Double Demerits: Safety Measure or Revenue Machine?

Double demerit points were introduced in NSW with one simple message:

“It’s about safety.”

The idea was straightforward:

On public holidays — when traffic is heavy and people travel long distances — penalties would be doubled to discourage dangerous driving.

That was the original story.

But like most government policies, once they realised how much money it made, the “safety measure” quietly evolved into something else entirely.

⭐ From Public Holidays Only… to Entire Weekends

Double demerits were originally for:

Christmas Day

Easter

Australia Day

Long weekends

Now?

They cover:

the day before the holiday

the day after the holiday

the entire weekend

sometimes four or five days straight

So here’s the obvious question:

If double demerits apply all weekend, does that mean the whole weekend is now a public holiday?

Because if the government is treating it like one, then:

shouldn’t workers get public holiday penalty rates?

shouldn’t businesses get public holiday trading rules?

shouldn’t the entire weekend be recognised as a public holiday?

But of course, that won’t happen.

Because the government wants two bites at the cherry:

Public holiday rules when it benefits them

Normal weekend rules when it benefits them

It’s not about consistency.

It’s about revenue.

⭐ “Safety” or “Income Stream”?

If double demerits were truly about safety, the government would publish clear data showing:

how many lives were saved

how many crashes were prevented

how behaviour changed

how risk dropped

But here’s the interesting part:

There is no publicly available, transparent before‑and‑after dataset showing that double demerits reduced road deaths.

Road deaths in NSW have:

gone up some years

gone down some years

stayed flat other years

But they have not shown a consistent drop that matches the introduction or expansion of double demerits.

If the results were impressive, the government would advertise them everywhere.

The silence speaks for itself.

⭐ One Fine = Loss of Licence

Double demerits have created a new problem:

People can now lose their licence from a single mistake.

One moment of:

10 km/h over

touching a phone

not wearing a seatbelt properly

forgetting to renew a licence

…and your licence is gone.

So what happens next?

More unlicensed drivers on the road.

And unlicensed drivers:

don’t care about fines

don’t care about points

don’t care about rules

are harder to insure

are harder to track

are more likely to flee police

So the system designed to “improve safety” ends up creating more unsafe drivers.

Another contradiction.

⭐ If It’s About Safety, Why Only on Holidays?

If double demerits save lives, then logically:

why not use them every day?

why not use them during peak hour?

why not use them during school zones?

why not use them during wet weather?

If something is truly a safety measure, you don’t switch it on and off like a Christmas tree.

You don’t say:

“It’s dangerous today because it’s a long weekend,

but tomorrow it’s fine.”

That’s not safety logic.

That’s revenue logic.

⭐ The Real Reason Double Demerits Expanded

It’s simple:

The government discovered how profitable they are.

Once the money started flowing, the “safety” story became the cover for:

longer enforcement periods

more days included

more offences doubled

more licence suspensions

more fines collected

It’s the same pattern we’ve seen with:

smoking taxes

plain packaging

vaping bans

toll roads

parking fines

council fees

When a policy makes money, it grows.

When a policy costs money, it disappears.

⭐ The Final Question

If double demerits were truly about safety, the government would:

publish the data

show the results

prove the impact

justify the expansion

But they don’t.

Instead, they quietly extend the dates, increase the penalties, and pretend it’s all for our own good.

Meanwhile, more people lose their licences from a single fine, and the number of unlicensed drivers keeps rising.

So the real question is:

**How many government policies start as “safety measures”…

and end as revenue streams?**

Double demerits are just another example of a system that punishes the public while pretending to protect them.