Speed limits may rise
Discussion
Speed limits may rise 10mph in local road rethink
DIPESH GADHER TRANSPORT CORRESPONDENT
THE government has ordered a review of speed limits on most of Britain’s roads in an attempt to win back the confidence of motorists. The move is likely to result in hundreds of local speed limits being raised on accident-free roads, but lowered to 20mph in more sensitive areas, such as around schools.
In potentially the biggest shake-up of speed limits for a decade, the Department for Transport is to issue new guidelines to local authorities urging them to set threshholds at “appropriate” levels.
Ministers acknowledge that many drivers feel they are being unnecessarily penalised for speeding, and believe it would be fairer for limits to be raised by 10mph on certain 30, 40 and 50mph roads.
However, raising the limit on motorways above the current 70mph has been ruled out. Government research is said to indicate such an increase would lead to more accidents.
“I want all councils to be reviewing all speed limits because nothing brings a speed limit into disrepute more than drivers feeling that it’s entirely inappropriate for the circumstances,” said Stephen Ladyman, the road safety minister.
“An indication that that might be the case . . . is where there are lots of (people being caught) speeding on a particular road and no evidence of any accidents.”
Ladyman said he wanted to “strike a deal” with motorists who have become increasingly sceptical about speed cameras. More than 2m drivers received speeding fines last year compared with 260,000 in 1996.
Many drivers are caught out by speed limits chopping and changing along the same road.
“One of the problems we have with getting motorists to obey speed limits is that they don’t believe that some of the lower speed limits are necessary and they think they were put in place years ago and have never been reviewed,” said Ladyman.
“In order to regain motorists’ confidence, I want to strike a deal with them. I am expecting that this will mean some speed limits will be adjusted downwards, but some will be adjusted upwards.”
Local authorities control 98% of the country’s roads, including B-roads and some A-roads, but not motorways, which come under the remit of the Highways Agency.
It will be down to individual councils to implement any changes to speed limits in consultation with the police. The changes are expected to take place over several years.
More 20mph zones, particularly around schools in residential areas, are likely to be created as a result of the transport department guidelines, which will be issued this autumn.
By contrast, historical speed limits could be raised on “free-flowing” roads where layout has been improved or where traffic conditions have changed over time.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1807839,00.html
DIPESH GADHER TRANSPORT CORRESPONDENT
THE government has ordered a review of speed limits on most of Britain’s roads in an attempt to win back the confidence of motorists. The move is likely to result in hundreds of local speed limits being raised on accident-free roads, but lowered to 20mph in more sensitive areas, such as around schools.
In potentially the biggest shake-up of speed limits for a decade, the Department for Transport is to issue new guidelines to local authorities urging them to set threshholds at “appropriate” levels.
Ministers acknowledge that many drivers feel they are being unnecessarily penalised for speeding, and believe it would be fairer for limits to be raised by 10mph on certain 30, 40 and 50mph roads.
However, raising the limit on motorways above the current 70mph has been ruled out. Government research is said to indicate such an increase would lead to more accidents.
“I want all councils to be reviewing all speed limits because nothing brings a speed limit into disrepute more than drivers feeling that it’s entirely inappropriate for the circumstances,” said Stephen Ladyman, the road safety minister.
“An indication that that might be the case . . . is where there are lots of (people being caught) speeding on a particular road and no evidence of any accidents.”
Ladyman said he wanted to “strike a deal” with motorists who have become increasingly sceptical about speed cameras. More than 2m drivers received speeding fines last year compared with 260,000 in 1996.
Many drivers are caught out by speed limits chopping and changing along the same road.
“One of the problems we have with getting motorists to obey speed limits is that they don’t believe that some of the lower speed limits are necessary and they think they were put in place years ago and have never been reviewed,” said Ladyman.
“In order to regain motorists’ confidence, I want to strike a deal with them. I am expecting that this will mean some speed limits will be adjusted downwards, but some will be adjusted upwards.”
Local authorities control 98% of the country’s roads, including B-roads and some A-roads, but not motorways, which come under the remit of the Highways Agency.
It will be down to individual councils to implement any changes to speed limits in consultation with the police. The changes are expected to take place over several years.
More 20mph zones, particularly around schools in residential areas, are likely to be created as a result of the transport department guidelines, which will be issued this autumn.
By contrast, historical speed limits could be raised on “free-flowing” roads where layout has been improved or where traffic conditions have changed over time.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1807839,00.html
Mon Ami Mate said:
...
“In order to regain motorists’ confidence, I want to strike a deal with them. I am expecting that this will mean some speed limits will be adjusted downwards, but some will be adjusted upwards.”
....
Regain confidence by imposing more speed limits. Oh, dear. The ones that will be adjusted upwards will no doubt be the ones that had stupid limits imposed by them in the first place! For example this silly 30MPH though village rule, YUP fine if build up near school etc. But these 30's in the middle of nowhere with sod all around them except a cow and maybe a sheep. but its now within the bounds of 'A' village. Oh and now all the old villages seem to be creeping out of the woodwork some you never heard of as you thought it was part of a main town. Also don't you find after a while you get confused and cannot remember if its a 30,40 or 50 limit.
Sorry rant over......I will keep taking the tablets.
Mon Ami Mate said:
However, raising the limit on motorways above the current 70mph has been ruled out. Government research is said to indicate such an increase would lead to more accidents.
What data?
Every safe driver that I know does at least 80.
Mon Ami Mate said:
“In order to regain motorists’ confidence, I want to strike a deal with them. I am expecting that this will mean some speed limits will be adjusted downwards, but some will be adjusted upwards.”
Who else thinks this means a few token speed limit changes and a massive expansion of not only 20 mph limits, but also inappropriate 30 ones.
You ahve got to remember that Labour has no interest in road safety they wish only to make the Motorist's life a misery as part of their twisted ideology.
Absolutely NO limits will be adjusted upwards.
Perhaps apart from a very public token few.
The problem is that local councils are going to be allowed to do this. They are populated with both officers and elected officials who are anti-speed. The elected ones because they are worried that if they raise a speed limit and there's an accident they'll be voted out by outraged Mums! (Who speed anyway - but lets not let the breathtaking hypocrisy get in the way, eh?)
No. This is just more political bullshit that means little.
Now. If they disbanded the SCPs, took control of the local roads off the councils and handed to the Highways people - that might be a start. Oh: and then got Highways to reset every speed limit in the country from scratch. If they did that I might believe them...
Perhaps apart from a very public token few.
The problem is that local councils are going to be allowed to do this. They are populated with both officers and elected officials who are anti-speed. The elected ones because they are worried that if they raise a speed limit and there's an accident they'll be voted out by outraged Mums! (Who speed anyway - but lets not let the breathtaking hypocrisy get in the way, eh?)
No. This is just more political bullshit that means little.
Now. If they disbanded the SCPs, took control of the local roads off the councils and handed to the Highways people - that might be a start. Oh: and then got Highways to reset every speed limit in the country from scratch. If they did that I might believe them...
ladyboy said:
“One of the problems we have with getting motorists to obey speed limits is that they don’t believe that some of the lower speed limits are necessary and they think they were put in place years ago and have never been reviewed,” said Ladyman.
Thats not true is it??
I don't have a problem with the speed limits that were imposed years ago! It is the ones that have been imposed recently that seem to be the problem!
By the aforementioned anti-speed buggers.
Its funny isnt it. The cry of the average man against speed cameras is "they dont put them outside schools". Which is correct, but there lies a problem. Statistically, there is little point in putting them outside schools as the roads surrounding them are not busy for 70% of the day. During the 30% when they are busy, they are so busy that the average speed drops to such a low number that deaths and injuries outside schools are very low - just think of all of the parents dropping their kids off, teachers getting into the car park and lots of kids walking down the pavements.... its pretty logical really. So if they did put a speed camera there, it wouldnt actually get that many convictions during this peak and potentially dangerous time. What they would end up with is a bunch load of convictions of drivers at times when the road is empty and not at all dangerous - hardly good for the PR....
BUT, this reality is completely different to the reduction of speed limits to 20MPH. There is no consistency, no commonality and certainly no common sense used here. Someone in the council planning department thinks it a good idea so its now 20MPH - but the local SCP wouldnt put a speed camera there because its just statistically not dangerous....
Just goes to show that no one "in power" has the faintest idea how to do this - bloody depressing....
BUT, this reality is completely different to the reduction of speed limits to 20MPH. There is no consistency, no commonality and certainly no common sense used here. Someone in the council planning department thinks it a good idea so its now 20MPH - but the local SCP wouldnt put a speed camera there because its just statistically not dangerous....
Just goes to show that no one "in power" has the faintest idea how to do this - bloody depressing....
Mon Ami Mate said:
However, raising the limit on motorways above the current 70mph has been ruled out. Government research is said to indicate such an increase would lead to more accidents.
Doh. I think it would be a good idea if the law reflected modern day reality.
The 70 mph limit has been widely ignored for years, leading to little or no change in the number of accidents.
In fact, only 5-10 % of all car crashes happen in the 70 mph limit sections.
In practice, as many serving police officers on this gassing station have indicated, 90 mph is the speed at which they start to take an interest in speeding.
How about setting the limit at 80 mph for a year or two ?
Time is money - making faster journeys is cheaper.
This just seems like a(nother) half-arsed attempt by the gov. to regain favour from a (rather large) constituency from which it has lost favour for so long.
The revision of a few sites? Not good enough. The entire country should be up for speed limit review. Pardon my cynicism, but I recon we'll see a large increase in 20 zones (littered with scams) and a miniscule increase in all others. And why not the increase on motorways? Why can't we have a limit increase on the safest roads in our country?
edit: just to say: Ladyman? Nice name you have there Sir or should I say Madam?
>> Edited by _VTEC_ on Sunday 2nd October 13:27
The revision of a few sites? Not good enough. The entire country should be up for speed limit review. Pardon my cynicism, but I recon we'll see a large increase in 20 zones (littered with scams) and a miniscule increase in all others. And why not the increase on motorways? Why can't we have a limit increase on the safest roads in our country?
edit: just to say: Ladyman? Nice name you have there Sir or should I say Madam?
>> Edited by _VTEC_ on Sunday 2nd October 13:27
I'm as cynical as the rest of you about the governments motives and intentions. But it doesn't seem fair to speculate about what you *think* they would do, and then condemn them for it.
Something I found interesting is that the government seem to have brought forward their plans for road use charging on the basis that they didn't get a huge backlash when they proposed it. From my perspective I saw a widespread reaction which was almost universally negative, with just a few people saying fair enough if you also reduce fuel duty (yeah, that'll happen
). So how are they getting their feedback? It clearly isn't from people like us.
Something I found interesting is that the government seem to have brought forward their plans for road use charging on the basis that they didn't get a huge backlash when they proposed it. From my perspective I saw a widespread reaction which was almost universally negative, with just a few people saying fair enough if you also reduce fuel duty (yeah, that'll happen
). So how are they getting their feedback? It clearly isn't from people like us.GreenV8S said:
I'm as cynical as the rest of you about the governments motives and intentions. But it doesn't seem fair to speculate about what you *think* they would do, and then condemn them for it.
Something I found interesting is that the government seem to have brought forward their plans for road use charging on the basis that they didn't get a huge backlash when they proposed it. From my perspective I saw a widespread reaction which was almost universally negative, with just a few people saying fair enough if you also reduce fuel duty (yeah, that'll happen
It's pretty certain that the "speed limit increases" will be a weak but much trumpeted move based on "the people's wishes", haven't we seen these sort of tactics for the last 8 years? The limits have done nothing but reduce, now they say they will increase. Anyone thinking Labour will actually reverse their anti-car stance is a candidate for the old three-card trick (this comment isn't aimed at Green V8S or anyone else in particular).
With regard to your comment on road charging; in case no-one's noticed, Blair has a bit of a reputation for not listening (while pretending the opposite), so of course Labour spin will be such that they have "listened to people's concerns and are addressing the problem etc etc". It's just that they seem to listen to whoever is saying what they want to hear.
As an example of typical Labouresque "listening", take the London congestion charge zone which is to be doubled in size by Ken Livingstone, despite protests by business groups and the council whose residents will find themselves inside it.
So they cancel the new 50 on the A421 Bicester to Buckingham road will they? I think not. Its a political decision, not a road safety one - its to make you go via the A43 and keep traffic on the trunk routes. This happens all over the place.
The A421 is a lovelly road where travelling at your own discretion between 40 and the national speed limit could not be more appropriate and they are going to spoil it with a 50 so that half the time you be risking your licence doing something entirely safe that until last month was also entirely legal. Tw@ts.
The A421 is a lovelly road where travelling at your own discretion between 40 and the national speed limit could not be more appropriate and they are going to spoil it with a 50 so that half the time you be risking your licence doing something entirely safe that until last month was also entirely legal. Tw@ts.
This is timing, after the Labour party conferance there was nothing good to say, except that an old guy gets a kicking for shouting rubbish!
This week the tories have their party conferance I would bet a tenner they were planning on using the speed fines, milking the motorists as a headline grabber, now ladyboy has stolen their thunder with no intention of anything changing at all, and thye will be able to blame the councils. Smoke and mirrors anyone?
This week the tories have their party conferance I would bet a tenner they were planning on using the speed fines, milking the motorists as a headline grabber, now ladyboy has stolen their thunder with no intention of anything changing at all, and thye will be able to blame the councils. Smoke and mirrors anyone?
mojocvh said:
[quote=YamR1,V64motion]
the limit on motorways could easily go up to 90 or maybe even 100 without been much more unsafe, everyone does 85 ish most of the time anyway.
m6 cumbria 75+ and your knicked.[/quote]
that sucks,down here 80-85 and they dont even bother to pull you over
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff