Numpty-filled local councils
Discussion
Just having returned to Cheadle Hulme for Easter, I noticed a copy of 'Keeping In Touch', our local Lib Dem paper which reminds us of what's going on in our constituency. Their 'Transport Policy' section makes me sick: It turns out that NONE of our local MPs (probably a central office requirement) are drivers. They say that this gives them a 'better perspective' on the 'normal commuters', yet I turned out of the end of my road this morning to discover speed humps were being placed on an adjoining cul-de-sac - yes, a cul-de-sac. I've also noticed that '40' speed limit signs have been removed in the local area (next to '60' zones), but the scameras have stayed.
To rub salt into the filler cap, we got a questionnaire through a week later concerning local transport policy, featuring sections on Buses and availability of cycle lanes. The only thing in it relating to cars was 'do you find that traffic congestion prevents buses from running on time'. No doubt these will be filled in by local boot-lickers, and we'll have to put up with more lunacy.
Have other members experienced similar pig-ignorance in relation to so-called 'transport' policy from their local councils? Across all parties?
What makes this ludicrously anti-car (ie anti-real world practicality) stance more worrying is that I noticed in a copy of the T.E.S. that an 'anti-car' section has wormed it's way into the national curriculum! Where are the informed petrolheads of tomorrow if they are indoctrinated before they can drive?
To rub salt into the filler cap, we got a questionnaire through a week later concerning local transport policy, featuring sections on Buses and availability of cycle lanes. The only thing in it relating to cars was 'do you find that traffic congestion prevents buses from running on time'. No doubt these will be filled in by local boot-lickers, and we'll have to put up with more lunacy.
Have other members experienced similar pig-ignorance in relation to so-called 'transport' policy from their local councils? Across all parties?
What makes this ludicrously anti-car (ie anti-real world practicality) stance more worrying is that I noticed in a copy of the T.E.S. that an 'anti-car' section has wormed it's way into the national curriculum! Where are the informed petrolheads of tomorrow if they are indoctrinated before they can drive?
Just having returned to Cheadle Hulme for Easter, I noticed a copy of 'Keeping In Touch', our local Lib Dem paper which reminds us of what's going on in our constituency. Their 'Transport Policy' section makes me sick: It turns out that NONE of our local MPs (probably a central office requirement) are drivers. They say that this gives them a 'better perspective' on the 'normal commuters', yet I turned out of the end of my road this morning to discover speed humps were being placed on an adjoining cul-de-sac - yes, a cul-de-sac. I've also noticed that '40' speed limit signs have been removed in the local area (next to '60' zones), but the scameras have stayed.
To rub salt into the filler cap, we got a questionnaire through a week later concerning local transport policy, featuring sections on Buses and availability of cycle lanes. The only thing in it relating to cars was 'do you find that traffic congestion prevents buses from running on time'. No doubt these will be filled in by local boot-lickers, and we'll have to put up with more lunacy.
Have other members experienced similar pig-ignorance in relation to so-called 'transport' policy from their local councils? Across all parties?
What makes this ludicrously anti-car (ie anti-real world practicality) stance more worrying is that I noticed in a copy of the T.E.S. that an 'anti-car' section has wormed it's way into the national curriculum! Where are the informed petrolheads of tomorrow if they are indoctrinated before they can drive?
snap
Try talking to a traffic planner, face to face.
Deep breaths first, then repeat several times "I must NOT strangle this man..............."
Tackled one at a preliminarly consultation for traffic calming, held in the local junior school.
Planner on hand, tut-tutting young mothers and one smug engineering graduate, sucking on bio-yogurt.
Let's try this....."do you ever consider patients in ambulances when you lay humps?" (quiet at the back...)
"We always consult the ambulance service"
"Yes you do, they always object......you always ignore them"
Stony silence, shocked look, mothers gasp, greenie engineer looks cross...........
"Well, we've got to do something"
"Why?"
"Speeding cars"
"What makes you think that?" (went to school here, 45 years ago....I know more than he does)
"We did a survey"........condescending smirk.
"What did it show?"
"Average speed 40mph"
"When?"
"24 hours a day, 7 days a week"
"What about school times?"
"Don't know about that" Bites tongue, thinks "bugger, fell for that"
"So you don't really know if there's a problem?" (There isn't, volume of traffic and kids at school time slows traffic to a crawl)
Pointy finger...."Well, what would YOU do?"
"If I had to do something, I'd put in pelican crossings"
"We find that, if they're not used all day long, drivers just ignore them"
"Do you worry about unsafe cars driving about after being damaged by humps?"
Enter cocky graduate engineer....."if you drive over humps at an appropriate speed, I can tell you that modern cars cannot be damaged. I've got an engineering degreee. You must be driving too fast"
........Stifle the urge to insert his yogurt in a sticky place............
Traffic planner perks up......"we don't HAVE to use humps, we can build pinch points"
"Do you ever worry about head-on collisions? If 2 cars collide at 20, it's like driving into a concrete block at 40"
"Oh, no, it doesn't work like that....." sneers cocky engineer.
Let's ignore that one.........
"What's the casualty record here?"
"16 casualties"
"When?"
"Over five years"
"How bad?"
(looking sheepish) "one serious, biker, 15 slight"
"How many child pedestrians?"
"err.....seven"
"Causes?"
"err.....three walked out from behind a bus"
"How many due to speeding vehicles?"
"err.......don't know"
Indignant mum......"We've got to do something, the cars just won't stop"
"Humps won't stop cars, you need pelican crossings"
"But they don't work..............." says traffic planner, looking confused...........
So there you have it. Absolutely no evidence that speed is a problem. A few bruised legs over 5 years.
BUT WE MUST DO SOMETHING.
Why? To further the cause of political correctness........and give traffic planners something to do, in order to justify their existence.
Which is a bit odd because, when I chased up details of the speed survey yesterday, I was told that they're all on leave..........but there might be a copy in another office......where the consultants are working on the design of the scheme.
Consultants? CONSULTANTS????
What the hell do we pay traffic planners for...???
I say....
....the lot of 'em. Now. Today. Before they return from leave. Or sooner. Where's the cat..............
Deep breaths first, then repeat several times "I must NOT strangle this man..............."
Tackled one at a preliminarly consultation for traffic calming, held in the local junior school.
Planner on hand, tut-tutting young mothers and one smug engineering graduate, sucking on bio-yogurt.
Let's try this....."do you ever consider patients in ambulances when you lay humps?" (quiet at the back...)
"We always consult the ambulance service"
"Yes you do, they always object......you always ignore them"
Stony silence, shocked look, mothers gasp, greenie engineer looks cross...........
"Well, we've got to do something"
"Why?"
"Speeding cars"
"What makes you think that?" (went to school here, 45 years ago....I know more than he does)
"We did a survey"........condescending smirk.
"What did it show?"
"Average speed 40mph"
"When?"
"24 hours a day, 7 days a week"
"What about school times?"
"Don't know about that" Bites tongue, thinks "bugger, fell for that"
"So you don't really know if there's a problem?" (There isn't, volume of traffic and kids at school time slows traffic to a crawl)
Pointy finger...."Well, what would YOU do?"
"If I had to do something, I'd put in pelican crossings"
"We find that, if they're not used all day long, drivers just ignore them"
"Do you worry about unsafe cars driving about after being damaged by humps?"
Enter cocky graduate engineer....."if you drive over humps at an appropriate speed, I can tell you that modern cars cannot be damaged. I've got an engineering degreee. You must be driving too fast"
........Stifle the urge to insert his yogurt in a sticky place............
Traffic planner perks up......"we don't HAVE to use humps, we can build pinch points"
"Do you ever worry about head-on collisions? If 2 cars collide at 20, it's like driving into a concrete block at 40"
"Oh, no, it doesn't work like that....." sneers cocky engineer.
Let's ignore that one.........
"What's the casualty record here?"
"16 casualties"
"When?"
"Over five years"
"How bad?"
(looking sheepish) "one serious, biker, 15 slight"
"How many child pedestrians?"
"err.....seven"
"Causes?"
"err.....three walked out from behind a bus"
"How many due to speeding vehicles?"
"err.......don't know"
Indignant mum......"We've got to do something, the cars just won't stop"
"Humps won't stop cars, you need pelican crossings"
"But they don't work..............." says traffic planner, looking confused...........
So there you have it. Absolutely no evidence that speed is a problem. A few bruised legs over 5 years.
BUT WE MUST DO SOMETHING.
Why? To further the cause of political correctness........and give traffic planners something to do, in order to justify their existence.
Which is a bit odd because, when I chased up details of the speed survey yesterday, I was told that they're all on leave..........but there might be a copy in another office......where the consultants are working on the design of the scheme.
Consultants? CONSULTANTS????
What the hell do we pay traffic planners for...???
I say....
....the lot of 'em. Now. Today. Before they return from leave. Or sooner. Where's the cat.............. Picked up a copy of the Torygraph this morning to be confronted by an article in the motoring section about the Government's definition of 'necessary journeys'. Under the title of the Transport and Social Exclusion (how appropriate) report, it states that the 'socially excluded' (disabled, low-income, unemployed etc) are only justified public investment in transport when their journeys are absolutely necessary. They now want to know WHY you want to travel, not where or in what time. To Quote Austin Williams:
"On the basis of this policy paper, instead of providing a decent public transport network so that people can make individual choices about how, when and where they travel, the Government will now say that unless your trip is to an officially designated key service then certain transport provision will recieve lower assistance. Travel by the socially excluded, for pleasure, spontaneous desire, or just to be sociable, will be deemed, by implication, to be inessential"
If this isn't the rumblings of neo-totalitarian control of movement, then what is?
At the moment this scheme covers just public transport, but as far as I can see, knowing this government - or any at the moment - it won't be long before this new 'initiative' reaches cars too, and we won't be able to get anywhere that Big Tony and the Drive Police won't allow us access to on 'essential' grounds, unless, like your organic yoghurt-slurping acquaintance, you embrace New Labour impracticality and go on holiday (no doubt an 'inessential' journey) by micro-scooter.
"On the basis of this policy paper, instead of providing a decent public transport network so that people can make individual choices about how, when and where they travel, the Government will now say that unless your trip is to an officially designated key service then certain transport provision will recieve lower assistance. Travel by the socially excluded, for pleasure, spontaneous desire, or just to be sociable, will be deemed, by implication, to be inessential"
If this isn't the rumblings of neo-totalitarian control of movement, then what is?
At the moment this scheme covers just public transport, but as far as I can see, knowing this government - or any at the moment - it won't be long before this new 'initiative' reaches cars too, and we won't be able to get anywhere that Big Tony and the Drive Police won't allow us access to on 'essential' grounds, unless, like your organic yoghurt-slurping acquaintance, you embrace New Labour impracticality and go on holiday (no doubt an 'inessential' journey) by micro-scooter.
Interesting piece in our local parish magazine this week. An open letter from the head teachers of the two local primary schools - pleading with parents not to park in the roads/lanes approaching the schools, and in fact to leave the car at home. There have been numerous near misses and the occasional minor shunt - my own daughter was knocked over a couple of years ago by a wayward mother in her MPV outside the school gates, trying to control her kids in the back.
Their double parking is illegal as emergency vehicles can't reach the school and as the road outside is a cul-de-sac parents use the school playground to turn round, further endangering their own children. This is the second time parents have been warned but the problem has actually gotton worse - the Police will now be patrolling to issue some 'friendly advice'.
I would speculate that if you actually break down the accident statistics, you will find that most are caused by the parents themselves dropping off/picking up, confirmed by my own mother who was a primary school teacher for 20 years.
Their double parking is illegal as emergency vehicles can't reach the school and as the road outside is a cul-de-sac parents use the school playground to turn round, further endangering their own children. This is the second time parents have been warned but the problem has actually gotton worse - the Police will now be patrolling to issue some 'friendly advice'.
I would speculate that if you actually break down the accident statistics, you will find that most are caused by the parents themselves dropping off/picking up, confirmed by my own mother who was a primary school teacher for 20 years.
v8thunder said: Picked up a copy of the Torygraph this morning to be confronted by an article in the motoring section about the Government's definition of 'necessary journeys'. Under the title of the Transport and Social Exclusion (how appropriate) report, it states that the 'socially excluded' (disabled, low-income, unemployed etc) are only justified public investment in transport when their journeys are absolutely necessary. They now want to know WHY you want to travel, not where or in what time. To Quote Austin Williams:
"On the basis of this policy paper, instead of providing a decent public transport network so that people can make individual choices about how, when and where they travel, the Government will now say that unless your trip is to an officially designated key service then certain transport provision will recieve lower assistance. Travel by the socially excluded, for pleasure, spontaneous desire, or just to be sociable, will be deemed, by implication, to be inessential"
If this isn't the rumblings of neo-totalitarian control of movement, then what is?
At the moment this scheme covers just public transport, but as far as I can see, knowing this government - or any at the moment - it won't be long before this new 'initiative' reaches cars too, and we won't be able to get anywhere that Big Tony and the Drive Police won't allow us access to on 'essential' grounds, unless, like your organic yoghurt-slurping acquaintance, you embrace New Labour impracticality and go on holiday (no doubt an 'inessential' journey) by micro-scooter.
You are joking ?
>> Edited by DennisTheMenace on Sunday 30th March 02:11
That's it. I'm going into politics.
I'm going in on the "Common Sense" ticket, coupled with the "I'm not anti-car I'm anti-idiot" slogan.
Jesus. How come these lentil-munching, salad-eating, sandal wearing, cotton-wool-between-the-ears, I'm all-right-jack, bunch of evil-doers ever get into any kind of position of responsibility is beyond me.
Time to do something.
Now...how do I become a councillor......
I'm going in on the "Common Sense" ticket, coupled with the "I'm not anti-car I'm anti-idiot" slogan.
Jesus. How come these lentil-munching, salad-eating, sandal wearing, cotton-wool-between-the-ears, I'm all-right-jack, bunch of evil-doers ever get into any kind of position of responsibility is beyond me.
Time to do something.
Now...how do I become a councillor......
Don said:...., coupled with the "I'm not anti-car I'm anti-idiot" slogan.
Now...how do I become a councillor......
Ask the Garbage man
. Alternatively make sure that you have good hair and surround yourself with really intelligent people to make the policies. Oh and always remember 'You won't survive by your wits alone'.
Don said:
Now...how do I become a councillor......
If you are serious you need to join the local political party, get yourself noticed and then get chosen to run for a particular seat.
In other words no chance because you are sensible and do not spout the standard political crap. You may be able to stand as an independent but I think you require to pay a deposit or something like that. Talk to the local council (employees, not elected representatives)
s2ooz said: "err.....three walked out from behind a bus"
so the REAL fault is buses are too big, and have serious blind spots!! so ban buses!!
Amen to that! I live in semi rural Derbyshire and the number of accidents/near misses and damage to property caused by humingous great busses on tiny country roads is unbelievable.
Why they don't just run minibusses which can do 20mpg I will never know.
I mean, I've never seen more than 4 people on the bus and often there is nobody but the driver. Yet we have to have some huge Leyland Daf Optare Charabank thingy pounding up and down the lanes crushing cyclists, knocking down dry stone walls, forces oncoming traffic into hedges, and all at 6mpg!
I was told that Derbyshire won't license the use of Minibusses for public transport. Dunno if thats true, but I know they allow it in Devon and the impact is fantastic. Instead of a few big expensive to run lumbering old busses offering a crap infrequent service you get lots of smaller, nippier busses offering a decent service more safely. Result? more people use the bus, congestion is lessened. Car drivers, passengers, bus company, residents and everyone I cannot think of right now is happy!
Derbyshire? Bunch of stupid PC unthinking morons!
Andy 400se
You don't have to be tied to a political party to become a Councillor, you can stand for election as an Independent.
Unfortunately it isn't the Councillors who "design" all these stupid systems but their "officers", planners?highway engineers etc, many straight out of Uni with no real knowledge of "how to gan on".
The councillors in most cases rubber stamp their ideas but 'cos the average councillor is often more used to hewin' coal/running an employment agency/working in a cafe (no offence) then they have no real idea about traffic & accidents unless they have been in one. The only listen to the whingers and ask the officers to do some thing about it.
Speaking as an ex council engineer now working in private practice.
Example of councillors _ They make a decision to not sweep up grass cuttings cos its too expensive then ring the Engineers to play hell about all the grass cuttings lying on the footpaths making them slippy.
Then there was the old lady who rang up every autumn to tell us that the leaves were falling off the trees......
Unfortunately it isn't the Councillors who "design" all these stupid systems but their "officers", planners?highway engineers etc, many straight out of Uni with no real knowledge of "how to gan on".
The councillors in most cases rubber stamp their ideas but 'cos the average councillor is often more used to hewin' coal/running an employment agency/working in a cafe (no offence) then they have no real idea about traffic & accidents unless they have been in one. The only listen to the whingers and ask the officers to do some thing about it.
Speaking as an ex council engineer now working in private practice.
Example of councillors _ They make a decision to not sweep up grass cuttings cos its too expensive then ring the Engineers to play hell about all the grass cuttings lying on the footpaths making them slippy.
Then there was the old lady who rang up every autumn to tell us that the leaves were falling off the trees......
andymadmak said
Derbyshire? Bunch of stupid PC unthinking morons!
Oh, yes.
Seen the blanket 40 limit on the North Lees Estate?
I objected to it. Police objected to it, saying unnecessary and not possible to enforce.
Derbyshire CC went ahead anyway.
Reason?
"To reduce sheep deaths from high speed collisions"
YEEHAAA
..........
BAAAAAAAA...............
Don said: That's it. I'm going into politics.
I'm going in on the "Common Sense" ticket, coupled with the "I'm not anti-car I'm anti-idiot" slogan.
Jesus. How come these lentil-munching, salad-eating, sandal wearing, cotton-wool-between-the-ears, I'm all-right-jack, bunch of evil-doers ever get into any kind of position of responsibility is beyond me.
Time to do something.
Now...how do I become a councillor......
It's apparently harder than you think. I'll tell you about it next time we meet...
Some months ago I did have the dubious pleasure of meeting the traffic planner guy for Basingstoke whilst he and his ilk were doing a "road show" (the irony of the name was not lost on me) in the shopping centre. His ideas for "improving" the key roads around the town did not give me hope for the future.
The anti-car lobby is very well organised. The ADB is finally starting to get a little bit of traction but we've nothing to match the slick organisation of Transport 2000, Reclaim the streets, Greenpeace (grr) or FoE. Lobbying works and the powers-that-be respond to these pressure groups.
In time things will reverse. Now that the motorist is the underdog we'll be able to garner some sympathy. What we must learn from the Greens is that starting from a sensible position doesn't achieve what you want. They start from an outrageous position (man with red flag, ban all cars from London) and settle for a compromise (daft-as-a-brush system around Trafalgar Square, Kengestion charging).
In most areas of regulation we'd see someone arguing that if a crime is committed a million times a year it might mean that the law is wrong. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be the case for speeding.
In the next Mayoral elections I'm minded to vote for Simon Hughes, he is very popular with his constituents. Does anyone know his motoring policy?
Simon
In time things will reverse. Now that the motorist is the underdog we'll be able to garner some sympathy. What we must learn from the Greens is that starting from a sensible position doesn't achieve what you want. They start from an outrageous position (man with red flag, ban all cars from London) and settle for a compromise (daft-as-a-brush system around Trafalgar Square, Kengestion charging).
In most areas of regulation we'd see someone arguing that if a crime is committed a million times a year it might mean that the law is wrong. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be the case for speeding.
In the next Mayoral elections I'm minded to vote for Simon Hughes, he is very popular with his constituents. Does anyone know his motoring policy?
Simon
Speed Matters | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff