Arguments for raising the UK motorway speed limit

[Lil'RedGTO]

According to a 2014 RAC Report, 67% of those surveyed admitted breaking the motorway speed limit. 70% of those surveyed were in favour of increasing the motorway speed limit to at least 80mph.

http://www.rac.co.uk/pdfs/report-on-motoring/rac-r...

Given those figures, increasing the motorway speed limit to 80mph should be a no-brainer for any politician, and the current Government did flirt seriously with the idea a couple of years ago before a change of Transport Minister appeared to put paid to the idea.

Given all that, it seems like it might be worthwhile writing to the relevant Minister, particularly after the upcoming election, just to remind him or her that there are people out there (of whom I am one) who would like to see this policy revived. I don’t really expect doing so will change anything, but it might act as some form of counterpoint to the loud voice of Brake on the topic, and might just make me feel a little better for having done something.

The question is, what are the points you would make when writing to the Minister urging him to consider increasing the motorway speed limit to 80mph?

Points against, ideally with rebuttals, also welcome.

[eybic]

I thought the greenies got this scrapped due to increased pollution both environmental and noise.

[mygoldfishbowl]

I agree there should be a voice to oppose the likes of brake but as someone who uses our motorways on a daily bases I wouldn't like to see the speed limit for cars raised, or dropped for that matter, from a mainly selfish point of view.

[Lil'RedGTO]

Can you explain why? For the avoidance of doubt, I am not proposing to set myself up as a one-man opposition to Brake. I'm just a citizen considering writing a letter to a politician.

[Esseesse]

The most likely reason that the motorway speed limit is raised is if it's felt necessary to harmonise our speed limits with the EU (yes I know they vary even there, but generally higher).

[Lil'RedGTO]

That would seem to be one of the arguments in favour. 81mph in Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, France, Germany (on restricted sections), Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia and the Ukraine, with a limit of 87mph in Poland. The only countries with limits at or lower than the UK are Albania, Cyprus, Georgia, Iceland, Latvia, the Netherlands, Norway, and Russia.

[agtlaw]

European motorways - commonly 130 or 120 kmh (80.8 / 74.6 mph).

Gemany - extensive motorway network with no limit - KSI stats only marginally worse than UK

In England, we had a 20 mph speed limit between 1903 and 1930. The limit was widely ignored and in 1930 it was abolished. Speaking in 1932, Lord Buckmaster said;

"I do not propose for a moment to reopen that old and vexed controversy. It is sufficient to say that the reason why the speed limit was abolished was not that anybody thought the abolition would tend to the greater security of foot passengers, but that the existing speed limit was so universally disobeyed that its maintenance brought the law into contempt. For that reason I was prepared to support the removal of the restriction. Nothing can be worse than that the law of this country should be universally disregarded and that courts of law should find themselves unable to secure its maintenance."

There were no speed limits on English motorways until 22nd December 1965 when a national speed limit of 70 mph was imposed - initially for a four month trial period. The trial period was extended and made permanent in 1967.

[Lil'RedGTO]

Another solid point. A law which is not respected by (if the RAC figures are to be believed) more than two thirds of those subject to it is untenable and its continuing presence on the statute book brings the whole of the law into disrepute.

[Bennet]

The solution seems extremely straight forward to me. Expensive though.

Make every motorway a managed one, with limits raised up to 90 or 100 when the traffic is light.

We'll get the dual benefits of the congestion reducing effects of managed motorways and increased speed when it's safe.

I don't want to see a blanket increase. There are enough pileups as it is, and the idiots will always be there.

[agtlaw]

Bennet said:

The solution seems extremely straight forward to me. Expensive though.

Make every motorway a managed one, with limits raised up to 90 or 100 when the traffic is light.

We'll get the dual benefits of the congestion reducing effects of managed motorways and increased speed when it's safe.

In Germany, the gantry speed limit signs indicate a speed limit / lower speed limit in adverse weather conditions. Plainly, that involves a cost.

[richcy]

Lil'RedGTO said:

That would seem to be one of the arguments in favour. 81mph in Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, France, Germany (on restricted sections), Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia and the Ukraine, with a limit of 87mph in Poland. The only countries with limits at or lower than the UK are Albania, Cyprus, Georgia, Iceland, Latvia, the Netherlands, Norway, and Russia.

Here in the Netherlands as of the end of 2012 (I believe) the default motorway speed limit was raised from 120 km/h to 130 km/h ;-)

[LoonR1]

agtlaw said:

European motorways - commonly 130 or 120 kmh (80.8 / 74.6 mph).

Gemany - extensive motorway network with no limit - KSI stats only marginally worse than UK

In England, we had a 20 mph speed limit between 1903 and 1930. The limit was widely ignored and in 1930 it was abolished. Speaking in 1932, Lord Buckmaster said;

"I do not propose for a moment to reopen that old and vexed controversy. It is sufficient to say that the reason why the speed limit was abolished was not that anybody thought the abolition would tend to the greater security of foot passengers, but that the existing speed limit was so universally disobeyed that its maintenance brought the law into contempt. For that reason I was prepared to support the removal of the restriction. Nothing can be worse than that the law of this country should be universally disregarded and that courts of law should find themselves unable to secure its maintenance."

There were no speed limits on English motorways until 22nd December 1965 when a national speed limit of 70 mph was imposed - initially for a four month trial period. The trial period was extended and made permanent in 1967.

Many autobahns do have speed limits though, although not federally set, there are big chunks with fixed limits which are rigidly enforced, ditto woth temporary limits for roadworks. I think it's about 40% that are permanently limited now.

[Lil'RedGTO]

richcy said:

Lil'RedGTO said:

That would seem to be one of the arguments in favour. 81mph in Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, France, Germany (on restricted sections), Greece, Hungary, Italy, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia and the Ukraine, with a limit of 87mph in Poland. The only countries with limits at or lower than the UK are Albania, Cyprus, Georgia, Iceland, Latvia, the Netherlands, Norway, and Russia.

Here in the Netherlands as of the end of 2012 (I believe) the default motorway speed limit was raised from 120 km/h to 130 km/h ;-)

That's interesting. I did not know that. A bit of googling suggests that they did a year long trial on eight stretches of Dutch motorway, which was presumably a success, although I can't readily see any reports of the formal results of that trial. It is often said that UK motorways are too congested to support higher limits but I doubt they are any more congested than Dutch motorways, given how densely populated the Netherlands is. I see that it is reported that the move was expected to shave around 1 per cent off journey times while raising an extra €50-€100 million a year for the government in fuel taxes. Rijkswaterstaat, the executive arm of the transport and infrastructure ministry, apparently calculated that the time savings were expected to boost the national economy by €75 million, and the Netherlands is a much smaller economy than the UK.

[agtlaw]

LoonR1 said:

Many autobahns do have speed limits though, although not federally set, there are big chunks with fixed limits which are rigidly enforced, ditto woth temporary limits for roadworks. I think it's about 40% that are permanently limited now.

Yes, some German motorways are not derestricted and they are very strict about temporary speed limits - possibly worth mentioning.

[richcy]

Lil'RedGTO said:

That's interesting. I did not know that. A bit of googling suggests that they did a year long trial on eight stretches of Dutch motorway, which was presumably a success, although I can't readily see any reports of the formal results of that trial. It is often said that UK motorways are too congested to support higher limits but I doubt they are any more congested than Dutch motorways, given how densely populated the Netherlands is. I see that it is reported that the move was expected to shave around 1 per cent off journey times while raising an extra €50-€100 million a year for the government in fuel taxes. Rijkswaterstaat, the executive arm of the transport and infrastructure ministry, apparently calculated that the time savings were expected to boost the national economy by €75 million, and the Netherlands is a much smaller economy than the UK.

I am in favour of increasing speed limits, Europe wide. I don't (personally) think it comes down to congestion ... you could arguably say this of any country. There have been plenty of times I have been on an unlimited stretch in Germany, and been stuck in traffic. There seems to be so much emphasis on speed. I (again personally) think just let people do what they want on certain stretches of highway. There are obviously times of the day where 'unlimited' is impossible, but, it doesn't mean and I don't mean to suggest that everyone them attempts to do 300 mph in a traffic jam. It all comes down to sensibility. when I visit the UK often my Dover > M25 drive is met with empty highways. Empty highways with nothing around me. I know in Germany, I adhere to all limits - they're there for a reason, right? But, when there is nothing around, and it's 3am, why not allow someone to do what they feel comfortable with? (and, like with the Dutch authorities, you see, it increases fuel revenue, more money for the national pot ... ;-)))

[richcy]

richcy said:

I am in favour of increasing speed limits, Europe wide. I don't (personally) think it comes down to congestion ... you could arguably say this of any country. There have been plenty of times I have been on an unlimited stretch in Germany, and been stuck in traffic. There seems to be so much emphasis on speed. I (again personally) think just let people do what they want on certain stretches of highway. There are obviously times of the day where 'unlimited' is impossible, but, it doesn't mean and I don't mean to suggest that everyone them attempts to do 300 mph in a traffic jam. It all comes down to sensibility. when I visit the UK often my Dover > M25 drive is met with empty highways. Empty highways with nothing around me. I know in Germany, I adhere to all limits - they're there for a reason, right? But, when there is nothing around, and it's 3am, why not allow someone to do what they feel comfortable with? (and, like with the Dutch authorities, you see, it increases fuel revenue, more money for the national pot ... ;-)))

And, forgot to say - when in Germany on an unlimited stretch, I am not driving 155 mph everywhere. Typically sit at around 100-110 mph. But, of course, drivers there expect you to be going that little bit faster which makes it that bit safer.

[Type R Tom]

Lil'RedGTO said:

Another solid point. A law which is not respected by (if the RAC figures are to be believed) more than two thirds of those subject to it is untenable and its continuing presence on the statute book brings the whole of the law into disrepute.

I don't think that is a workable, there are quite a few illegal activities out there committed by millions of people, doesn't mean that it should be dropped.

[Jasandjules]

Type R Tom said:

I don't think that is a workable, there are quite a few illegal activities out there committed by millions of people, doesn't mean that it should be dropped.

Actually it does, if you subscribe the majoritarian view of democracy.

[tapereel]

Lil'RedGTO said:

According to a 2014 RAC Report, 67% of those surveyed admitted breaking the motorway speed limit. 70% of those surveyed were in favour of increasing the motorway speed limit to at least 80mph.

http://www.rac.co.uk/pdfs/report-on-motoring/rac-r...

Given those figures, increasing the motorway speed limit to 80mph should be a no-brainer for any politician, and the current Government did flirt seriously with the idea a couple of years ago before a change of Transport Minister appeared to put paid to the idea.

Given all that, it seems like it might be worthwhile writing to the relevant Minister, particularly after the upcoming election, just to remind him or her that there are people out there (of whom I am one) who would like to see this policy revived. I don’t really expect doing so will change anything, but it might act as some form of counterpoint to the loud voice of Brake on the topic, and might just make me feel a little better for having done something.

The question is, what are the points you would make when writing to the Minister urging him to consider increasing the motorway speed limit to 80mph?

Points against, ideally with rebuttals, also welcome.

Maybe you could just add in your real opinions on the limit; see this from Oct 2014:

Lil'RedGTO said:

mybrainhurts said:

Blakewater said:

If we lifted motorway speed limits tomorrow there would be lots of people thinking they can max out their cars and do 200mph carving through traffic doing 50mph.

I'd be interested to see your research. Or is that just your opinion?

Just my opinion, but I reckon it's more likely many people would do over the ton once, decide that it was a bit stressful and too bad on fuel consumption, and settle back down to a steady 80-90mph, much like some do now, but without being criminalised.

[Kawasicki]

Jasandjules said:

Type R Tom said:

I don't think that is a workable, there are quite a few illegal activities out there committed by millions of people, doesn't mean that it should be dropped.

Actually it does, if you subscribe the majoritarian view of democracy.

I'm confused by this too. If most people brake a law, why does the law exist?