If Average Speed Matters, Why Doesn’t Average Delay?


 There’s something odd about the way the road system measures our behaviour. If I travel 10 kilometres too quickly, the system knows instantly. Average‑speed cameras calculate it, record it, and fine me for it. The maths is simple: 10 kilometres at 60 km/h should take 10 minutes. If I do it in less, I’m punished.

But what happens when the same 10 kilometres takes 20 minutes? Or 25? Or more? What happens when the system itself forces me to sit still for half the journey? Nothing. No accountability. No explanation. No recognition that the delay wasn’t caused by me, but by the design of the road.

Take the trip from Liverpool to Chester Hill. It’s roughly 10 kilometres, mostly through 70 km/h zones. In theory, it should be quick. In reality, it often takes twice as long. Not because of traffic. Not because of accidents. But because of the endless stop‑start rhythm created by poorly timed lights. You hit one red light, and you’re almost guaranteed to hit the next nine. The system locks you into a sequence that wastes your time, your fuel, and your patience.

And then there’s the strange behaviour during double demerit periods. On a normal day, a set of lights might let 10 or 15 cars through. But on a double demerit weekend, the same lights might only let two or three through. I’ve seen this repeatedly. It’s not imagination. It’s not coincidence. It’s a pattern. The system changes its behaviour when the penalties increase, and drivers are the ones who pay for it — literally and figuratively.

If average speed matters so much, then why doesn’t average delay? If the system can calculate how quickly I travel between two points, then surely it can also calculate how slowly I’m forced to travel because of its own design. If I’m punished for being too fast, then shouldn’t the system be held accountable when it makes me too slow?

But that’s not how it works. The system measures only one side of the equation. It punishes speed, but it ignores inefficiency. It fines drivers for saving seconds, but it never explains why it wastes minutes. It enforces rules on us, but it never evaluates itself.

Maybe the real issue isn’t speeding at all. Maybe it’s that the system is designed to monitor drivers, not to measure its own performance. And as long as that’s the case, we’ll keep sitting at red lights, watching the minutes tick away, wondering why the only time the system cares about timing is when it can use it against us.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Sydney Has Big‑City Problems Without Big‑City Population

Image
  There’s something strange about Sydney. It behaves like a city bursting at the seams, yet its population is nowhere near the scale of places like London, Tokyo, or New York. Those cities move millions of people every day with systems that, while not perfect, at least make sense. Sydney, on the other hand, struggles with far fewer people and far simpler geography. So the question is: why? The problem isn’t population. It’s design. Sydney’s roads aren’t built for flow — they’re built for stopping. You can drive from Liverpool to Chester Hill and hit ten sets of lights in ten kilometres. And if you hit one red, you’ll probably hit all of them. The timing isn’t coordinated. The sequences don’t adapt. The system doesn’t try to move you through; it just reacts in isolation, one intersection at a time. It’s a city designed as if every road is its own little world, instead of part of a larger network. And because the lights aren’t synchronised, drivers end up doing the one thing the syst...
Read more

Why Drivers Carry the Blame for Everyone Else’s Mistakes

Image
  There’s a strange imbalance built into the way our roads work. Drivers are held responsible for almost everything, even when the behaviour around them is what creates the danger. It’s as if the entire system is designed around the assumption that the driver is always at fault, while everyone else gets a free pass. Take school zones. Every weekday, drivers slow down to 40 km/h, sometimes crawling through areas that were never designed to handle the volume of cars they now attract. And while drivers are being cautious, what’s happening around them? Parents double‑parked. Cars stopped in no‑stopping zones. People swinging doors open into traffic. Children weaving between vehicles because there’s no proper drop‑off area. Councils put schools on main roads with no parking, no flow, and no logic — and then drivers are the ones penalised for trying to navigate the chaos safely. It’s the same pattern everywhere. Drivers are expected to compensate for everyone else’s behaviour. If a paren...
Read more

Why Students Leave School Unable to Function in the Real World

Image
  There’s something deeply wrong with a school system when teenagers can analyse a poem, label the parts of a cell, and recite the steps of long‑division — but can’t book their own doctor’s appointment. And it’s not their fault. Kids aren’t leaving school unprepared because they’re lazy or entitled. They’re leaving unprepared because nobody taught them the things they actually need to know. Every week you hear it: “Mum, can you book my learner’s test?” “Dad, can you call the doctor for me?” “Can you fill out this form?” “Can you help me apply for a job?” These aren’t advanced tasks. They’re basic life skills. Skills every adult uses constantly. Skills that should be taught long before a student is handed a graduation certificate. But instead of teaching kids how to function in the real world, the curriculum is packed with content that looks impressive on paper but has almost no practical value. We spend years teaching calculus — a subject used by maybe 2% of the population — but no...
Read more