With regard to the "Proposal to change the categorisation of the road and the Roads Act", published on the portal on 07.09.2016 and marked as "Proposal accepted and closed", I note that the categorisation of the national road H6 is still unchanged, despite a different announcement by the competent ministry.
Has the recategorisation been rejected by the Government of the Republic of Slovenia, which is responsible for the categorisation of national roads, or has it not been proposed by the Ministry at all and is the initiative still valid?
The initiative to add a supplementary sign to the sign "ROADS FOR MOTOR VEHICLES", indicating a maximum speed of 90 km/h, was rejected by the competent ministry. This was on the grounds that an additional speed limit, which would apply only on ROADS RESERVED FOR MOTOR VEHICLES, would cause ADDITIONAL CONFUSION among drivers. By "additional confusion" they probably meant the confusion they themselves had caused by their unprofessional drafting of the rules: the Road Act still uses the term "road reserved for motor vehicles" for the purpose for which they are used, while the Traffic Signals Regulations rename the same roads as "roads designated for motor vehicles".
I propose that the competent ministry harmonise the terminology of the regulations by uniformly using the term "roads reserved for motor vehicles" (with a different speed limit (90 km/h) than the one that has been in force for more than half a century on such roads reserved for motor vehicles (100 km/h) and that is subconsciously held by drivers).
I further propose that the Road Act be amended in a fast-track procedure as regards the solutions relating to municipal roads, in particular the protection of municipal roads. The fact is that all the municipal road ordinances issued after the entry into force of the new Roads Act are PROTISONED, since this Act has taken away most of the powers of municipal road authorities. I propose that the competent Ministry, in the context of its obligation to monitor the legality of acts falling within the competence of local authorities, should first establish how many such unlawful acts there are and in how many articles on average they are incompatible with the Roads Act, and that it should inform the public of this in its response to this initiative. And also how, if it has, or how it will take action in this case, to avoid the legality of municipal road ordinances being reviewed by the Constitutional Court.