Government response to 20mph limit petition

Discussion in 'Advocacy and Cycling Safety' started by Mister Paul, 14 Jun 2008.

  1. Mister Paul

    Mister Paul Legendary Member

    Thank you for signing this e-petition.

    There are no plans to reduce the urban 30mph speed limit to 20mph. The Government believes that local authorities are best placed to decide which speed limits are appropriate for their roads as they will invariably understand local needs and conditions. The Government provides local authorities with guidance to ensure those speed limits are appropriately and consistently set.

    The Government recognises the need for reduced vehicle speeds in areas where the more vulnerable road user may be present, such as roads around schools. However, research shows that simply reducing a speed limit from 30mph to 20mph will only reduce vehicle speeds by around 1mph unless proven traffic calming measures are also introduced.

    This is why the Department only recommend local authorities consider 20mph speed limits where vehicle speeds are already relatively low. A good example would be vehicle speeds of around 24mph. When a 20mph speed limit is introduced local authorities are required to place repeater signs along its length; traffic calming measures are not required but they can be used if the local authority considers it appropriate.

    Where lower speed limits are desired but vehicle speeds are in excess of 24mph, the Department strongly recommends local authorities consider introducing a 20mph zone.

    A typical 20mph zone will cover a number of roads, often incorporating school premises and must have proven traffic calming measures along its length to physically force drivers to reduce their speeds. The self-enforcing nature of a 20mph zone is such that additional enforcement is considered unnecessary.

    Research by the Transport Research Laboratory has found that accident frequency fell by around 60% and that the number of accidents involving children reduced by 67% in 20mph zones.

    The new research project titled "Local road safety evaluation and action learning" was commissioned in February 2008 and will take three years, with an interim report due in March 2009. The research is likely to include a survey of local authorities, which will cover 20mph zones and other local road safety issues.
  2. bonj2

    bonj2 Guest

    I've heard that blanket 20mph limits like portsmouth's are counter productive as if there is a low speed limit somewhere where it is unnecessary for it to be so low then some drivers will ignore it, including even when it IS necessary.
    What would be much better for safety of schools is, imho, threefold: (a) have 20mph speed limits outside schools
    (;) give lollipop ladies extra power so that their report of a dangerous/speeding driver carries suffcient weight to be regarded as evidence, possibly backed up with cctv, and actually prosecute such reports, this might entail stricter recruitment procedures for lollipop ladies and paying them more but the cost of that wouldn't be that great, it could come out of the local SCP budget (c) make drivers more trusting of the SCP by visibly or publicly taking down cameras in unhazardous areas and moving them to more hazardous areas such as outside schools. Or simply replace them with CCTV cameras which are going to provide evidence for claim of dangerous driving rather than just speeding.
  3. zimzum42

    zimzum42 Legendary Member

    This whole online petition thing seems to be a total waste of time, has anything ever been done because of one?

    Allow people to park all over the place, that would slow the traffic down!
  4. OP
    Mister Paul

    Mister Paul Legendary Member

    The response says that there's little point because reducing the limit only doesn't slow people down enough.

    Their thinking stops there. I could make a few suggestions of how to make people conform.
  5. roshi chris

    roshi chris New Member

    That is such a ridiculous reason. Making murder illegal doesn't automatically catch murderers does it, but that doesn't mean it should be legal!

    Too much resources required to enforce it is what they mean. And being frightened of the motoring lobby as usual.
  6. OP
    Mister Paul

    Mister Paul Legendary Member

    That's where cameras come in.
  7. zimzum42

    zimzum42 Legendary Member

    Great, so we get those massive ugly cameras all over the place. nice one.

    there's enough crap 'street furniture' in towns as it is
  8. OP
    Mister Paul

    Mister Paul Legendary Member


    No, we hide them.


    Interesting comment though. It makes you wonder why people don't complain about those ugly streetlights. I'm not being funny saying that, it's just a thought that's come to mind.
  9. zimzum42

    zimzum42 Legendary Member

    There are some terribly ugly street lights. There are also way too many signposts all over the place, hideous massive wheelie bins all over the place, garish plastic bus stops, fences to stop you crossing the road where you want, the list goes on.....
  10. I agree.
  11. Noeyedear

    Noeyedear New Member

    The problem with statistics (and this government loves stats) is they just don't stop coming. I mean if you really intend to stop traffic accidents then you pass a law that says cars have to stay in the garage. The stats for that would be 100% reduction. There are just to many pointless statistics being rammed down our throats, used to justify some political aim. I drive a car and ride a bike, I've not seen anything added in my area that has made either safer or better. I see lots of paint on pavements that are supposedly cycle lanes (what a joke), I see lots of flashing speed signs and money making cameras, don't get me started on speed bumps. I wonder how many School accidents involve parents driving their children to the School that could easily be walked or cycled and not caused by other drivers just trying to get to work. I would think most of them. I lived near a primary School once, parents would load their offspring into the family car at the end of the cul de sac to drive them 300yds to the School, parking would be so congested they would often park on the pavement with great difficulty and still have 50 yds to walk, you would be lucky to achieve a speed of 5mph. A blanket 20 mph is not solving any cause of a problem. There will be many reasons why children get involved in motoring accidents, I doubt hardly any are either speed related or the road users fault, this would be a law to treat the symptom and not the disease. We come to rely on pointless laws and restrictions in this country, the ability for people to look after their own safety is being diluted, everyone assumes there is a law to keep them safe and the use of wits is redundant. I taught my children to cross the road without the use of crossings, why would you trust your life to a working light bulb and a driver seeing it? Teach children the dangers, if they are not old enough to see them on their own, they should not be on their own.

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice