Thinking hard about renewing my RAC membership
Discussion
Whilst looking into various studies on road pricing (as you do) I became aware that one very senior member of the board at the RAC is one of the major UK contributors in this area, having written or collaborated on several published works on the subject.
Now I've often thought that since around 2005 (when bought by AVIVA) the good old RAC started giving out mixed messages and I (in my own opinion) sensed a loss of the 'epsrit de'corps' that the organisation once had with the motorist (call me sentimental).
With my interest picqued I have just (belatedly) reviewed their 2009 motorists' report. Now it might just be me, but they appear to be trying to suck and blow at the same time........
Some examples from the report:
RAC blows....
4.4 Making motoring greener
86% think investing in alternative fuels will have the biggest impact.
81% want better training on environmentally friendly driving as part of the driving test.
and sucks.........
76% suggest fitting speed limiters on cars
On road pricing:
blows..........
Motorists are worried about road pricing. Is it just another revenue generator for the Government or can it really help to reduce congestion going forward? They also want investment in public transport to provide alternative methods of travel before being asked to pay more.
sucks.........
Motorists have yet to be convinced that road pricing is essential to fund road maintenance and ease the bottlenecking within the infrastructure.
And their stance on...........
Speed cameras
Greater use of average speed cameras and the use of speed activated warning signs. RAC believes these help to educate motorists to stay within the limit and promote safe driving behaviour rather than simply penalising. A nationwide audit of existing speed cameras also needs to be carried out to ensure that each one can demonstrate a proven effect in reducing accidents. Those which cannot should be removed.
Speed limits
blows............
RAC wants local solutions to local issues. Speed limits being set dependant upon the risk each road represents rather than blanket 20mph or 50mph limits.
and sucks........
RAC would like to see motorists involved in the issue using personalised campaigns such as "how fast would you want people driving outside your home?". RAC would welcome an accident black spot map, which would help local authorities in making local decisions.
______________________________________________________________________________________
Now that senior RAC Foundation chap I mentioned (no names): He's just welcomed the endorsement of Road Pricing in a study commissioned by the Scottish Government!
These are of course just my own personal views/opinions, but I'm seriously weighing up where to take my future custom (funding).
Now I've often thought that since around 2005 (when bought by AVIVA) the good old RAC started giving out mixed messages and I (in my own opinion) sensed a loss of the 'epsrit de'corps' that the organisation once had with the motorist (call me sentimental).
With my interest picqued I have just (belatedly) reviewed their 2009 motorists' report. Now it might just be me, but they appear to be trying to suck and blow at the same time........
Some examples from the report:
RAC blows....
4.4 Making motoring greener
86% think investing in alternative fuels will have the biggest impact.
81% want better training on environmentally friendly driving as part of the driving test.
and sucks.........
76% suggest fitting speed limiters on cars
On road pricing:
blows..........
Motorists are worried about road pricing. Is it just another revenue generator for the Government or can it really help to reduce congestion going forward? They also want investment in public transport to provide alternative methods of travel before being asked to pay more.
sucks.........
Motorists have yet to be convinced that road pricing is essential to fund road maintenance and ease the bottlenecking within the infrastructure.
And their stance on...........
Speed cameras
Greater use of average speed cameras and the use of speed activated warning signs. RAC believes these help to educate motorists to stay within the limit and promote safe driving behaviour rather than simply penalising. A nationwide audit of existing speed cameras also needs to be carried out to ensure that each one can demonstrate a proven effect in reducing accidents. Those which cannot should be removed.
Speed limits
blows............
RAC wants local solutions to local issues. Speed limits being set dependant upon the risk each road represents rather than blanket 20mph or 50mph limits.
and sucks........
RAC would like to see motorists involved in the issue using personalised campaigns such as "how fast would you want people driving outside your home?". RAC would welcome an accident black spot map, which would help local authorities in making local decisions.
______________________________________________________________________________________
Now that senior RAC Foundation chap I mentioned (no names): He's just welcomed the endorsement of Road Pricing in a study commissioned by the Scottish Government!
These are of course just my own personal views/opinions, but I'm seriously weighing up where to take my future custom (funding).
I got a 'questionnaire' by email from the RAC, regarding road safety. There was an (unhealthy, in my view) emphasis on the "speed kills" and "automatic speed enforcement is good" mantras, and it was hard to see where it was all heading (a bit like this post 
).
Anyway... for a motoring organisation, it asked some pretty odd/off the wall questions that seemed to be mired in the points that the OP made.
Shame, as I've been very happy with the RAC on the occasions I have needed them! I renewed this year for this reason alone.
).Anyway... for a motoring organisation, it asked some pretty odd/off the wall questions that seemed to be mired in the points that the OP made.
Shame, as I've been very happy with the RAC on the occasions I have needed them! I renewed this year for this reason alone.
This is all very interesting. I've been recently considering NOT having any form of recovery at all on the basis that, statistically at least, I'm never likely to need one (I know the arguments "You might only need them that once"). I'm with the RAC but based on the details posted above, I think I shall now consider moving to another breakdown service, or (as mentioned) not bothering at all.
911motorsport said:
Umm.. don't get me wrong. As a recovery service they have been faultless
You seem to be getting confused between RAC plc (the breakdown service) and the RAC Foundation (the ones who want road pricing, speed cameras, cars fuelled by lentils, etc.)They are two seperate entities. As you rightly say RAC plc are owned by Aviva. The RAC Foundation is the remnants of the original Royal Automobile Club.
You can renew your membership to RAC plc with a clear conscience.
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff