New Rule 151A

Discussion in 'Australian Motorcycles' started by Iain Chalmers, Jan 19, 2006.

  1. 4.34 Making new laws where existing laws suffice - New rule 151A

    It is common practice for law makers to "make redundant laws", that is,
    propose new laws (where present laws already suffice) without regard for
    existing laws. Although there are rules about making laws, it appears none
    specifically require the law makers to fully understand the issues or
    existing laws before making new laws. This has resulted in the cult belief
    that uninformed drafting of new laws (an inherent burden on the community)
    is recognised as acceptable behaviour of law makers.

    It is intended to impose the same behaviour on law makers as is already the
    case with other professionals, that is, understand the issues involved and
    the existing law, and only make new laws when necessary. If it can be
    demonstrated that new laws are required, an informed amendment proposal may
    be drafted. This submission is structured to demonstrate that this
    behaviour is not universally followed by the law making community.

    Impact: The submission is expected to point out the current behaviour of
    law makers, in that they are apparently able to make laws without
    understanding the issue and current law, where they are expected to become
    fully informed about the problem and whether its covered by existing laws
    and then only if required draft new laws that address the problem in
    careful balanced language without the need to resort to misleading
    statements and emotionally biased language. Although the extra work for law
    makers is expected to be minimal, opposition can be expected from some law
    makers as it involves a change in behaviour. Nevertheless, this parody
    points out that the general community expects a certain level of
    professionalism from its law makers.

    Costs: The costs imposed by this submission are those normally involved in
    publicly pointing out inadequacies in other peoples professional work,
    education of people doing that work, and advice to the people responsible
    for overseeing and approving it. It is understood that this parody is part
    of the contemporaneous legislative review. Additional cost may also be seen
    in minimal time delays for law makers becoming informed about issues and
    laws. However it is not possible to quantify a monetary value, as it is not
    possible to estimate how many law makers currently draft laws without
    adequate research, and how many will continue to do so after reading this

    Benefit: The benefits are to achieve a self consistent set of laws that the
    community will respect and abide by, which will assist in reducing unlawful
    behaviour. Furthermore, a general reduction in redundant laws is expected
    which will benefit not only the law makers, but also his/her family and the
    community in general when presented with, yet again, another poorly thought
    out road rule amendment.
    Iain Chalmers, Jan 19, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Note: I didn't actually send this parody to the NTC, on the grounds that
    its levity may reflect badly on my two serious submissions.

    Of course if anyone _else_ feels like sending it to them without
    attributing it to me... :)

    Iain Chalmers, Jan 19, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Iain Chalmers

    alx Guest

    darn... already sent off my submission...goes something like this..." youse
    lot is all a bunch of wankers, please do give up your day job..."
    alx, Jan 19, 2006
  4. Iain Chalmers

    Rich Sawkins Guest

    I'll get my wife to submit it if no one else has already ?
    Rich Sawkins, Jan 20, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.