So you're basically just having a whine at rail accreditation processes apparently crippling the rail network and in some sort of deluded revenge want to wrap the road network in red tape too - well doesn't that just make perfect sense.
a/ Trucks are relatively safe to km travelled
b/ Adequate compliance measures already exist for roads
c/ If there are equity issues with bureaucracy it needs to be solved with less, not more
Yes, I most definately am having a darn good whine / whinge or however you want to describe it, but not in the way you are framing it. My issue is not just simply with the excessive bureaucratic zeal that accreditation obligations are piled on the rail industry, but the completely inequitable manner it is applied across the rail and road modes, considering the relative risk pertinent to the two modes.
The inequitable nature of the application of regulatory constraints to rail vs road is completely counter-intuitive to the relative public risk of both modes. So whilst the intent of regulation is to protect workers and the public, it pretty much achieves the objective with rail, which was already a low risk transport mode (whilst in the process arguably going over the top), whilst in response to the demonstrated poor performing heavy road sector, virtually abrogates any responsibility whatsoever. It is illogical to have a relatively safe mode regulated to within an inch of its existence whilst a high risk mode is allowed to get away with murder (literally).
Additionally, this isn't just a matter of "Oh, the bad govt dept is picking on me (rail), boo hoo, pick on him (road), for a change". The imbalance in regulatory burdens skews the relative economic outcomes for both modes in a way that doesn't serve the public interest. And no, that DOESNT make perfect sense.
As for your last points; a] " relatively safe to the kms travelled" ? By what measure? Cars? certainly not any other transport mode thats for sure! b] "adequete compliance measures already exist for roads"? Rubbish. Even if they did, they are routinely ignored. The rate of occurrences of overloading, poor load retention, unroadworthy vehicles, fatigue through excessive hours, drugs, record tampering, speeding and all manner of other driving offences belie such a ludicrous claim - and - c] "equity issues....solved with less not more" well half right. What is needed is BALANCE and appropriate regulation for the risk. If the heavy road industry (and I mean heavy road - thats articulated and multi-articulated - not your average mid sized delivery truck) regulation was brought up to even half to three quarters that which rail is required to comply with, the reductions in truck caused road truama would be reduced considerably (to maybe match that of rail).