Mike baird Strikes again

[zipping]

AFAIK there has been no outbreak of accidents involving P-platers and mobile devices.

A blanket ban on mobile use seems absurd when adequate laws already exist.

Only Baird would ban talking maps a top invention.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ps-big-mistake

Remember street directories? Remember flipping through them, following a blue line from page 7, Section D8 through to page 43, Section F1, and then only to have to move on to page 115, Section B9? Often, doing this while you were driving?

In the name of safety, that’s what the NSW government wants P-platers to do again.

From 1 December, P-plate licence holders in NSW will be banned from any use of a mobile phone while driving.

That’s right – any. Not just texting. No talking – not even hands-free through a blue-tooth system in the car. No listening to music. And no using maps applications.
Mike Baird to trumpet successes but health and education aren't among them
Read more

That the nanny-state NSW Coalition government – led by the Mike “Lock-out Laws” Baird – should make such a regulation is not surprising. But it is concerning when state governments, often keen to look like they are “doing something”, overreach in the name of safety.

Now, as the mother of one P2 driver and another soon-to-be L-plater, I appreciate measures that make our roads safer. And, as a former premier, I appreciate the near-irresistible pull of new regulations to a government.

In this case, the Baird government should have thought less about road regulations and more about the law of unintended consequences.

Sometimes a well-intentioned actions can actually create the opposite of what it is meant to achieve. Occasionally governments even figure this out before making such a decision. For example, the US government agency charged with keeping people safe on planes, the FAA, regularly refuses to ban lap-held travel for toddlers, even though it is safer for them to have their own seat.

The FAA calculates that requiring every child have their own airline seat would cause more families to drive instead of fly, due to the increased cost. But driving is riskier than flying, for everyone. The FAA calculates the unintended consequences of making babies “safer” on planes is that travel becomes more risky for everyone.

How does the law of unintended consequences work when it comes to P-plate drivers and mobile phones? Yes, using a mobile phone – even on blue-tooth – can be risky. But think about how much safer a maps application makes driving for young people. Young drivers are less likely to know how to get where they are going. They are simultaneously trying to focus on the mechanics of both driving and navigating. The maps app substantially takes care of the latter job, freeing the young person to focus on the former.

Tell me – would you rather that the P-plate driver in front of you is listening to Google Maps on his phone tell him where to turn right in 800 meters, or is looking down at the book on his lap, flipping through pages, and trying to figure out what box in the street directory grid he is currently on?
The stories you need to read, in one handy email
Read more

Talk about distracting. Talk about making it harder for young drivers. Talk about making the roads less safe for everyone.

The Baird government would respond that P-platers will be permitted to use GPS satellite navigation devices, just as long as they aren’t phones. Well, that’s terrific – if your family has a car that has a navigation system installed, or if you have a few hundred extra dollars to throw around.

I’d like to see Mike Baird explain to parents or young people why they should shell out $229 ($449 with internet access to get traffic information) for a satnav system to replace the exact function available on a phone for free. Or maybe he could explain to cash-strapped families why their kid is somehow safer reading a book while driving instead of listening to a maps app.