Have your say - Graduated fixed penalties
Discussion
Sorry if this has already been done but time is running out for you to have your say on the Graduated fixed penalties for speeding offences proposals.
"You are invited to respond, by Friday 29 October 2004, to:
Mike Fishman,
Road Safety Division,
Department for Transport,
Great Minster House,
76 Marsham Street,
LONDON,
SW1 4DR
Telephone.020 7944 2028
e-mail: mike.fishman@dft.gsi.gov.uk"
Document is at;
www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_030771.hcsp
"You are invited to respond, by Friday 29 October 2004, to:
Mike Fishman,
Road Safety Division,
Department for Transport,
Great Minster House,
76 Marsham Street,
LONDON,
SW1 4DR
Telephone.020 7944 2028
e-mail: mike.fishman@dft.gsi.gov.uk"
Document is at;
www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_030771.hcsp
pebbledash said:
going by the graduation of the enforcement limit it would seem that the hidden mesage is that it is better to speed in the lower limits, as there is more tollerance.
]
>> Edited by pebbledash on Thursday 23 September 11:15
Just had a read of the entire gov proposals and am absolutely gobsmacked.
Present system
35+ in a 30 =60pts+£60 fine
Proposed system
38 in a 30 no action
39 in a 30 =2 points+£40 fine
40-44 in a 30=£60 fine
There are other changes at the other posted limits but these proposals in particular are especially ludicrous.
On the one hand they are saying speed kills, slow down, think of the children, and on the other they are being more lenient in the limits that are most hazardous. For the other limits look up the link for yourselves.
I implore as many PH'ers as poss to respond to these ludicrous proposals. In fact they have given us and Paul Smith even more ammo to attack their speed kills policy. Dont ignore this. It is
ing ludicrous. blademan said:
Proposed system
38 in a 30 no action
39 in a 30 =2 points+£40 fine
40-44 in a 30=£60 fine
I don't interpret the table of penalties like that...
The way I see it:
31-39 in a 30 = 2 points & £40 fine
40-44 in a 30 = 3 points & £60 fine
45-infinity in a 30 = 6 points and £100 fine
(otherwise the 2 point band would be pointless)
Therefore, the new system is much harsher (even though they are reducing the minimum penalty (government spin
)).Hi Guys,
Don't be in too much of a rush to reply to this consultation. I'm preparing a "reply pack", that might just help to make the replies more effective. I hope it will be ready early next week.
This is a very important consultation and I'll be working hard to help maximise the impact of replies. Once the reply pack is available, I shall be sending it to driver training and road safety organisations. I'm guessing that on average the driver training organisations are not aware on the consultation, yet they are probably the most important respondents.
Obviusly when the reply pack is available, I'll inform you guys.
Don't be in too much of a rush to reply to this consultation. I'm preparing a "reply pack", that might just help to make the replies more effective. I hope it will be ready early next week.
This is a very important consultation and I'll be working hard to help maximise the impact of replies. Once the reply pack is available, I shall be sending it to driver training and road safety organisations. I'm guessing that on average the driver training organisations are not aware on the consultation, yet they are probably the most important respondents.
Obviusly when the reply pack is available, I'll inform you guys.
blademan said:
going by the graduation of the enforcement limit it would seem that the hidden mesage is that it is better to speed in the lower limits, as there is more tollerance.
]
>> Edited by pebbledash on Thursday 23 September 11:15
Just had a read of the entire gov proposals and am absolutely gobsmacked.
Present system
35+ in a 30 =60pts+£60 fine
Proposed system
38 in a 30 no action
39 in a 30 =2 points+£40 fine
40-44 in a 30=£60 fine
There are other changes at the other posted limits but these proposals in particular are especially ludicrous.
On the one hand they are saying speed kills, slow down, think of the children, and on the other they are being more lenient in the limits that are most hazardous. For the other limits look up the link for yourselves.
I implore as many PH'ers as poss to respond to these ludicrous proposals. In fact they have given us and Paul Smith even more ammo to attack their speed kills policy. Dont ignore this. It is
The problem is the addition of the fixed 6mph in all limits, which messes things up 6MPH in a 20 zone is loads, 6MPH in a 70 is not much..
Lower penalty -
2 points and £40 fine
20 No lower penalty
30 39 (30% over the limit)
40 50 (25% over the limit)
50 61 (22% over the limit)
60 72 (20% over the limit)
70 83 (18% over the limit)
Standard penalty -
3 points and £60 fine
20 31 (30% over the limit)
30 40 - 44 (46% over the limit)
40 51 - 56 (40% over the limit)
50 62 - 69 (38% over the limit)
60 73 - 81 (35% over the limit)
70 84 - 93 (32% over the limit)
Higher penalty -
6 points and £100 fine
20 32 (60% over the limit)
30 45 (50% over the limit)
40 57 (42% over the limit)
50 70 (40% over the limit)
60 82 (36% over the limit)
70 94 (34% over the limit)
Sent this.
Dear Mike,
Why not just leave it as it is and put more policemen on the roads?
The current structure works fine, but the ridiculous amount of ill-judged limit reduction and camera placements does nothing to make our roads safer.
Why can't we have road engineers defining limits based on sound technical reasons, such as the 85 percentile rule, whereby limits are set at the safest level for minimising accidents, both to road users and pedestrians (if there are any on that particular road). There are so many safe roads that have the limits reduced cynically and a camera put up to enforce it that road safety cannot be the real agenda. And there are other methods of reducing drivers speeds, such as the flashing speed limit signs, which have a much bigger impact that a fluorescent yellow box.
As usual though, there are other factors at play here, rather than pure speed. Limiting trucks to 40 mph on non-dual carriageway roads may seem like a sensible idea at first, but then you have to consider the effect that this artificial road block has on other traffic, creating congestion rather than easing it. Drivers drive most safely when they are calm and able to make progress towards their destination - unnecessary delays just cause impatience, which leads to rash overtaking manouevers which lead to accidents. I know that you will say its all speed-related, but that is a very simplistic attitude and one that doesn't focus on the real cause of accidents - driver inattention.
To drive at a safe speed a driver will be alert - force a slower than safe speed on them and the attention will wander. You have to remember that we are dealing with humans here, not automatons. No-one wants to have an accident, so the majority of drivers will choose a speed at which they feel safe. Penalising otherwise safe drivers for exceeding an arbitrarily set limit (which is becoming the fashion these days) will do nothing to improve road safety. Enforcement, Education, Engineering should be what the Government uses to improve road safety - using Enforcement only is easy, but not something that will give you the results you are after.
All of the legislation and technology in the world won't stop the car thieves from speeding, nor the persistent drunk driver from crashing, nor the inattentive driver from pulling out in front of a bike or lorry. The only thing that will stop this is more policemen in patrol cars. People have respect for other people, not for machines.
So my considered answer is, no, leave the penalty system alone, Enforceement - put more police on the roads Education - improve the quality of driving standards of those passing the Driving Test and make it re-testing compulsory Engineering - allow qualified engineers to set speed limits at a local level, within Government guidelines) and give Councils the budget from Road Tax and Petrol Tax to re-build our roads to a higher standard.
Best Regards
Dave Murray
B.Eng(Hons)
See what happens next
Dear Mike,
Why not just leave it as it is and put more policemen on the roads?
The current structure works fine, but the ridiculous amount of ill-judged limit reduction and camera placements does nothing to make our roads safer.
Why can't we have road engineers defining limits based on sound technical reasons, such as the 85 percentile rule, whereby limits are set at the safest level for minimising accidents, both to road users and pedestrians (if there are any on that particular road). There are so many safe roads that have the limits reduced cynically and a camera put up to enforce it that road safety cannot be the real agenda. And there are other methods of reducing drivers speeds, such as the flashing speed limit signs, which have a much bigger impact that a fluorescent yellow box.
As usual though, there are other factors at play here, rather than pure speed. Limiting trucks to 40 mph on non-dual carriageway roads may seem like a sensible idea at first, but then you have to consider the effect that this artificial road block has on other traffic, creating congestion rather than easing it. Drivers drive most safely when they are calm and able to make progress towards their destination - unnecessary delays just cause impatience, which leads to rash overtaking manouevers which lead to accidents. I know that you will say its all speed-related, but that is a very simplistic attitude and one that doesn't focus on the real cause of accidents - driver inattention.
To drive at a safe speed a driver will be alert - force a slower than safe speed on them and the attention will wander. You have to remember that we are dealing with humans here, not automatons. No-one wants to have an accident, so the majority of drivers will choose a speed at which they feel safe. Penalising otherwise safe drivers for exceeding an arbitrarily set limit (which is becoming the fashion these days) will do nothing to improve road safety. Enforcement, Education, Engineering should be what the Government uses to improve road safety - using Enforcement only is easy, but not something that will give you the results you are after.
All of the legislation and technology in the world won't stop the car thieves from speeding, nor the persistent drunk driver from crashing, nor the inattentive driver from pulling out in front of a bike or lorry. The only thing that will stop this is more policemen in patrol cars. People have respect for other people, not for machines.
So my considered answer is, no, leave the penalty system alone, Enforceement - put more police on the roads Education - improve the quality of driving standards of those passing the Driving Test and make it re-testing compulsory Engineering - allow qualified engineers to set speed limits at a local level, within Government guidelines) and give Councils the budget from Road Tax and Petrol Tax to re-build our roads to a higher standard.
Best Regards
Dave Murray
B.Eng(Hons)
See what happens next
supraman2954 said:
Proposed system
38 in a 30 no action
39 in a 30 =2 points+£40 fine
40-44 in a 30=£60 fine
I don't interpret the table of penalties like that...
The way I see it:
45-infinity in a 30 = 6 points and £100 fine
(otherwise the 2 point band would be pointless)
Therefore, the new system is much harsher (even though they are reducing the minimum penalty (government spin
31-39 in a 30 = 2 points & £40 fine
40-44 in a 30 = 3 points & £60 fine
It's called ZERO TOLERANCE folks......
MoJo.
[/quote]
mondeoman.
I was in the process of typing my response to these proposals as well, but have stopped now that Paul is doing it on a more official level, and getting the info. to those that matter.
However, I thought your reply was excellent. Couldn't have put it better myself.
mondeoman.
I was in the process of typing my response to these proposals as well, but have stopped now that Paul is doing it on a more official level, and getting the info. to those that matter.
However, I thought your reply was excellent. Couldn't have put it better myself.
supraman2954 said:
I don't interpret the table of penalties like that...
The way I see it:
31-39 in a 30 = 2 points & £40 fine
40-44 in a 30 = 3 points & £60 fine
45-infinity in a 30 = 6 points and £100 fine
(otherwise the 2 point band would be pointless)
Therefore, the new system is much harsher (even though they are reducing the minimum penalty (government spin
You're quite correct supraman.
On first (quick) view I failed to see the statement "up to and including" on the 30 limit.
However, I am still correct in saying that the proposal allows for a higher speed to get the same penalty as at present.
Current system:-10%+2mph (35mph)in 30 limit=3pts+£60 Proposed system:- 40-44mph in 30 limit=3pts+£60
So my point was that in response to all the motorists who are complaining of the unfair "across the board" current system, these proposals are sending out the wrong message, which, as has been said, it is ok to speed at the lower posted limits.The 30 limit is one which most PH'ers agree should be adhered to. Once again, they fail to see road safety as anything other than an absolute speeds exercise. I look forward to Pauls response with interest.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff