Stubborn problems need tough solutions

THE SPECTATOR’S VIEW

Sometimes, desperate times really do call for desperate measures. Two examples: Hamilton city council’s decision to study reducing speeds on the Linc and Red Hill Valley parkways, and the hyperaggressive stance city officials are now taking with people trespassing at area waterfalls.

Both are extreme measures. But both are a reactions to serious, ongoing problems of public safety, expense and stewardship that seem to defy reasonable solutions.

Admittedly, the waterfall example is more extreme. This week the city began issuing court summons’, potentially with fines up to $10,000, to people who trespass at attractions like Albion Falls, fall through their own irresponsibility and require expensive and highrisk emergency rescue services.

This is not what the city had planned. Officials didn’t want to deter people from calling 911 if they really need help. Yet threatening them with a $10,000 fine could certainly be seen as a deterrent. But let’s apply appropriate context. This is a scare tactic. It’s unlikely that any court is going to levy a fine that large on an injured trespasser. But could the prospect of a court appearance and hefty fine be enough to deter irresponsible hikers? Logically, yes. You could argue that there’s nothing logical about the instinct and intellect driving this sort of activity. But you could also argue the heavyhanded approach is worth a shot, especially since nothing else seems to be working.

The parkway situation isn’t as clearly defined, but in its own way it is desperate as well. We know based on statistical reporting done by The Spectator and other sources that the number of accidents, especially on the Red Hill, is disproportionately high. Everyone has an opinion on why, including design issues and slippery road surfaces. But the one thing most reasonable people can agree on is that speeding (and the things that go along with it — unsafe lane changes, tailgating etc.) is a major factor. People regularly drive 110, 120, 130 and more. The roads are not designed for that speed.

More enforcement? It’s part of the answer. But police will tell you that due to resource limitations and safety issues, that alone won’t do it. So why not lower the speed limit from 90 to 80? Add stepped up enforcement, signage and other education messaging. And yes, ask the province to allow photo radar. There is allowance for that under community safety zone rules, but only if speed limits aren’t higher than 80.

So go for it. This will drive libertarian motorists crazy, of course. But lower speeds will improve safety. Photo radar, for all of its flaws, will act as a deterrent. A couple of fines in the $300 range and some demerit points will give all but the most reckless drivers pause. The only people who lose are law-breaking drivers, and there’s nothing wrong with that.