paid specifically on factory extras that increase the projected selling price of the car, If more standard safety equipment makes cars more expensive, then the government will get more VRT.

Ah, this is exactly the point that was being made.

colm_mcm wrote:

If the government abolished VRT on safety features, what would you add to a normal car like an Avensis which comes with 9 airbags and ABS as standard?
And how do you define a safety feature

How about ESP? That example aside most cars do not come with amount of safety equipment as standard.

How do I define a safety feature? Assuming you actually want an answer to that question I would say any device that reduces the likely hood of an incident occuring, or, in the event of an incident potentially decreases the risk of injury or death.

For most cars extra airbags are an option in Ireland. I am sure no one would deny the exsistence of the povery spec here in Ireland. Go to www.renault.ie & www.renault.co.uk or www.citroen.ie & www.citroen.co.uk and compare the spec of the same car.

The fact is that additional safety features are considered by the VRT inspectors as a "luxury" and are taxed accordingly. If there was no VRT on them then they would be more likely to appear as standard on cars as the price increased would be reduced.

Are there any other countries that charge VAT on motorbike helmets?

MrP

colm_mcm

You can't just get rid of VAT on anything that might save lives.

VRT is a tax on cars, and the number of airbags, availibility or ESP, adaptive cruise control, or any of these aren't and can't be a factor in a tax that is based on the seling price of a car.

cars have a safety cell that is constructed to maximise safety, this is then a safety device.

Remote control audio switches lessen the amount of concentration required to operate the stereo, this, arguably is a safety device.

Anything which can be argued to lessen the chance of a crash, or the impact of a crash is a safety device. it is impossible for the government to quantify how much these obscure features cost to produce, It would be such a complicated system that it would never work.