Review of Speed Limits

[Satch]

Only downwards, of course.

http://www.gnn.gov.uk/environment/f...07&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=False

All to be done by 2011 so many rural A roads currently with a 60 limit are almost certain to drop to 50 or 40 over long stretches.

Now when is Road Charging for Motorways & major A roads supposed to start so that many people will be seeking alternative routes??? Ooooh let me think.....

All part of the grand plan

 

[jay73]

wish I'd bought shares in gatso !!!

what with all the new speed camera's that will be going in on the revised limit 'A' roads

 

[Rose Chap]

There is all sorts I could say about this, but to be honest its summed by saying I really, really, really hope this government get booted out at the next election.

 

[jeremytaylor]

Transport Minister Ladyboy (who has been done for speeding in his Alfa three times) was on Radio 2 at lunch time saying that if most cars were exceeding the speed limit, in safety, it would suggest the limit was too low, and that it should be raised.

Well, motorways are statistically the safest roads, and how many people stick at 70mph?

So, how about an 85mph limit on motorways, Ladyboy???

 

[jay73]

how about an outside lane with a minimum 100mph limit then that would stop all the 70mph dawdlers sticking to the speed limit in the outside lane.
Or even (drastic I know) banning artic lorries off the road from 8 a.m. until 8 p.m. that should clear up some valuable tarmac.

But TBH I don't really care anyway, If I need to go anywhere quickly now I just go on my bike, as you just can't rely on the road network anyway ! I'm talking about the M6 between birmingham and manchester
Messing around with speed limits wont affect me I'll just get a smaller and smaller rear number plate (wink)

 

[Shude]

Transport Minister Ladyboy (who has been done for speeding in his Alfa three times) was on Radio 2 at lunch time saying that if most cars were exceeding the speed limit, in safety, it would suggest the limit was too low, and that it should be raised.

These days people are so used to being told what to do that they don't know how to make decisions for themselves. When it says 60mph I'm going to do 60mph regardless of traffic, road, weather or any other conditions!

It is this mentality that has brought about all the additional legislation and pointless laws.

Or even (drastic I know) banning artic lorries off the road from 8 a.m. until 8 p.m. that should clear up some valuable tarmac.

This is too extreme, all we need to do is ban artic overtaking on certain roads and routes. I know it probably sounds terrible to the truck drivers and companies but there are several sections of roads that I drive on daily that slow to 60mph in all lanes because there are trucks overtaking trucks overtaking trucks on a hill.

This is already in use between two motorway junctions in the UK and is popular in NL and other european countries.

 

[Flasheart]

Only downwards, of course.

http://www.gnn.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=219207&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=False

All to be done by 2011 so many rural A roads currently with a 60 limit are almost certain to drop to 50 or 40 over long stretches.

Now when is Road Charging for Motorways & major A roads supposed to start so that many people will be seeking alternative routes??? Ooooh let me think.....

All part of the grand plan

Actually the minister involved when interviewed on BBC this morning said it could work both ways actually. But lets not let the facts get in the way of hysteria.

 

[jay73]

Where will this madness all end.

There must be a point where this island we reside on cannot physically support any more people?

 

[Satch]

Actually the minister involved when interviewed on BBC this morning said it could work both ways actually. But lets not let the facts get in the way of hysteria.

Really? I also seem to recall that a long time ago the public was assured that VAT was a "simple and understandable tax" and more recently that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction capable of being launched in 40 minutes.

That is just spin and no doubt there will be cases where limits are raised just to make the point but the overall trend is clear: a planned overall reduction in speed limits and all that is to be put into the hands of local government who are utterly hopeless at that sort of thing.

They will always default to the lowest limit they can get away with because that way they can claim it as "road safety" expenditure from the new Central Government funding pool. That is why all sorts of utterly bonkers "improvements" like offset roundabouts and speed hump minefields are springing up.

Odd this should just coincide with announcements about the need to reduce motorway speed limits to reduce CO2 and the "leaked" plans for Road Charging. And just after all the MP's have gone on holiday so no difficult questions in Parliament. How convenient.

 

[Rose Chap]

Actually the minister involved when interviewed on BBC this morning said it could work both ways actually. But lets not let the facts get in the way of hysteria.

Do we really think that any local or central government will raise the speed limit on a road (which would surely involve an expensive analysis) when they can get away without doing road maintenance, then lowering the limit, then slapping up a few gatsos, then saying they are making the road 'safer'?

Infuriating.

 

[Swiss Toni]

Actually the minister involved when interviewed on BBC this morning said it could work both ways actually. But lets not let the facts get in the way of hysteria.

Soooooooooooo true.



Reading what is actually said, rather than a media spin of it, it actually provides an incentive to increase the limit on motorways (but this is not within the remit of the local authorities who the new guidance is aimed at).
The majority of genuine roadsafety organisations would support an increase to 80/90mph on motorways, so it might yet happen.

Variable limits improve the flow of traffic where the volume is greatest, so everyone travelling at 50mph is actually more effective than some trying to hit 75mph and then slowing to 50mph.

HGVs are involved in a significantly greater number of fatal accidents than their proportion of total traffic on the roads (but, in my opinion, tend to be more skilled drivers than most, in fact Tanker Driver tend to be amongst the best?) - Do we need to INCREASE the speed limit for HGVs on trunk roads to reduce overtaking? (again, not within the remit of the local authorities who are the subject of the guidance).

Lets not allow some media spin to get in the way of the facts - imagine some parts of the media as an over-excitable friend who speed reads the facts and then shouts the bits they remember at you...

 

[Swiss Toni]

Do we really think that any local or central government will raise the speed limit on a road (which would surely involve an expensive analysis) when they can get away without doing road maintenance, then lowering the limit, then slapping up a few gatsos, then saying they are making the road 'safer'?

Yes.

 

[BonzoDog]

Isn't the problem too many vehicles and not enough road. Thus these are all compromise solutions.
And come on please, if anything, most of the cars should be making way for the trucks. They represent the distribution system and the supply of vital services. Are these not the essential road users? I suspect any cost justification analysis would put most, if not all trucks, way ahead of any individual car, except perhaps two Jags.

 

[jeremytaylor]

Yes, too many people with too many cars, with virtually no new road-building to accomodate them. Our mileage of motorways is way below French and German levels and we suffer congestion as a result.

 

[Satch]

Lets not allow some media spin to get in the way of the facts - imagine some parts of the media as an over-excitable friend who speed reads the facts and then shouts the bits they remember at you...

Which is precisely why you always need to go to the source documents.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_rdsafety/documents/page/dft_rdsafety_612262.pdf

On the criteria suggested I would think that just about every A or B road in my area with a 60 limit is capable of a 50 or 40 limit slapped on. Some justify it but most do not.

Note also that the commonly accepted benchmark of Killed & Seriously Injured (KSI) per 100m km for measuring road safety has gone. We now have "injury accidents" which covers anything from a fatality to a bruised little toe.

Fear is that whilst much of this is well intentioned and sensible the dice are already loaded towards blanket speed reductions. Once it gets into the hands of local government nonsenses will abound:

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the former."

Albert Einstien

 

[Swiss Toni]

Alternative speed management options should always be considered before a new speed limit is introduced.

The underlying aim should be to achieve a ‘safe’ distribution of speeds which reflects the function of the road and the impacts on the local community.

The needs of vulnerable road users must be fully taken into account.

Traffic authorities will wish to satisfy themselves that the benefits exceed the disbenefits before introducing or changing a local speed limit.

Local speed limits are determined using a series of underlying principles.

What the road looks like to road users should be a key factor when setting a speed limit.

Mean speeds should be used as the basis for determining local speed limits.

These are underpinned by extensive research demonstrating the well proven relationship between speed and accident frequency and severity, and also reflect what the majority of drivers perceive as an appropriate speed to be driven for the road.

The minimum length of a speed limit should generally be not less than 600 metres to avoid too many changes of speed limit along the route.




I would see these points as being key - that a local community have some involvement, that a mean speed of traffic already on the road is used, and that it is what the majority of drivers do that guides the change.

 

[Satch]

I really wish it would bring in a more sensible system. But with a lot of anti-car local authorities around better get used to seeing more of this sort of nonsense.

 

[NormanB]

Basically most of this is bollox.

What we need are politicians who can deliver sensible policies that benefit UK PLC.

At the moment our transport infrastructure is an absolute joke with whole sections of arterial motorways grinding to a halt and even closing for considerable periods of time because of an accident - the knock on effect is staggering.

Basically we need more concrete and lots of it - NEW motorways which can be financed from the diverted monies taken off motorists in VED and Duty + VAT on fuel +++ speed camera fines +++ just about everything else. More North South and More East West - lay down absolutely loads of them. Bollox to the environmentalist finding rare worms or a particularly fetching badger to stop road building - pour the piggin concrete.

Despite popular misconception we have absolutely loads of land - only 6% of UK land is classed as 'built environment' - we should aim to consume, say, another 1% for new motorways and important new dual carriage ways.

The UK economy needs this, it will help farmers get rid of some strips of questionably productive land that we subsidise anyway.

Any Minister of Transport who does not build at least the equivalent of 1000 miles of eight lane motorway during his time in office** needs to be classed as a miserable failure and denied any future office and pension rights. the Department of the Environment should have all their computers taken away and the Secretary of State and Ministers of that department should be charged with one mission - releasing land for motorway/road building - the target being 1500 miles worth of eight lane motorway during their time in office. Failure will be a hanging offence conducted in public - a law to be introduced by the Home Secretary to root out weedy non achieving politicians and the sandal wearing brigade who are an obstacle to progress in developing the economic infrastructure of UK PLC.

The policy should be reviewed after 10,000 miles of new motor way and new dual carriage ways has been completed.

Scotland can do what it likes - no one goes there anyway.


** Maximum time in office = 2 years

 

[Satch]

Basically most of this is bollox.

Failure will be a hanging offence conducted in public - a law to be introduced by the Home Secretary to root out weedy non achieving politicians and the sandal wearing brigade who are an obstacle to progress in developing the economic infrastructure of UK PLC.


** Maximum time in office = 2 years

Bloody Liberals.

 

[scumbag]

What we need are politicians who can deliver sensible policies that benefit UK PLC.

Which planet did you just come from? that is never going to happen while ever we vote in people who then need to do something that it thinks the majority want so it can keep its job for another number of years.

I am afraid an idea so way out as yours really is contemptuous. I should imagine that if we didnt allow free speech in this country, you would be hung for that ridiculous statement.

How on earth would we get on with poeple making up ideas like that. God forbid we actually get in polictican who actually wants to help the country first and himself second.

clearly what we need is more buffoons like Blunkett, he was great. look at the column inches he created in tabloids, and Prescott, the boxing bonker of bellybrains.

Who actually voted for these pondlife?


And being serious for a minute, your suggestion is exactly right, but we need someone to take that to the masses as they vote for them. so we need someone with spin savvy who can get a party up and running and make the popular press tell the story so Joe P can understand it.

The BNP would easily get in more places if they actually had any policies to deal with education, councill tax, health, law and order, welfare, enviroment, etc etc etc. in fact if they actually had any policies that were of any use at all maybe. anyone can say close the borders!

The country needs and enema!