Info regarding the outcome of this meeting has been a bit light on,Found a little bit on ozrodders that enlightens us of the days events a little...Appears there is much discussion and organisation still required,needles to say there are some very unhappy rodders outt here and the wider car enthusiast should be concerned.
Below are some posts from the forum,with a link for the forum..
Re: Registration info day
by JohnL on Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:44 am
I've seen a couple of posts asking for info on how this meeting went, so this is my 2 cents' worth. I've posted it in Elvis' original thread so that he'll get an email notification and may respond to clarify anything that I've misinterpreted.
Firstly, Elvis, Kim, Dave and the other (and earlier) ASRF luminaries who've been working on this street rod rego project for decades deserve a medal. We can register rods at present because of their past efforts. The fear that this would no longer be the case brought together maybe a couple of hundred (?) rodders for an update. The vast majority were really glad of the chance to hear what the ASRF committee was up to with the RTA but there were a few who seemed to have strong frustrations with the process but no strategy for resolving the looming problems. The discussion became bogged down several times with Elvis having to answer the same question again and again- the bloke sitting next to me had to plead for us to move on a couple of times- the meeting took about 3 hours when the info could have been downloaded in more like an hour.
As I understand it, the issue is that the RTA wants to change the NSW rego system so that the Modified Production rules that we register street rods under no longer apply. It seems they'll want all street rods to be treated as individually constructed vehicles (ICVs) and subjected to the continuing stream of ADR changes this causes. For most rodders, that would mean "club rego" would be their only option because the ICV rules are much tougher than the MP rules we have now.
This appears to be where there is some controversy among rodders and Elvis appeared to get some criticism on the basis that negotiating about applying the National Street Rod Guidelines (NSRGs) was motivating the RTA to withdraw the MP rules. The proponents of this theory didn’t seem to have much support, and they obviously don’t understand that it’s what bureaucrats do for a living that guarantees the MP rules won’t stay set in concrete. Apparently one of the key RTA officials involved with the process had said, “If I had my way, there'd be no modified cars on the road.” The strategy of Elvis’ opponents seems to be “let’s ask for a halt on changes to the MP rules”- these guys obviously aren’t professional lobbyists.
I had heard that the rules were going to be changed by this December, but I think Elvis said the RTA was going to release a draft paper on their proposed changes in February.
As I understand it, the ASRF’s strategy is to push for the RTA to accept the National Light Vehicle Modification VSB 14 guidelines which include the NSRGs. The advantage of this is that you get a nationally consistent registration system, and that rodders can use new repro chassis without lying about their authenticity as original rails and crossmembers. This has got to be a huge benefit, but the RTA is pushing back on this- I think Elvis said it’s not so much because they don’t like the NSRGs, but because of the wider scope of VSB14.
According to Elvis, the attitude of the RTA is that rodders have an advantage that no-one else has and there should be a level playing field for modified vehicles so that Cobras (ICVs) and rods meet the same rules- “why should the blue car have easier registration requirements than the red car?” is their position. The point that Elvis made and needs to be constantly promoted by rodders is that the ICVs are for “individual” vehicles, where the NSRGs are for “ASRF-community vehicles” modifications- modified original pre-‘49 cars and replicas of them. Apparently Mark Saunders has done a valuable paper on the risk management aspects of allowing ASRF cars to have a set of rules of their own.
The only thing that I couldn't see being done is an approach to the Minister's office directly instead of to the bureaucrats only. The politicians are actually more important than the regulators sometimes .
This meeting reminded me how valuable the ASRF is and how futile it is for the odd rodder with an outlaw mentality to think it’s feasible to make your own rules up in opposition to a government bureaucracy. The ASRF has been very persistent in keeping this registration system viable over the years by working with the bureaucrats. I’ve got to do something about joining .
What I took home from this:
1) The MP rules are going to be made harder if the RTA bureaucrats get their way.
2) An RTA consultation paper is due for release in February 2011.
3) The ASRF strategy is to try to negotiate the application of the NSRGs to NSW rego for pre-49 cars.
4) Efforts are being made to gather support from a wide range of private motoring enthusiasts’ groups in a roundtable type group to increase lobbying power.
So thanks again Elvis, Kim, Dave and others. And to the Regency Ramblers for their hospitality and BBQ breakfast!
NEXT...
Re: Registration info day
by '26bits on Tue Aug 17, 2010 8:46 am
Thanks for the very succinct report John L.
I was there and was pleasantly surprised by the mostly positive meeting and the eye opening on just what it is that the ASRF are doing in this ongoing saga with the RTA.
I think it was Elvis who stated that at the start of all this negotiation there were 102 different motoring groups affected by the Modified Production rules and now there are only 2 who stuck to their guns and are getting vehicles registered......... Trikes and Street Rods!
Anyone who is professionaly involved in this industry (Modified Vehicles) and is not a member of AAAA, or the aftermarket assoc., should seriously consider joining as it will add to the numbers of affected businesses and livelyhoods and directly affects lobying power. The AAAA acts in a similar fasion to SEMA in the US and is affiliated with SEMA and the ASRF have been affiliated with AAAA for the past twelve months.
The same goes for ASRF membership. How many Voters are miffed is what makes a polly sit up and take notice and they judge that by electorates which average out at approximately 42,000 voters. The amalgamation with other motoring groups should add up to something like a 750,000 headcount of voters. All of this is in the early stages and IMHO should have happened years ago, but better late than never.
This brought the meeting to the sending of the petition most of us signed. Tirns out not to have been such a good idea, mainly because of the comment facility.
The minister received the petition with 5000 signatures and I don't know how many comments were included, but there were 32 derogitory remarks of varying degrees.
The minister asked the RTA "please explain" and the RTA inturn asked KIm Featherstone "WTF is this"? He couldn't and was red faced to say the least. Kim went on to explain that this action could have jeopodised all of the years of negotiations between the ASRF and the RTA. The RTA were miffed at the fact that the subject of meetings held between the two bodies in confidence, had become widespread public knowledge.
In hindsight, maybe we should be a little bit more diligent by asking questions of the ASRF commitee before such a thing happens again.
I was glad that I went.
NEXT..
Re: Registration info day
by JohnL on Tue Aug 17, 2010 10:09 pm
deuce1932 wrote:
...shoot me down if you may but it's my simpleton opinon
I said earlier in this post that we need legal representation now... some said "as a last resort".. but when will that last resort be.. were cutting it fine guys.
Give me an ASRF account number & I'll write a cheque now for my part.
I feel your pain- I have a '38 Ford ute project that won't be finished before February. But your "let's write a cheque for a lawyer" strategy sounds futile- what is the appeal mechanism you're planning to use? The state government can write any regulations they please and your only grounds (in NSW) for complaint IMHO is that they're not applying them with administrative fairness. Hang on, rodders already have better treatment than ICVs, doesn't that mean to be administratively fair they've got to treat the "blue car the same as the red car?"
krusty wrote:
i strongly agree with duece1932 on the fact that we need to get some bigger balls and hit these censored aers as hard as we can , lets give them everything we have
Go ahead and chest off at the bureaucrats Shane, but how is this likely to be effective in getting rods registered in future?
I understand why rodders are upset, but I don't have any patience with futile non-strategies.
The only strategy I've seen with any appeal is the ASRF's push for national guidelines to be applied, while NSW wants to write its own regs. The federal Office of Best Practice Regulation's has a role ensuring that the states can justify "boutique" regs. Maybe the OBPR might require a regulatory impact statement of the RTA.
from
http://www.finance.gov.au/obpr/proposal ... dance.html:
"Is a RIS Required?
The OBPR is required to assess whether a proposal triggers the need to prepare a Regulation Impact Statement (RIS). To allow the OBPR to assess if a proposal requires a RIS, departments and agencies should contact the OBPR once the administrative decision is made that regulation may be necessary, but before a policy decision is made, and provide the following information:
•Name of the Agency / Department
•Name of the Proposal
•A description of the proposal detailing:
◦the nature of the proposal
◦the intent of the proposal
◦whether the proposal is likely to impact on business or not-for-profit organisations,
either directly or indirectly
◦the nature of the impacts – whether the proposal restricts the activities of certain
businesses or whether it acts more indirectly, and
◦the size of the likely impacts– how many businesses will be affected and whether there
will be effects on the community more broadly.
At this stage, the information you provide to the OBPR does not need to be particularly detailed; it just needs to allow the OBPR officer to make an accurate assessment about the likely impacts of the proposal.
In general terms, the more the proposed regulation impacts on business operations, and the greater the number of businesses or not-for-profit organisations that will be affected, the more likely it is that a RIS will be required"
LINK TO THE FORUM...
For anyone wanting to read more.
http://www.ozrodders.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=38040&start=15Hoorroo
Luke
Phone 02 9829 5072
Phone 0438 658 458
Phone 0432 136 333
