South Africa will reduce road fatalities by 50% by 2020 as per the Decade of Action for Road Safety
Debate Rounds (3)
Granted this opportunity, I would like to discuss the policy of this debate:
In round 1 I expect my opponent to provide definitions for this debate. Briefly give a few points of his own. In round two I expect my opponent to refute on one of my points and give more points to support the stance he has taken, and n round three I expect my opponent to give statement on why he/she should win this. After my opponent has given definitions a few points of his own, I will accept his definitions based apon the fact that I will concur on his/her definitions and proceed to provide a clash for the debate. I will do what I asked him/her to do in round 2 and 3.
Unless if you"re planning to be the source of these fatalities I think you have no means of predicting future fatalities. South Africa has an improved road infrastructure which we both would agree that it has less impact on road fatalities. The Medical Research Council indicated that more than 60% of fatal crashes, especially over weekends, are as a result of abuse of alcohol, either by a driver or a pedestrian. Towards this course the minister of roads and transport responded by implementing a policy of to screen a minimum of 10000 motorist per month. Also South African department of roads and transport has implemented great programmes to raise awareness of road safety issues. It even supports private initiatives in support of road safety issues. Last argument is that the fatalities have started to drop significantly, what would turn back the clock and make them rise again if not drop them further.
Reduce:Make smaller or less in amount, degree, or size.
Fatalities:An occurrence of death by accident, in war, or from disease, in this case "by accident".
Moving on to my argument.
Before one can go about agreeing with the motion at hand one needs to consider the five main pillars of "the decade o action for road safety" which are the drivers of this campaign. The pillars are;
1.Improving road safety management
4.Safer road users
5.Improving post crash care
General public, having mentioned this one needs to look at South Africa and their current stance under the above-mentioned pillars. General public,it is no secret that a lot of corruption has been taking place South Africa. Thus i will look at Corruption and traffic enforcement;
The effect of corruption is not only a loss of state revenue. When corrupt officials allow motorists who speed, or who are driving vehicles that are not roadworthy, to proceed with their journey, the consequences for other road users are potentially disastrous. A breakdown in public trust of the integrity of traffic officials is also likely to result in an increase in lawlessness among road users.
Studies on crime in South Africa revealed that corruption was most evident in encounters with traffic officials, followed by the police, and then during interactions with officials over employment opportunities. This support the perception that corruption is a problem in local government traffic departments, municipal police services and the SAPS, and highlights the discretionary power of some of these officials. For example, the public largely interacts with traffic officials on the road where the actions of corrupt officials are difficult to monitor. Furthermore we need to look at how corruption manifest in the field of traffic enforcement and road safety;
1.Bribes are often demanded in situations where road users have committed an offence such as speeding, overloading, or driving unlicensed or unroadworthy vehicles. Bribery in these instances may be used to ensure that the offender escapes a stiffer penalty (i.e. a R100 bribe is requested when the alternative is to pay a legitimate fine of double that amount).The most commonly paid bribe was for traffic fines, driver testing and licensing irregularities.
2.Certificates of roadworthiness are issued without the said vehicles undergoing the necessary roadworthy tests.
3. Money is received in return for assisting applicants for learners licence tests to cheat in their exams.
4.Car sellers often attempt to bribe examiners to overlook a certain component or else to push through a marginal case.
5.Car sellers often try to buy "paper" certificates. That is, a certificate provided without testing or examining the vehicle at all.
6.Car sellers will sometimes put testing stations under pressure if they do not pass their vehicle then they will take the business elsewhere.
7.If a vehicle fails a roadworthy test, the client often takes the vehicle to another testing station where they know the test is less strict.
8.A vehicle might be checked and (correctly) passed, only for some of the components to be switched before the vehicle is sold. The seller shows the prospective buyer the certificate and a deal is made on that evidence. The tyres, for example, may have been swapped with worn tyres after the test.
9.Each vehicle examiner has an examiner's code that appears on the examination sheet. Unscrupulous examiners will sometimes use another examiners code and name when passing non-roadworthy vehicles.
This above-mentioned reality makes it impossible for South Africa to reduce fatalities by 50% by 2020 as per decade of action for road safety as these realities undermine the pillars that drive this campaign.
And yes one cannot deny the fact that there are initiatives in place to make the decade of action a success But with the above-mentioned how will these initiatives become successful if the above-mentioned is not addressed. And general public, with this statement made, I am not being negative but realistic.
i don't think i need to remind my fellow opponent that we're debating within the South African context not the global context in which the pillars apply to. I do acknowledge the high level of corruption in the country but what substantiate your argument for high criminal activity in the traffic enforcement? on the same argument Jeff Radebe, a former Minister of Transport has emphasized the strategy in combating corruption through a Special Investigation Unit which worth 20 million per year. i cannot ignore the fact that my opponent fails to produce his own arguments but rather plagiarizes online sources. The arguments provided are part of the report from arrive alive on corruption,traffic enforcement and road safety available online [http://www.arrivealive.co.za...]. Dear opponent i
I would appreciate it if you take some initiative towards this debate and produce original arguments rather than assumptions .
On the UN framework for Decade of Action for Road Safety 2011-2020 South Africa has achieved at least 60% of the pillar and which illustrate development.
1.road safety management: we have established a reasonable and strong agencies for road safety in the country involving partners from a range of sectors and furthermore we have a sound national road safety strategy.
2. safer roads: we have a high quality road infrastructure that serves the need for all road users. our roads are regularly regulated and maintained.
3.safer vehicles: the country has put in place a good legislation towards safe vehicles and constant patrols regulate those legislation. within this system many faces fines, ban or even sentence for lack of cooperation with the regulation. South Africa recently replaced the public transport system so driver can have safer vehicles.
4.safer road users issue is being addressed with initiatives towards road safety.
the last argument is your own pillar and its being addressed by the new health policy which stands to improve health services in the country.
traffic volumes for the past Easter holidays has increased on major route. further to show that our country has worked efficiently:From 5 to 9 April 2012, 56 roadblocks were held; 905 motorists were arrested including 562 for drinking and driving, 226 for reckless and negligent driving (including excessive speed) and 117 for other offenses; 355 vehicles were discontinued from use, including 249 public transport vehicles that were impounded. according to the current minister of transport.
Research:Defined as the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions.
I do advice my opponent to take note of the word study in the definition of the word research which has been taken from www.dictionary.com. Now I conducted research on corruption in South Africa within Traffic enforcement department and my opponent described it as plagiarism only because the research comes from a particular website as highlighted in his argument, which I find tedious of my opponent. And this further tells the general public that my opponent could be sucking all his facts out of his thumb as he confuses conducting research with the art of plagiarism. I further remind my opponent that I stated in Round1 that I will either accept his definitions, and by me providing definitions it simply means that I did not accept his definitions. I further remind my opponent that the whole Decade Of Action initiative was implemented by the United Nations, and was adopted by South Africa, thus meaning that these pillars do apply to South African initiatives to make this campaign a success. Now if this pillars don't apply to South African initiatives how will South Africa then reduce fatalities by 50% by the year 2020. I further advice my opponent to please inform on us on the successes of the initiative implemented by the former minister Mr. Jeff Radebe inorder to tackle corruption? And I would also like to know on how far the new minister is interms of combatting corruption, because general public public, to fondly speak about the former minister like my opponent has done simply means that he is living in the past, and we are in the present. Furthermore general public, I do acknowledge the initiatives in place "but" with corruption taking place, these initiatives will be unsuccessful and will not reduce fatalities by 50% by the year 2020
Moving on to my argument.
In this round I will use a case study to substantiate my argument.
The following case study is on the failure of ARRTO(The Administration and Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences Act). I remind the general public that AARTO was established for law enforcement officers to deal effectively and quickly with infringements of road rules. It also aims to alleviate pressure on the courts by penalising drivers and operators who are guilty of infringements through a demerit point system. The more offences you commit, the more points you lose, simple as that.Essentially, AARTO was designed to improve safer driving behaviour and encourage compliance with the law in an attempt to reduce accidents and deaths on our roads. Unfortunately, it has not turned out this way. The system, tested as a pilot project in Johannesburg, has failed so badly that none of the other provinces want it to be rolled out nationally. Gary Ronald, head of public affairs at the Automobile Association (AA) stated that the root of the problem is the ineffectiveness of the very people who are meant to enforce AARTO. General public with the pilot project itself failing, and taking into consideration the comment made by Mr. Ronald, proves to us that its becoming another idea better then its implementation. And how many of the projects my opponent fondly speaks of are like this?
General public, yes we will reduce fatalities in South Africa, but note by 50% by the year 2020 as per the Decade of Action for Road Safety, and this is what my opponent fails to understand.
AARTO legislation is still being improved to meet the specification and targets of South Africa. No final decisions have been made regarding the system. Over the past Easter holidays fatalities crash reduced by 15.81% only during the first year Easter. Ask what will happen with the increased budget to the Transport department? What about the increased initiatives, first my opponent failed to provide substantial evidence to why South Africa won"t reduce its fatalities by 50% yet he acknowledged that fatalities will increase. I provided a proof that 15% this year and the same in the next seven years will surely reduce fatalities till below 50%.
I deserve to win because I presented the best case scenario for my site and showed the weakness of my opponent. Furthermore my opponent is an amateur debater without a debating style. His speech doesn"t have a clear introduction, case or conclusion. He assume the minimum knowledge to his argument.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.