Saturday, March 24, 2012

More sport "safety" fascists protecting us from ourselves



In this post I quoted Coast to Coast supremo, Robin Judkins.  He needs repeating:

One area that...has changed over the race's 30 year history is the paperwork, particularly in the area of health and safety...Judkins insist that this has always been his focus and points out that his was the first event to insist on competitors holding a kayaking certificate and wearing helmets and lifejackets.

What he objects to, and he's certainly not alone here, is the "stifling" level of bureaucracy now surrounding the multisport and adventure racing industry. "I'm safety conscious anyway, I always have been, I just don't like being told what to do...[T]he risk is the same it was thirty years ago. The risk hasn't increased but where we started out with 22 officials, now it takes 400 officials to run the same race."

The bottom line is that "all the red tape makes events more expensive to run" which is bad news..."[P]rice has become a huge factor".
Now this, from Auckland's cycling scene:
An illegal "underground" road racing movement has taken root in Auckland as traditional cycling clubs have been forced off the roads by rapidly rising council costs.

Auckland Transport outlined in a statement to the Weekend Herald, that "traffic management costs for all types of events have changed over time as traffic and pedestrian growth and development of Auckland has required improved levels of service for safety".
There are many who question complainers like me on stifling bureaucracy, especially in the area of sport and recreation.  A lot of those on the Left just love more regulation and bureaucracy - without it we are all doomed.  Every facet of our lives needs a law to control it.  Sport and recreation is no different.  

I find really offensive the attitude of bureaucrats who think they can protect people, especially athletes, from themselves, in the name of "safety".

Individual safety of cyclists on roads is actually none of their business.  If cyclists want to use the road and battle Auckland's traffic, that is their risk.  They know it.  ACC covers their injury cost, and the more expensive bikes are insured also.

I don't recall, ever, anyone suing a council in New Zealand for failing to provide safe roads for cyclists.  Yet the nanny-statist approach from the we-know-best bureaucrats might just allow the first case, as the cycling club president alludes to:
There are now a number of unlicensed, essentially illegal, races, including the long-standing Tamaki Drive Time Trial and a less regular event in Mangere's industrial fringe. The biggest trend has been the creation of Cannonball Run-type events promoted through social media and cycling message boards.

The courses are secret until the night before the race. They are popular, but come at the cost of the clubs. "It's great having an underground because it suits a lot of people, but eventually something is going to happen and dare I say it, someone's going to get killed," Cornelius said. "Who does it fall back on then?"
Of course, none of this ever occurs to pen-pushing, sandal-wearing, pen-behind-their-ear officianados.  Maybe they can pay for the funeral caused by their nonsensical regulations.

2 comments:

Tinman said...

I support the bureaucrats.

I spend my days avoiding cycle scum, knowing, as I do, that I'll spend all my time in small claims court trying to get the (mainly) taxpayer-fed cycle racer scum to pay for the damage they cause whenever I hit them if I don't.

Every cyclist should carry third party insurance and registration (including a paid ACC component) before being allowed to pollute NZ roads.

Then, if they wish to emulate (slow) boy-racers as you suggest, they can at least be held responsible for their mayhem.

This comment in no way includes Mr Judkins who, unlike cycle-scum, does something both worthwhile and admirable.

Psycho Milt said...

Were you cuckolded by a cyclist once or something?