Targa Tasmania... CAMS telling Councils how to suck eggs?

[GTRMagic]

Whispers from the powder room suggest... that the executive of CAMS has seriously got its nose out of joint over the AASA 'sanctioning' of the Targa Tasmania event this year.

So badly out of joint, allegedly, that the chief of that organisation has seen fit to allegedly sent a note to the different local councils on the alleged route of the Targa Tasmania event, and informing them of their alleged obligations in various areas of control and risk management...

... allegedly under the auspices of being involved in the events previously along the lines of ... "How shall ye suck eggs? Let me show you the way" CAMS (or more accurately allegedly their chief) allegedly bleats and moans as to how that organisation had been involved in the event since inception, and allegedly referencing an accident in the event in previous years as being one of the reasons why the newly AASA-sanctioned event shall generate issues to reputation & image of the event, and if anything bad were to happen, allegedly how it would impact CAMS insurers' view of how motor racing is viewed in Tasmania.

Scaremongering allegedly... but written in such a way to challenge that the AASA group is capable of performing the very same function as CAMS. And allegedly goes onto suggest that public liability insurance claims may not be paid at all, if there has not been full disclosure of issues relating to the aforementioned alleged accident.

I wonder if CAMS really think that they can stymie the running of the 2008 Targa Tasmania event in this way?? Or that they will come riding along on their white horse to save the day and 'sanction' this event.... allegedly...

Very strange...

Presuming any of this actually happened

[Nero]

Do you have any hard evidence? I personally would like to see a copy of the note.

[Trevor]

Here they go again, AASA beat them off and the scare-mongering starts all over again. Jesus Christ, I wish those *******s at CAMS would grow up and get used to the fact that they now have competition.

Throwing rocks at the competition is just showing everyone how petty you are.

And as far as this being true, I reckon it is because I read somewhere else that some Councils were getting anxious.

I will find the link and come back.

Here is the link: Brindebella Motor Sport Club Forum

[bludvl_x19]

Or how worried you are with the success that the competition are having...

Mick

[Rachel Richards]

With regard to insurance claims not being paid, an alternative powder room has whispered that CAMS best do some reconnaissance on their own glasshouse.

A rock was recently thrown through my very own glasshouse, with a note wrapped around it, which had some incredible allegations:

"That the widow of a racer who tragically lost his life in a competition event in the past 18 months still hasn't seen dollar one".
Meeting sanctioning and insurance issued by: CAMS.

and that;

"A Victorian club racer seriously injured in a serious incident in the very same time-frame (and unable to resume his employment) started receiving payments within three weeks"
Meeting sanctioning and insurance issued by: AASA.

Although the crayon writing on the note was slightly smudged, the words were still quite legible, and were also quite startling.

Now for the sake of human decency, I hope the rock thrower is very much mistaken, but if this scurrilous allegation is proved, one might hope this fact is conveyed to aforementioned Tasmanian Councils !

[Trevor]

They just don't give up do they Rachel, it just makes them look like bigger d!ckheads everytime they start this stuff.

[Trevor]

Just to keep it legal, here are links to the Articles mentioned above (thanks to the Tasmania Mercury):

March 20 2008:
Targa racers just 'hoons and bandits'

and

March 21 2008:
Targa ready to race in Hobart

and

March 27 2008:
Targa gets green light

Read 'em and weep CAMS, you plot didn't work -

[Nero]

So no one actually has a copy of the alleged note?

[BFC]

and while we are on CAMS i heard that they are self imploding with the commitee passing a no confidence vote on the National Officiating Panel which has been suspended.....say no more on the compentency of the organization........heard anything about this on the grapevine yet Rachael??

[Nero]

I am puzzled by the link between the above articles and the comments as there is no mention of the supposed note.

Alderman Ruzicka was contacted to find out what has been said and the following response was received:

Thank you for your e-mail communication. As always, the Mercury writes a good story in order to generate circulation. I am not angry about anything despite the hyperbole of the Mercury. All I have stated, as I have for many years, that it is hypocritical for Council to spend money on greenhouse gas climate change programs where in we encourage the community to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions (ie. restrict motor vehicle use) and at the same time fund events that promote the use of motor cars, such as Targa. I can’t support that. I have also not said people who take part in motor sports are hoons or that Targa is organised hooning. They are Alderman Harvey’s comments. I am on record (somewhere, but not in any Mercury article) that those who take part are usually well experienced drivers who know what they are doing.

However, what I have said is that Targa encourages hooning behaviour, and I have observed, as have many others, the behaviour that occurs on Tasmanian roads post Targa, in vehicles not driven by people who have the experience and skills of competitive drivers, who drive not to the road conditions or to their abilities. Targa is a road rally event and therein lies the problem, sealed or unsealed road notwithstanding. I do not have any issues with motorsports held on closed tracks.

The problem lies with drivers attempting to emulate the feats of Targa competitors when the roads are in normal use. It does occur. And road safety for the ordinary mortals who do observe road safety is compromised. Targa can impose all the safety rules on its competitors that it likes but it means nothing post event. The question is, if the event were not occurring, would we be having the behaviour on the streets that causes the problems? An analysis, albeit limited, of driver behaviour post the Adelaide Grand Prix, draws limited conclusions about the influence the event has on young impressionable drivers, but conclusions that do raise enough concern for later race promotion to include the message of “enjoy what we do, but don’t try it yourself”!

As an Alderman, I have to make decisions in prioritising spending large sums of limited ratepayer money with many competing demands. The amount of money having to be spent on road safety because of the behaviour of one section of the motoring public is money not spent on other areas that may create opportunities for greater good for the community (sports grounds, playing fields, playgrounds, etc). The argument about Targa earning money for Hobart comes up all the time from its supporters and organisers, but it is said either in the absence of any real economic analysis of the impacts and benefits, or in an analysis that excludes out the real costs and who ultimately ends up paying for the real cost of the event.

All in all, the Mercury carry-on is simply that. I’ve been a lone voice on Council for many years on this issue (although previous 11-1 decisions haven’t been reported in the Mercury anywhere to the extent it has this time). That I’d be joined by another Alderman is a surprise, but I greatly doubt that a Domain stage of Targa will be prevented from going ahead given the voting pattern of previous Council decisions. I predict at worse a 10-2 vote in favour. Nonetheless, as one ratepayer commented yesterday to me, at least someone has had the guts to get up and voice their concerns.

Again, thank you for your communication and the opportunity to express my opinion.

Regards

Alderman Eva Ruzicka


I also spoke to a CAMS state manager today and he has not hear of any note sent from the CAMS head office.
Can someone please supply a copy of the note and I will follow that up.

[Matthew Ronke]

Originally Posted by Nero

I also spoke to a CAMS state manager today and he has not hear of any note sent from the CAMS head office.
Can someone please supply a copy of the note and I will follow that up.

PM me your email and I will send you a copy of the letter.

[mjt57]

Originally Posted by Big_Trev

Here they go again, AASA beat them off and the scare-mongering starts all over again. Jesus Christ, I wish those *******s at CAMS would grow up and get used to the fact that they now have competition.

I liken this to the "world" of professional wrestling, wherein there are twenty million "sanctioning bodies" that control the "sport".

So silly, really, given that anyone can run a motor racing event and they don't need approval or sanctioning from any body in order to do so.

[PVDA]

The whole point of a sanctioning body is to satisy various bodies that you will have adequate control and insurance coverage of an event.

For example it is a lot easier to go to the Tasmanian government with CAMS or AASA sanctioning and insurance both with a proven track record (pun not intended) then as an individual.

Also getting insurance, doing it as an individual would be like an 18 yo trying to insure a WRX, it can be done but will cost you a packet where by using a recognised bodies insurance it should be a lot less.

[NewsStalker]

Originally Posted by PVDA

The whole point of a sanctioning body is to satisy various bodies that you will have adequate control and insurance coverage of an event.

For example it is a lot easier to go to the Tasmanian government with CAMS or AASA sanctioning and insurance both with a proven track record (pun not intended) then as an individual.

Also getting insurance, doing it as an individual would be like an 18 yo trying to insure a WRX, it can be done but will cost you a packet where by using a recognised bodies insurance it should be a lot less.

Not so - if a body (or individual) is prepared to do their homework before attempting to run an event and get everything in place, they have just as much chance of success as someone using CAMS or AASA facilities.

If this weren't the case then the NTMSC would never have been able to run events in the Northern Territory all those years before they were bullied into believing this tripe.

The ONLY real benefit CAMS, AASA or any of these bodies have is that they have done the leg work for you and, should the ****e ever hit the fan, they have their own procedures in place to handle the after effects for you.

As has been pointed out a number of times over the years - CAMS has no legal backing to run or control motorsport in this country. If anyone believes they do have the legal right then perhaps they can show the relevant Australian statutes that give them this right.

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by Matthew Ronke

PM me your email and I will send you a copy of the letter.

OUCH Nero!!

[Nero]

what ouch? why ouch?
I have not received anything yet, but I will be delighted to get a real copy of the note and thus get facts and not innuendo. I will also follow any material up.
Good grief, all it took was an email to the Alderman to get the above reply, it is not rocket science to work from first principles.

[Trevor]

Well, give your email to Matt and I am sure you will recieve a copy of the letter. BTW, I was just reading your response to mine over on Brindabella.

[Nero]

ahhh....forum tennis. I PM'd my email to Matthew this am. However since there seems to be some implication that I have not do so, I will do it again.
OK done PM and email.

[Nero]

Well I have the letter which has some minor detail occluded (I assume to de-identify it) and I will follow it up with the author and with the relevant councils after the event has concluded.
As it currently stands I the contents can be viewed a number of ways.

[GTRMagic]

It depends on whether you take the view that CAMS as ASN should be telling councils their business or not.

Me, I think its a very well directed sleight on the winning sanctioning body, and while perhaps not naming that body directly, if you are situationally aware, the content and context can certainly be viewed as a selective view of information about a number of different issues.

It doesnt quite say that the AASA eats unborn children.. but might as well have... allegedly...

Presuming any of this actually happened

[Nero]

Actually considering what has been written in various magazines and on the internet from AASA supporters I thought the semantics and language was very mild. Having ssaid that I would not have parsed it in the same way...not that that is a criticism.
It can be viewed as responsible due diligence/ass covering with some usual business propaganda or it could be viewed as you say and no doubt much worse depending on the spin you want to put on it.
I have seen much the same in business and government dealings over many years. In my years in dealing with bureaucracy it has always been wise to spell out exactly what the issues are from your point, in writing, given the changing personnel and poor communication that often occurs in such organisations...in which I currently work ATM too!
As I said I will contact each of the relevant councils that Targa runs through and the author of the note and ask for comment. I would like to know what obligations and relationships existed and were expected of the CAMS.

[GTRMagic]

Imagine if you bought a Holden after owning a Ford, and Ford was to write to you to say that Ford have all these redeeming features, but well Holden dont, and here are quite a few problems you should consider, and really you should come buy a Ford because you made a mistake.... this is a view on the alleged output from CAMS... allegedly

[Nero]

Yes, you can view it in that manner.
However I would ask you also to consider the published views from AASA and its supporters with the same consideration simply for balance.
As I said the contents of the letter seem relatively mild and can be viewed a number of ways. I shall be interested in hearing what the recipients thought of it.

[nafe!]

And most people will take the way it's obviously intended.

AASA as a competitor in the market from what ive seen only point out where they offer the same service as cams for comparable or far cheaper prices in some cases.

Interesting you brought up the car sales example gtr as i have actually seen that kind of behaviour in a dealership occur and all it does is serve to reinforce the customers original decision to change product.

[Nero]

well I am not sure if it has been taken as it has been intended, particularly as I have not yet spoken to the author or the recipients.
I wonder what was expected by the councils as appropriate due diligence for CAMS in exiting their role?
In fact there are a number of questions that spring to mind, but this is not the forum to discuss them, rather I will make the phone calls.