City at odds with it's police force!
Discussion
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/local/east-hampsh...
The council should have considered how this was going to be enforced before they went ahead!
Perhaps they would like to fund the police to carry out this pointless task!
The Evening News said:
Police and council in 20mph row
SLOW DOWN, YOU MOVE TOO FAST The 20mph speed limit has sparked a row
PORTSMOUTH City Council is considering taking Hampshire police to court over its refusal to enforce 20mph zones.
Transport boss Cllr Jason Fazackarley said he wants to force the police to reconsider their stance on the city’s roads.
At the moment, officers will stop motorists breaking the limit as they go about their patrols – but the police won’t routinely enforce 20mph limits.
Cllr Fazackerley said the council was considering taking the police to a judicial review over the issue.
A total of 94 per cent of residential streets have a 20mph limit, but national police policy is not to use its camera vans to police limits lower than 30mph.
Cllr Fazackarley said: ‘That advice comes from the Association of Chief Police Officers and we understand it’s not legally binding.
‘We can’t see, as the whole city’s under this limit, how it would make any real difference to them, and we want them to make sure our speed limits are stuck to.
‘We are looking into calling a judicial review, which we hope will change their minds.’
Cllr Fazackerley also confirmed the council will pull out of the Hampshire Safer Roads Partnership at the end of this month – signalling an end to static speed cameras in the city.
Hampshire police’s head of roads policing, Superintendent Chris Brown, said: ‘Portsmouth 20mph zones are routinely patrolled by uniformed officers going about their normal duties, providing visible deterrent.
‘Someone driving at excessive speed would be subject to being stopped by police and could be subject to prosecution.
‘Safety camera vans are sent to high casualty sites, to areas where we can reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured.
‘The national guideline from ACPO is that there should not be routine enforcement by camera vans for a 20mph limit.’
I wonder why they are pulling out of the "safety" camera partnership?SLOW DOWN, YOU MOVE TOO FAST The 20mph speed limit has sparked a row
PORTSMOUTH City Council is considering taking Hampshire police to court over its refusal to enforce 20mph zones.
Transport boss Cllr Jason Fazackarley said he wants to force the police to reconsider their stance on the city’s roads.
At the moment, officers will stop motorists breaking the limit as they go about their patrols – but the police won’t routinely enforce 20mph limits.
Cllr Fazackerley said the council was considering taking the police to a judicial review over the issue.
A total of 94 per cent of residential streets have a 20mph limit, but national police policy is not to use its camera vans to police limits lower than 30mph.
Cllr Fazackarley said: ‘That advice comes from the Association of Chief Police Officers and we understand it’s not legally binding.
‘We can’t see, as the whole city’s under this limit, how it would make any real difference to them, and we want them to make sure our speed limits are stuck to.
‘We are looking into calling a judicial review, which we hope will change their minds.’
Cllr Fazackerley also confirmed the council will pull out of the Hampshire Safer Roads Partnership at the end of this month – signalling an end to static speed cameras in the city.
Hampshire police’s head of roads policing, Superintendent Chris Brown, said: ‘Portsmouth 20mph zones are routinely patrolled by uniformed officers going about their normal duties, providing visible deterrent.
‘Someone driving at excessive speed would be subject to being stopped by police and could be subject to prosecution.
‘Safety camera vans are sent to high casualty sites, to areas where we can reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured.
‘The national guideline from ACPO is that there should not be routine enforcement by camera vans for a 20mph limit.’
The council should have considered how this was going to be enforced before they went ahead!
Perhaps they would like to fund the police to carry out this pointless task!
Correct me if I'm wrong but I seem to remember speedos don't have to be accurate until 25mph and 20mph speed limits should be self enforcing, ie with speed bumps and such like.
How can they honestly ticket people for doing 24mph (10%+2) if the law says you can't be expected to rely on a speedo at that speed?
ETA: just done some quick googling and C&U regs state speedos must be calibrated to be accurate (can over read by 10%) at a minimum of 30mph. So a 20mph limit by extension is unenforceable as the speedo cannot relied upon. Of course, if you drive through at 30+ I guess that defence is blown out of the water.
How can they honestly ticket people for doing 24mph (10%+2) if the law says you can't be expected to rely on a speedo at that speed?
ETA: just done some quick googling and C&U regs state speedos must be calibrated to be accurate (can over read by 10%) at a minimum of 30mph. So a 20mph limit by extension is unenforceable as the speedo cannot relied upon. Of course, if you drive through at 30+ I guess that defence is blown out of the water.
Edited by Pannywagon on Friday 18th March 12:51
Pannywagon said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but I seem to remember speedos don't have to be accurate until 25mph and 20mph speed limits should be self enforcing, ie with speed bumps and such like.
How can they honestly ticket people for doing 24mph (10%+2) if the law says you can't be expected to rely on a speedo at that speed?
ETA: just done some quick googling and C&U regs state speedos must be calibrated to be accurate (can over read by 10%) at a minimum of 30mph. So a 20mph limit by extension is unenforceable as the speedo cannot relied upon. Of course, if you drive through at 30+ I guess that defence is blown out of the water.
Quite, and if that information is available from a quick Google, the council should have taken it into account before starting the scheme. From the look of it, the police have already realised that the 20mph zones are legally unenforceable.How can they honestly ticket people for doing 24mph (10%+2) if the law says you can't be expected to rely on a speedo at that speed?
ETA: just done some quick googling and C&U regs state speedos must be calibrated to be accurate (can over read by 10%) at a minimum of 30mph. So a 20mph limit by extension is unenforceable as the speedo cannot relied upon. Of course, if you drive through at 30+ I guess that defence is blown out of the water.
Edited by Pannywagon on Friday 18th March 12:51
stackmonkey said:
Quite, and if that information is available from a quick Google, the council should have taken it into account before starting the scheme. From the look of it, the police have already realised that the 20mph zones are legally unenforceable.
Councils fault for installing the wrong speed limits
I live near to but work in portsmouth and at 20 mph it is hard to watch the speedo check your mirrors for bikers and other motorists champing at the bit to speed away at 30 mph!
I really do think it is better to watch where you are going than to constantly worry about breaking some law.
Of course the other point here is that both the Police and the Council live off our taxes and now they are (despite making huge cuts) going to throw a heap of cash at lawers for no good result.
When will common sense return?
I really do think it is better to watch where you are going than to constantly worry about breaking some law.
Of course the other point here is that both the Police and the Council live off our taxes and now they are (despite making huge cuts) going to throw a heap of cash at lawers for no good result.
When will common sense return?
There is clearly more to this story than is being reported, notwithstanding the fact that it is hardly unusual for local authorities to come up with daft ideas.
From reading the article and the comments on the newspaper's website, and remembering the story about the Council's policy when it first broke, we appear to have a situation where these blanket 20mph restrictions were imposed in Pompey not that long ago and self compliance is, shall we say, leaving something to be desired.
This is of course always a problem with artifically low speed limits, and even the Police themselves make the point that unrealistically low limits lead to lower levels of self compliance.
We also have the situation where police budgets and local authority expenditure is being cut. As you know, I am not breaching the Official Secrets Act by telling you this. Hampshire plod are aware of their own financial circumstances and are also aware of the Council's, and vice versa.
I also think its telling us something that the Council is about to stop funding the local SCP.
The article doesn't say that the Council is seeking a judicial review, it says they are considering it. I consider what I might do if I won the lottery but I haven't bought the plane ticket in anticipation of winning it. To me this looks like a bluster on the part of the Council.
I think the real story here is that the Council are trying to distract attention away from ceasing their funding of the SCP by firing a shot at the Police for "not doing their job," whilst the Council knows as well as the Police do that they won't/ can't enforce these 20 limits and haven't got the resources to enforce them even if they had a mind to. This way, if something goes tits up with the KSI stats after the Council pulls the plug on SCP funding, they can then try playing the card - "Well, its nothing to do with us, its the police's fault not enforcing the law"
From reading the article and the comments on the newspaper's website, and remembering the story about the Council's policy when it first broke, we appear to have a situation where these blanket 20mph restrictions were imposed in Pompey not that long ago and self compliance is, shall we say, leaving something to be desired.
This is of course always a problem with artifically low speed limits, and even the Police themselves make the point that unrealistically low limits lead to lower levels of self compliance.
We also have the situation where police budgets and local authority expenditure is being cut. As you know, I am not breaching the Official Secrets Act by telling you this. Hampshire plod are aware of their own financial circumstances and are also aware of the Council's, and vice versa.
I also think its telling us something that the Council is about to stop funding the local SCP.
The article doesn't say that the Council is seeking a judicial review, it says they are considering it. I consider what I might do if I won the lottery but I haven't bought the plane ticket in anticipation of winning it. To me this looks like a bluster on the part of the Council.
I think the real story here is that the Council are trying to distract attention away from ceasing their funding of the SCP by firing a shot at the Police for "not doing their job," whilst the Council knows as well as the Police do that they won't/ can't enforce these 20 limits and haven't got the resources to enforce them even if they had a mind to. This way, if something goes tits up with the KSI stats after the Council pulls the plug on SCP funding, they can then try playing the card - "Well, its nothing to do with us, its the police's fault not enforcing the law"
It's supposed to be a flagship scheme but it's shown no benefits.
Scroll down to 20mph
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_speed_limits_in_... the plug is pulled, guess who is going to be blamed
Scroll down to 20mph
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_speed_limits_in_... the plug is pulled, guess who is going to be blamed
I'm down in Portsmouth fairly often, too. It's only the residential roads which have the 20mph limits, the arteries are 30's upwards (depending on how close you get to one of the three routes out of the city). It's a very compact city.
To do much more than 15mph down one of those little city streets with cars parked on either side of the road would be tricky and I can see why the council would want to enforce a 20mph limit. The main rat runs have speed humps etc which encourages drivers to use the main routes. For a busy city, these normally flow reasonably well due to a whole host of new traffic light schemes.
There are one or two schools sited on wider roads and these are mostly subject to the 20mph limit too, but it seems I'm the only one who realises this. Some of these roads may benefit from accurately targetting daft driving.
To do much more than 15mph down one of those little city streets with cars parked on either side of the road would be tricky and I can see why the council would want to enforce a 20mph limit. The main rat runs have speed humps etc which encourages drivers to use the main routes. For a busy city, these normally flow reasonably well due to a whole host of new traffic light schemes.
There are one or two schools sited on wider roads and these are mostly subject to the 20mph limit too, but it seems I'm the only one who realises this. Some of these roads may benefit from accurately targetting daft driving.
So how many accidents were occurring BEFORE the reduction to 20mph, and how many have occurred SINCE the reduction to 20mph?
The police no doubt are only interested in safety, while the council are more interested in saving face.
They introduced a measure which has failed to produce results, so they need to blame lack of enforcement!
The police no doubt are only interested in safety, while the council are more interested in saving face.
They introduced a measure which has failed to produce results, so they need to blame lack of enforcement!
Mill Wheel said:
So how many accidents were occurring BEFORE the reduction to 20mph, and how many have occurred SINCE the reduction to 20mph?
The police no doubt are only interested in safety, while the council are more interested in saving face.
They introduced a measure which has failed to produce results, so they need to blame lack of enforcement!
The comparison would only be significant if they were policed to the same standard.The police no doubt are only interested in safety, while the council are more interested in saving face.
They introduced a measure which has failed to produce results, so they need to blame lack of enforcement!
I assume this is what the police are trying to do.
Mill Wheel said:
So how many accidents were occurring BEFORE the reduction to 20mph, and how many have occurred SINCE the reduction to 20mph?
The police no doubt are only interested in safety, while the council are more interested in saving face.
They introduced a measure which has failed to produce results, so they need to blame lack of enforcement!
Quite right.The police no doubt are only interested in safety, while the council are more interested in saving face.
They introduced a measure which has failed to produce results, so they need to blame lack of enforcement!
The Council wants to use a metric of the number of motorists exceeding the new limit, whereas the only one that counts is the reduction in deaths and injuries.
Streaky
GKP said:
Who knows, but to be fair to the council (heck, am I actually typing that?) the 20mph limit won't affect your journey time one bit. Like I mentioned earlier, you'd be on the cusp of being reckless to get up to 20mph along most of the newly restricted roads.
Exactly, which shows how pointless the whole exercise was, AND the call for the police to take steps to carry out enforcement!Ah, but you're forgetting the power of the NIMBY's and the need to be seen to be doing something! (even though there's not much point in doing it and it will cost a lot of taxpayers' money to do it, something MUST BE DONE!)
All this type of malarky will stop soon enough as the budget cuts dig in.
All this type of malarky will stop soon enough as the budget cuts dig in.
GKP said:
To do much more than 15mph down one of those little city streets with cars parked on either side of the road would be tricky and I can see why the council would want to enforce a 20mph limit.
With all due respect, I learnt to drive and took my test in Southend. It is full of rat runs with cars parked on both sides (and not much room for a car to get through), yet on my test I was expected to drive at 30mph down them.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff