In an “update on highway speed survey results” published on the Government’s official website Tuesday, Transportation Minister Devin Dreeshen claims answers to a questionnaire that was online from Nov. 7 to Dec. 12 show “public support for raising speed limits on divided highways.”
Needless to say, that is not quite the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
“Albertans have spoken loud and clear,” the press release masquerading as a ministerial statement concluded. “We’re taking that direction seriously, and we will continue to make improvements that support safety, mobility, and economic growth across the province.”
Albertans have said no such thing, of course, and it’s doubtful Mr. Dreeshen’s plan will do much to support safety, mobility, and economic growth.
The transportation minister, who appears to be a reasonably intelligent young man, certainly understands that his statement is nothing more than misleading spin about a straw poll with no validity as a measure of public opinion.
The government survey results are based entirely on answers provided by anyone who felt like clicking a button on a web page and ticking the right boxes to agree with the Transportation Department’s questions, which leaned hard in favour of raising speed limits on some rural highways from 110 km/h to 120 km/h.
Much like the self-selecting surveys used in the United Conservative Party’s so-called “Alberta Next” engagement campaign to gin up popular support for Alberta separation and put pressure on the federal government to cave in to Alberta’s pipeline demands, this self-selecting survey has all the statistical validity of a politician asking a crowd of supporters to raise their hands if they agree.
You can draw the conclusion from such an exhibition that the room is full of supporters, but as a measure of actual public opinion, such voodoo polling is useless except as a tool for manufacturing consent. It’s possible, of course, that there is public support for higher speed limits, but there’s no way of telling from Mr. Dreeshen’s propaganda.
Whoever typed up Mr. Dreeshen’s statement was initially careful to be at least technically accurate about the questionnaire’s obvious flaws.
The “online public engagement survey … received a total of 59,400 responses,” the press release began. “The survey gave Albertans the opportunity to share their views on modernizing speed limits on rural divided highways,” it continued, echoing the biased language in Mr. Dreeshen’s original Nov. 7 release, but nevertheless half-heartedly acknowledging the self-selecting nature of the survey.
“Preliminary results show that 68 per cent of respondents who shared thoughts on the matter support increasing speed limits on these highways from 110 km/h to 120 km/h,” the release continued. Would the result have been different if respondents who just answered yes or no were included? Or is the release just ambiguously written. That much is not clear.
“It’s clear that Albertans are ready for modern, common-sense rules that better reflect how our roads are built and how people actually drive,” the statement said. So the government, in addition to reaching a highly questionable conclusion about public support, is telling us that the higher speed limits Mr. Dreeshen and his heavy-footed pals desire are modern and just common sense, an assertion for which there is no evidence.
Sad to say, at least with some unsophisticated readers, this flim-flammery seems to have worked. “Survey shows majority of Albertans back higher highway speed limits,” proclaimed the Central Alberta Online news site. The story continued in that vein.
Albertans first learned of this scheme in Mr. Dreeshen’s Nov. 7 announcement, which said the government was “investigating how to safely increase speed limits on divided highways, and if Albertans support increasing speed limits. … We want Albertans to be able to drive the speed limit that the highways are designed for. Modern vehicles combined with public awareness mean we can explore higher speed limits.”
As I observed at the time, the author of that release apparently wanted us to believe the government intended to safely increase highway speeds, knowing full well that higher speeds will make crashes deadlier.
The original news release – presumably unintentionally – also strongly suggested that Mr. Dreeshen had already made up his mind on what would happen next. The department would move ahead quickly to “conduct a mini-trial of a 120 km/h speed limit to assess the impacts of higher speed limits on divided highways.”
Tuesday’s announcement confirms that was the plan all along. It’s also likely that the decision to make the increase permanent has already been made.
As noted in my previous column, what happens next can be predicted with confidence by what happened when exactly the same thing was tried in British Columbia in 2014.
A study published by physicians and engineers from the University of British Columbia “looked at crash and insurance claim data from the 1,300-kilometre stretches of highway where the speed limit was raised to 120 kilometres per hour in 2014,” the CBC reported in the fall of 2018. The study indicated “the number of fatal crashes jumped by 118 per cent, injury claims with ICBC rose by 30 per cent and total insurance claims went up by 43 per cent.” The Insurance Corporation of British Columbia is B.C.’s public auto insurance provider.
British Columbians had to wait until 2018, when grownups were back in charge in the Legislature in Victoria, for speed limits to be brought back to a safer 110 km/h.
Mr. Dreeshen’s previous significant policy decision, celebrated in a March 27 press release headlined “Alberta is ending the photo radar cash cow,” was removing speed-camera enforcement from major provincial highways including those that run through urban areas. The policy also eliminated “speed-on-green” automatic enforcement at intersections.
All the results posted by Mr. Dreeshen on Tuesday show is who did the best job of getting supporters to fill out the government’s biased survey. It would be interesting to see what commenters actually said.
Had this kind of survey been published about a federal election campaign, the Canada Elections Act would have required anyone transmitting its results to indicate that it was not based on recognized statistical methods.
Oh well. This is Alberta. Make sure you do up your seatbelt the next time you venture out on a provincial highway.
Interesting that Mr Dreeshen put this out today, just when CTV news (National, this morning) was covering the topic of Edmonton police are behind bringing back photo radar, due to the uptick in speeding since the photo radar was stopped.
It is as ridiculous as Doug Ford saying that it was just a “cash cow” on citizens, and not ‘fair ‘ to them. Dougie is obviously not familiar with or ignoring Baretta– if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime. If you don’t want to pay a fine, don’t speed. Simple– and if you get caught it is totally on you. PUaSU.
#22 … So what exactly was the immunity in advance for? Are the UCP again following the d’rump agenda; threatening/bullying the ICJ with sanctions if they don’t give him immunity in 2029 ?
Hello DJC and fellow commenters,
You cannot make something that is inherently dangerous into something “safer” when you don’t change anything about it. Driving at 120 kph will result in a larger number of more serious injuries and fatalities.
Roads, like most engineering projects are “overengineered”, but using them to their maximum capacity is almost certain to have an undesirable outcome.
Even if most Albertans would like a higher speed limit, that would not make it a good idea. We don’t actually know what most Albertans prefer.
Why would someone want to increase the seriousness and number of life-altering consequences when this is unnecessary and provides no advantages? This is incomprehensible.
I remember that press conference with Deven Dreeshen, in a barbecue establishment, with a fancy apron and a brisket in appearance. He was engaged in typical UCP style doublespeak. At one point, he was blabbering about how photo radar is merely a cash cow, and it does nothing to improve safety. The next moment he said that photo radar is an effective safety tool. Experts agree that speeding is dangerous. At any given time, you can see the news and it will talk about a motor vehicle crash, and speeding is one of the factors that can be mentioned. Increasing speed limits, will increase the risks. Combine this with two other longstanding factors that were caused by premier Ralph Klein, over 30 years ago, which was the privatization of driver training, and his gross neglect of infrastructure maintenance in Alberta (which has a cost that could be as much as $40 billion to resolve), and it’s going to make matters even worse. Poorly trained drivers, who speed on very poorly maintained roads, is a bad combination. Aside from that, the police will be underfunded, because of the lost revenue, and municipal property taxes will go up. You can’t get anymore foolish than this, can you?
Anon: And don’t forget the weather, which climate change is making worse in Alberta with warmer, but still cold, Alberta temperatures that, as we have seen this week in Edmonton, result in ice rain and flash freezing after regular rain. DJC
David Climenhaga: That is true. At even normal speeds, trying to drive over ice is dangerous. That’s why the police advise to avoid unnecessary travel when there is inclement weather. Speeding will make it worse. At higher speeds, coordination diminishes, while the chances of vehicle crashes increase. Also, thirty years ago, Ralph Klein privatized highway maintenance. It made things worse. When we see more fatalities, due to speeding drivers, the UCP will have their so called experts look into the matter.
Speed Reid rides again!
Has anyone requested to see the written responses? I know I had some choice words about how dangerous this change is and I’m sure there are many more people who feel the same.
Andrew: As did I and at least five other commenters today. Hey! A survey! DJC
This is a straw government run by a straw man, propped up by straw polls. Increase highway speeds, they said. Then this happened:
https://www.mylethbridgenow.com/59423/news/traffic-closures-outages/multiple-rollovers-along-highway-2-due-to-high-wind-gusts-m-d-of-willow-creek/
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/blizzard-southern-alberta-december-17-9.7019824
It’s a plan. It’s a stupid plan. But it’s a plan. Mother Nature has other plans.
Kindly enjoy this distraction from the $25,000 fee you must pay now if you wish to be an engaged citizen, other than a bunch of separatists who got in under the $500 rule. It’s almost like those yahoos had the inside track, or deus ex machina on that. Maybe it’s a Christmas miracle. Maybe the $500M US loan to instigate the destruction of Confederation by foreign interests would make even a $25,000 fee a drop in the bucket.
The irony of the UCP has no bounds. Drunkard Dreeshen issued these sham survey results on the same day there was a 100 vehicle pile up between Airdrie and Calgary. Timing is everything isn’t it? I took the sham quiz and even though the answers were always tilted in favor of what Dreeshen wanted, I did have the opportunity to put in some nasty comments, which I doubt will ever see the light of day.
Regarding the Citizen Initiative Regulation, I am not a lawyer but to me there are two areas that change this in a big way. The first reflects what Dingy Smith keeps whining about being “anyone with $500 can launch a petition” or something along those lines. Well, that now has changed in Section 2 from $500 to $25,000. The other part that I can see relates to getting contributions for the petition drive. I see this as intentionally targets Mr. Lukaszuk’s petitions and fund raising that went along with that.
Higher speeds make for more dangerous crashes? That’s just physics. We laugh at the laws of physics here in Alberta, except maybe the bit about the faster a car goes, the more fuel it burns. What are a few more car crashes compared to the value of the extra gasoline sales? Happy Christmas from your friends at the UCP.
Except for short stretches, Alberta’s busiest highway (the QEII) is not built to the modern freeway design standards that make a 120 km/hour speed limit safe. Not with the numerous level crossings, the poorly designed interchanges, the median width, and the road grades when the QEII crosses valleys and coulees.
That we’re even discussing this is, for me, dealing with UCP “flooding the zone” tactics. But, with regard to human nature, for some, a 120 km/h speed limit really means driving at 130, 140, 150 km/h speeds. Already, we are seeing those driving at these speeds with impunity. As was mentioned in the survey by some, some very dangerous factors on these rural area roads, is the entering and the exiting of traffic on and off of the road going slower than the ever increasing oncoming traffic speed. Yes, buckle up and be on your game! It’s going to get worse!
I always save my online comments. This is the one I made on the ridiculous UCP “survey” about raising the speed limit:
It will create more pollution, use more fuel, cost drivers more money and lead to more accidents, health care costs and deaths. People are already going 120-130 kmh on 110 kmh roads. This means they will now go 130-140. Speed kills. No wonder the RCMP refused to comment when asked by a Global News reporter.
Plastic cars that buckle if you fart too loud, going faster on icy roads they share with huge metal shipping tankers on wheels.
What could possibly go wrong?
Fuzzification draws me to the years I enjoyed the back of Macleans and Dr Foth. Thanx for the memories. Love your writing always.
Happy holidays everyone.
Dreeshen is such a pimply, MAGA hat wearing weasel. Perhaps the real question is why is the UCP pushing this so hard? This is a government that doesn’t do anything unless it directly benefits them, so what gives? My best guess is their F350 driving, truck nut lovin’, knuckle dragging supporters are sick of getting speeding tickets on the highway. Now they can set the cruise to 129 and not have to worry about crossing that dreaded 15 demerit line.
Judging by what happened in BC with a 30% jump in claims, our insurance premiums will be taking a similar jump because of this initiative. Insurance companies are much better at assessing risk than this government.
Distracted driving is dangerous, but the politics of distraction can be too.
There was no uproar about highway speed limits which have been at the current level for a long time, until the UCP manufactured this issue and tried to give it traction with a “survey” they created and controlled to get the answer they wanted.
If this really was such a pressing issue for Albertan’s, why didn’t they let people just get signatures on petition to force a province wide vote, like seems to be happening with so many other things now? I feel the answer is fairly clear, most people weren’t interested, except for most of those of course who took part in the government controlled survey to try manufacture consent for what they wanted to do anyways.
While we are at it, lets have a survey on whether Smith and the UCP should resign now. I suppose that initiative is already happening now, although unfortunately for the UCP it doesn’t seem a process they have as much control of.
Perhaps the distraction of speed limits will give them some reprieve from the more serious problems facing them, such as this, but somehow I doubt it. Albertans have been distracted by Smith and the UCP in the past and are not in the mood now to be again.
the survey preamble, and insinuations through out, also contained economic development/expansion benefits attributed to an increase to the speed limit.
puzzled by the relationship, i asked for evidence that would support any increase or enhancement of economic activity resulting from an increase in speed limits; of course did not recieve a response.
Oh well, I won’t have to drive my young figure skater out on icy Alberta roads to Skate Canada competitions anymore. The boxers can have the road to themselves. The teams might need to stock up on more green shirts though.
I would also be interested in seeing the comments that were received for this survey. Mine were simple: Speed kills.
Will it make any difference on Hwy 2? Most drivers there already drive at 120. I guess when I drive next week for the holidays I guess the only real difference will be I’ll got honked at when I get passed. Oh Joy!
“It’s clear that Albertans are ready for modern, common-sense rules that better reflect how our roads are built and how people actually drive,”
1. It is already well established “how people actually drive”, for example:
“Alberta RCMP issued a warning cautioning against travel on all Alberta roads due to heavy snowfall causing whiteout conditions in many parts of the province. The Calgary Police Service warned motorists to avoid travel in the city due to extreme winter storm conditions.”
“Calgary police said they were called out to more than 200 crashes on city roads Wednesday evening, a result of the treacherous road conditions caused by the snow and blowing snow that hammered southern Alberta.” . . . “Fire crews encountered approximately 100 vehicles, including large transport trucks, at the scene of a major multi-vehicle collision on the QEII Highway southbound near 40 Avenue on Wednesday amid severe winter weather, the City of Airdrie said.”
2. The required self evident hint for the presumptuous and the perpetually perplexed, harsh as it may be, states that: “Ignorance or overconfidence . . . would be the highest degree of stupidity and appears in people who take risks of any kind, although they lack the skills or knowledge necessary to face them.”
And where, “Intelligence and stupidity are not the opposite of one another, nor is stupidity the lack of intelligence, but intelligence is the product, more or less unsuccessful, of a continuous series of attempts to dominate, or escape, the stupidity that constitutes everything that is human”, cf. “The transportation minister, who appears to be a reasonably intelligent young man, . . . ”
3. “The typical outcomes are that small increases in speed tend to increase (in) fatalities and injuries at a higher rate than the speed increases,” said Robert Harper, president of the Alberta Motor Transport Association. “We’re dealing with physics.”
4. “Similarly, economic assessment shows unequivocally that the financial benefits of lower speeds and safer roads far outweigh the costs. If economic rationality were the driving force behind transport policy, speed limit reductions would be expanded rather than rolled back.”
https://theconversation.com/false-economies-the-evidence-shows-higher-speed-limits-dont-make-financial-sense-251138
On any given afternoon, whether turning left or right, it’s hard enough to get on to the #2 hi-way with the current speed limit. This new speed limit is incredibly dangerous and fool hardy, a lot of good people are going to get hurt.
Hope they improve the health care system because more people are going to need it. Higher speeds equal higher and worse injuries and that requires more surgeries, more rehab., more adaptive housing, more care homes, MORE MONEY. I’m sure the insurance companies will increase rates as settlements will have to be larger.
Give this speed increase is going to be on rural roads are they going to have more ambulances in rural areas with paramedics with advanced training or just going to let people die.
We know Alberta doesn’t have the brightest tools in their political tool shed but most people know how horrific high speed traffic accidents are. Some of the news stations in B.C. report them with pictures and estimated speed. Its pretty clear from the news, the higher the speed the greater number of deaths.
I also commented on their blatantly biased poll that this is one of the stupidest ideas the UCP has come up with yet, and that’s saying something. The vast majority of Alberta drivers are unsafe at current speed limits and are already doing at least 120 on major highways. Now they will be doing at least 130. I wonder if this is Marlaina’s sneaky way of punishing EMT’s.
If rasing the speed is okay, who is going to pay for accidents and more damages to vehicles, personal injuries, and yes even publicly owned property, and private property like fences or animals in Rural farm areas. The Insurance companies will surely say well more accidents , we will either be allowed higher premiums or we will leave Alberta as the government went ahead with higher speeds, but would not allow us to under their boards to increse the rates which even now are too high to go strategically higher than needed.