Quote:
Originally Posted by NASSTY
For ICV the two big issues are emissions and now ESC. How much time and $$ is wasted by Transport departments to administer these requires, carry out audits etc compared to the kms travelled per year and breaches of the rules actually found? Is it more practical and economical to relax the regs. I've heard on the grapevine that some in Vic are taking this approach. If that's the case it would seem to me that engineers under the VASS system (who certify ICV in VIC at least) would be the most influential especially if backed by all interested parties. Common sense, where has it gone???
Al
|
Spoken like a devoted bean counter Al,
and I agree with some qualification.
I think you are mistaken when you say the authorities are unaware of the admin costs. Discussion with QT up here very much indicated their concern with admin costs of the ICV category. This is somewhat indicated by their recommendation not to pursue a "cobra" category as Cobras were only a very small part of the replica scene. ie. Their recommendation was to incorporate all manner of replicas. Cobras,GT40's,clubman and whatever other make of replica is out there. Hence the effort to widen the audience at the before mentioned meeting. ie.: QT didn't want to deal with a whole host of different replicas.
The message in fact was very simple and straight forward: Governments like to outsource for several reasons.
1. It's cheaper for them to administer.
2. If things go pear shaped, responsibilty can be directed away from them.
3. The category is "managed" by people with more knowledge of the industry.
4. Governments can be seen as complying with international agreements (emissions,ESC etc) without the exemptions of interest groups (read ICV's/hot rods/replicas) reflecting on governance.
The message was very clear .. If an interest group, lets call it "replicas" can establish a set of "acceptable documented standards" which include some degree of emission standards (unlike Hot Rods ((no emission standard))but maybe not as stringent as current legislation), engineering practice (beam and torsion tests etc), and mechanical approval( read engineers) in an auditable manner then they would very much entertain the concept.