The comparison
| Jurisdiction | Tolerance published? | Latest camera/fine revenue | Where the money goes |
|---|---|---|---|
| NSW | No — most secretive | ~$275M (hist.); fell after signs returned | Community Road Safety Fund — ~$104M underspent |
| VIC | Yes — 2 km/h fixed / 3 km/h mobile | $473M (2023-24) | Better Roads Victoria Trust — but cameras run covert/unsigned |
| QLD | No | $464M gross, ~$337M net (2023-24) | Hypothecated (TORUM Act); majority from lowest-level fines |
| SA | No | 608,794 speed fines (2023-24) | Community Road Safety Fund |
| WA | No | $127M into RTTA (2022-23) | Road Trauma Trust Account — ~$120M sat unspent |
| TAS | No | $9.5M mobile cameras (to Oct 2024) | Consolidated — no dedicated fund (its own advisers want one) |
| ACT | No | ~$51M (2023-24) → ~$104M (2025-26) | Consolidated — no fund at all |
| NT | No | Not separately published | Consolidated — lightest enforcement, worst toll |
Sources on the Sources page. Only Victoria officially publishes its tolerance; every other jurisdiction keeps it confidential, arguing disclosure would create a de-facto higher limit. Demerit suspension is 12 points (13 in NSW).
The one damning fact per jurisdiction
NSW
Its "Community Road Safety Fund" has been underspent every year since 2019-20 — a ~$104M shortfall. A safety fund that isn't spent on safety is just a tax with a nicer name.
Victoria
The only state honest enough to publish its 2 km/h tolerance — and the one that runs its mobile cameras hidden and unsigned, "anywhere, anytime."
Queensland
More than half its speeding revenue comes from the lowest-level speeding band — the smallest overages, not the dangerous outliers.
South Australia
Ran a formal independent Speed Camera Audit of its own siting — an admission the question of "safety vs revenue" is live.
WA
The Auditor-General found ~$120M sitting unspent in the Road Trauma Trust Account, weak ministerial-approval records, and decade-long unevaluated projects.
Tasmania
Camera revenue goes to consolidated revenue — and the chair of the state's own Road Safety Advisory Council has publicly demanded it be ring-fenced.
ACT
A single mobile-phone camera gantry earns ~$1 million a month; fine revenue is set to double by 2026 — all into consolidated revenue, no road-safety fund.
NT
The outlier that breaks the spell: no phone cameras, no point-to-point cameras — and the highest road-death rate in the country. If cameras were the answer, the NT would be safest.
Sources: NSW & WA Auditor-General; QLD/VIC/SA/TAS/ACT/NT government & reporting — full list on Sources.
The tell across all eight
Read the table as a whole and the pattern is unmistakable. The jurisdictions "ring-fence" the money into road-safety funds — then leave tens or hundreds of millions unspent (NSW, WA). The ones that don't bother ring-fencing tip it into consolidated revenue and forecast it to grow (ACT). Only one publishes how it enforces (VIC) — and hides the cameras anyway. And the single place with almost no automated enforcement (NT) has the worst toll — which means the deaths are about roads, distances and infrastructure, not about whether a camera caught you 3 km/h over in a city.