Amy Gillett foundation pro government or pro safety?   1 comment


last revised 7/8/11

Most people including organisations have not much idea about road safety. The problem is that we assume and rely on the authorities. The authorities presumably are the ultimate experts and have road safety as their aim – the government. The reality is reversed. The government is dedicated to support road lawlessness and they are absolutely not interested in ensuring road safety.
Any individual or an organisation including Amy Gillett foundation have to discover for themselves what reality is and find out the solutions. The solutions must be then handed out to the government to be implemented. This is our normal democratic duty and government duty if we still live in democratic nor dictatorial country, to actually do what we need – a safe roads and full law and order.
For this to happen, we have to find out the truth and propose sensible solution. Part of the problem is a very wide and very deep corruption across the government system and all institutions. As this site is dedicated not on punishing corrupt officials but to identify the problems and ask for correction, so we do.



Hello Melitta,

I understand people like you, I was also young and naive, full of beliefs and so on. Now I know how corrupt the system is.
First of all, thanks for reply and though I do not see a clear invitation to cooperation, I may go one small step further to see if you and the foundation will actually be interested in improving radically the losing fight.
You as most people assume that MIchal, self declared road safety campaigner is noone. The PHD are the wise people above God or at least equal. If this is the case, it is fanatism and this actually leads to our current situation. Do not be offended but the money as I am concerned are most likely wasted on such studies.
Money are wasted in case of political corruption and willingness to maintain road lawlessness.
Money are wasted because I have experienced that.

Melitta, regardless of one person like me, it is sensible not to make the PHD people god like, it is sensible open for public debate and use public wisdom. Set the committee and then break road problem on many sections. Give the task to scientists, and to public, then analyze the results.

As we speak, number of people die, get injuried and traumatised. I assess it is in 90% due to government running the business of road safety and transport and remaining 10%, it would happen even in government would be perfect. I am quite sure that the figures are quire real. Therefore it is sensible to concentrate on the government and not on individual drivers.

Melitta, I am the really serious on improving road safety unlike any official or other so called campaigner. I am the first in Australia and perhaps in the world who conducted a real life research on tailgating. Yes my private research and my method.

A short story how I got to the research. Knowing the rules reasonably good, being a perfect driver with an extra training, I bothered police and government authorities over the specific issues and incidents. Over the decades of this struggle, I often told experienced officers that so many drivers do offend and they always reply to me with their professional certainty that only an odd driver make a bad name to so many. It did not make any sense when I observed the road. When about a year ago I pressed many officials in police and asked them to give me the figures, they started to startle and pointed me to the minister, minister very quickly pointed me to the department, there was plenty of… gossip, and they again knew that I am wrong but again no figures and referred me to university of Adelaide to road safety research unit. I contacted the head of research and she assured me that I am wrong and that they do conduct the research on scientific basis. She again pointed me to her researcher who invited me and showed me a stack of literature they published. I;’ve picked one that I feel very strongly on it, – tailgating. Took it home and browsed through and found nothing of a research. I contacted the researcher again and told him about my discovery. He admitted that there are no figures as they did not do a research.
Well Melitta lots of puff, lots of public money consummed and nothing but gossip created. On the basis of this gossip the state and federal governments make decision and they deny all complaints and concerns and careers grow and so on. What is most worrying is that people continue to die and get injured and traumatized because nobody knows what the real situation is.
It is an open corruption but my goal was not to attack the university for corruption but to improve the safety on the road.

On an open road I though: it must be very expensive and very complex to conduct such a real life research…
This was based on an automatic assumption that they want good but it is hard to deliver.
In an instant the higher intelligence gave me idea, I simply asked myself how would I do as a private person?
In the next minute I had a rough idea and in no time I refined it and conducted a preliminary study and later a bigger study and real data started to come out revealing what is going on.
I conducted a few more studies and all confirm the first one.
I was happy with the research results but also very dissatisfied from authorbities who deliberately want a lawlessness on our roads.
I have offered to the university my results and my method for free just to acknowledge me. They are not interested, so is not interested police, ministry and any other uni and college in Australia. They are dedicated to corruption and lawlessness.
University chief management actually abused me.

Melitta, my method is simple and cheap and is very suitable for any grade school children to conduct. It is a perfect idea so children when involved in such projects, would gain so much on road safety. Sure older children with more advanced math skills would present it in a better way and perhaps make interesting variations of the research.

No, I do not discount of Universities. At present I cannot see their dedication. To me personally they are the criminals with titles.

Leaving aside the research I’ve done and all nastiness of the officials, lets take the matter and start to dissect it and analyse.

First thing I propose is to propose that federal government make the unified rules and one of the first rules should acknowledge the certain: road users must be categorised by their vulnerability.
Vulnerability would be a product of mass and speed normally used. Therefore the most vulnerable will be children and pedestrians in general, than the bicyclists, invalid scooters, motorbikes and passenger cars and least the heavy trucks.

This would be the very basic rule and other rules must take into account their interaction. As default the least vulnerable would have more responsibility on the more vulnerable. There is a bit of discussion needed on the fast motorbikes, fast passengers cars and powerful trucks. Leave this for a moment aside, it should be no excuse of car hitting a bicyclist. One should take a full responsibility for doing it. Only in certain circumstances when the cyclist did something obviously wrong and car driver had no way to avoid it, one may be excused. Otherwise car driver must take responsibility for hitting more vulnerable road user.
Melitta, it is hard to understand what I say from a perspective of real driver driving on our roads today. Lets take a situation where the string of cars drive (tailgate badly) at excessive speed in the hills. Visibility due to many curves dictate that safe speed would be not much more than 30-40kmh. People drive at 2-3 times of that. It is extremely dangerous on vulnerable road users like cyclists when one car does it and when they tailgate, it is often tragic to cyclist. The fact that all drivers do it every day is not excuse at all.

From your website I have not found any analysis like that, nor a forum where to discuss such issues. Forum and discussion would have to involve a drawings.

While Mike Rann deserve the death sentence for his part to ensure the road lawlessness, I imagine that foundation should concentrate on real issues and definitely make sure of full independence on any government office or even from mainstream media.

I wrote to make sure I do not have to include this foundation as another group who talk and do nothing to improve safety on my website dedicated to the road safety.

I propose that you publish my research and take to another higher level. Let school children do it under your instructions. Allow (not fund) the Universities to take up and research it further.

There are plenty of issues to be analyzed, solution found and proposals made for the government to implement.
It is true that our government is almost in 100% corrupt but if we concentrate on the issues and propose well worked out proposal and we as society should demand the government to accept and implement them. We should also have lots to say in democratic society of how police should operate in regard to road safety policing. At present they dictate and in democracy we have to dictate.
Police is interested in revenue raising not in ensuring safe roads….

Plenty of issues and plenty of people needed to analyze them.

Is your foundation interested in real thing rather than be drawn into corrupt system?

By the way, I am a keen cyclist with some personal achievements and unfortunately I know what it mean to be knocked by dangerous drivers. I know what police and ministry do to avoid this and to improve – nothing.


Road safety campaigner


Hello Michal,

Thank you for your email expressing concern about the safety management of Australian roads and traffic interactions. It is always encouraging to hear that there are growing numbers of individuals who are passionate about improving the situation and proactive in their approach.

There is certainly a requirement as you state to “know what is wrong” with the current road situation/behaviours in order to improve the situation. One way that the Amy Gillett Foundation does this is through PHD research scholarship (please see recent findings attached). We also have a dedicated Research, Policy & Education arm to the Foundation that works behind the scenes collating information/evidence to support the safety campaigns that we implement. Our membership with the Australasian College of Road Safety and relevant such boards is an important element through which the Foundation remains up-to-date with current research findings and industry initiatives.

The Foundation works collaboratively with road safety stakeholders and organisations throughout Australia to achieve the best possible road safety initiatives. We are certainly open to hearing about the research that you have conducted as it applies to improving road safety.




The invitation message for the foundation to initiate a cooperation.


I am a road safety campaigner and have not met yet anyone who really care about road safety. Starting from government and police, and ending on just common people, no one does anything positive to actually improve road safety for cyclists and for everyone.
Well it is a sensitive site as it is inspired by the death of a young cyclist.
My challenge still stands, nobody care for safer roads in Australia.

I do not believe in any of your claims on the site. In order to find a solution, you need to know what is wrong and to have a right idea of how it should be.

If I am right, you can be offended, and I do not want to. If you truly want to improve significantly road safety, you will not be offended but invite me to a serious debate on what is wrong and what must be changed.

I do blame the government for almost all fatalities and I know exactly why. I have conducted first in the world private research on real life driving in Australia. I know some results first hand. No minister nor even universities do have this nor they are interested in it.

Weather you reply or not, weather you invite me to share my findings and get yours, I will campaign anyway.

Well your aim to achieve zero fatalities of cyclists is childish. It is impossible, it is naive dream.
I do not say to just criticize it, I also want it but I cannot do it against government corrupt will. I have done a lot, I know so many real factors causing road unsafe.
Police for example in SA refuse to take the reports of dangerous driving. Even if they take, nothing is being done with the report to actually improve the dangerous driver.

Ok, I so far do not see positively your site, but you can prove me wrong. I hope.




Posted August 7, 2011 by mmistrz

One response to “Amy Gillett foundation pro government or pro safety?

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Mr Philip Atkinson of Queensland has presented his ideas on the decline of civilisation here:

    A study of the decline of western civilization (6/2/2011)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: