Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
A propos nothing and simply my anecdotal experience - I have suffered with hayfever since my teenage years and despite tablets, I generally endure 6-8 weeks of misery from late May to late July as the various grasses to which I am allergic flower.
I have read pollens bind themselves to the finer particulate matter in pollutants which enables them to go deeper into the lungs and nose and aggravate the symptoms so traditionally on hot, still days my symptoms would be worse.
This year was odd - from a slow start the symptoms really kicked off in the second week of July and during Ascot week I suffered as badly as I have for many years but on the Sunday after the Royal meeting, the weather changed dramatically with the introduction of cooler, fresher air and it didn't just mitigate my symptoms, it stopped them dead.
I didn't take a tablet after June 26th - now, I'm left with a number of thoughts. Usually, the symptoms persist well into July before fading slowly - this year, they just went. Could the cold, wet spring followed by a much warmer spell have caused all the grasses to which I am allergenic to flower at the same time rather than over a period of weeks?
Did the change in weather help? Could it have been the ULEZ which meant less particulate pollution to which pollens could bind? As is so often said, I'm left with more questions than answers.
I'd welcome the experiences of other hayfever sufferers this year (grass pollen) - I sense it was a bad start but the cooler weather helped a lot.
I'm normally hayverish from mid-July. Nothing yet this year.
The argument about transport availability & cost highlights both the huge variances in availability and the huge gulf in understanding.
For your outer London resident there are riches in public transport options which are largely paid for out of general taxation. For your cundry bumpkins there is often a complete absence of public transport options despite paying general taxation.
For suburbanites it is optimal to encourage more public transport and less driving. For country folk the choice is driving or not going.*
Road pricing gets talked about as a replacement for fuel duty. And gets shouted at as being patently unfair. Which is probably true the way that shitbox UK would implement it. What we need is subsidised fuel for the countryside and heavier taxes in towns. ULEZ and similar is the right policy, just being implemented poorly.
* Before anyone says "what about walking or cycling", what about them? Too many roads between villages would be lethal to walk / cycle down, and thats before we ask about fitness / safety issues.
Agree. On your *, I agree that investment in walking and cycling, or even public transport, between villages isn't worth it.
But 83% of us live in urban areas, so investment in active and public transport makes sense for most.
Urban areas = towns, not cities.
I got a train (first time in about 5 years) recently, to and from the Airport, got the return train journey yesterday. To get to the train station took a car [in this case taxi] ride.
You seem to view the country as either Edinburgh or Sticksville. Reality is somewhat different.
I grew up in a town in rural Scotland. It had a train station. The main problem is you couldn't walk or cycle to it. Sounds like your problem too.
Even public transport in towns is designed for drivers.
Because cars work.
Towns require cars. The alternative to cars is taxis or buses. And that's the bulk of your 83%
You simply can't get your head around supply/demand, can you?
The only reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users is because there are lots of buses.
The reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users, is its a city. Its not a town, what part of this are you failing to understand?
Nothing wrong with buses existing, but buses in towns are a crappy mode of transportation that only those who can't afford their own car (or can't drive as they lack a licence) would use.
The thing with a car is if you want to get from A to B you drive there and are done.
With buses you are stuck with the bus routes, and in most towns the bus routes don't go between A and B if you aren't trying to get to the town centre. Get a bus into the bus depot in town, then another bus from the depot out of town to your destination. And of course that relies upo n the bus turning up, and the bus then follows its route stopping everywhere it has to stop.
My wife doesn't drive, she used to take two buses to get to work which took at least an hour, nearly an hour and a half sometimes one way. It took me 15 minutes to drive it, or 30 minutes return to go pick her up and drive her home.
Good luck finding a parking place at B unless your destination is a supermarket, or you are MD of the company.
I always find a parking place at B. 🤷♂️
Try leaving your bubble from time to time. Saying "oh but what about parking" to someone who drives everywhere and always finds parking, isn't much a problem.
You drive everywhere and always finds parking, in English towns, without a blue badge and without privileged access to private spaces?
I don't want to call you a liar, but happy to call you an outlier. 5 sigma.
Your kidding, right? The rest of the UK is not RBKC outside Harrods. There is plenty of parking all over the country in towns, villages, cities. Some even - gasp if you can believe this - for free.
Name me a town where you can't park without the criteria you specify.
Bath
Free Car Parks in Bath
Bath University Car Park BA2 7JX – free after 5pm every day, all day on public holidays. Sydney Road BA2 6NS – 4 hours maximum. Raby Mews BA2 4EJ – 2 hours maximum. Sydney Wharf BA2 4BG – 4 hours maximum. Daniel Street BA2 6NB – 2 hours maximum.
Those are just the free ones after a 46 millisecond google.
I was mildly joking. I agree you can generally park in most British towns quite easily. London is an outlier
I find the whole debate enervating and a bit depressing. Cars are shit and destroy townscapes. Thank god they are on the way out
What utter nonsense. A "Leon" post just to see who would bite.
Leon is right (unusually). I am someone who travels 30,000 miles a year and car travel is nightmarish. Main motorway arteries gridlocked adjacent to conurbations, particularly during rush hours. Parking is also difficult and expensive. Travel from the motorway to the parking spot is also slow and frustrating.
I'd take the bus if there were any.
Just looks better too
Take anywhere on earth, and remove the cars, and replace with people, trees, greenery, and it looks infinitely better
Cars are an abomination. Thank God they are in the Last Gasp Saloon. In decades to come we will look back and marvel - in a bad way - at how we allowed cars to destroy and desecrate beautiful towns and cities
Fuck knows what America is gonna do, tho. It is built for cars. Take them away and what is left?
And if you think the problem is colour photos vs black and white, consider these;
Both of those pictures look nice to me. 👍
Parks are a good thing to have, I think we can all agree with that. Most places, to get to somewhere like your bottom image, there's a parking lot, or road with parking, next to it. Which makes the park convenient and accessible. 👍
[Radio Norwich. Alan sits behind the mixing desks in the radio studio, wearing a Pringle sweater.] Alan Partridge: That was Big Yellow Taxi by Joni Mitchell, a song in which Joni complains they paved paradise to put up a parking lot, a measure which actually would have alleviated traffic congestion on the outskirts of paradise, something which Joni singularly fails to point out, perhaps because it doesn't quite fit in with her blinkered view of the world. Nevertheless, nice song. It's 4:35 AM, you're listening to Up With The Partridge.
Quite right.
It is a good song. But the "message" is complete bullshit.
"They took all the trees and put 'm in a tree museum". Oh really? Funny my road has countless of trees on it. In stretches, can't even see the houses through the trees from the main road.
There's many songs like that. Imagine by John Lennon, good song but describes an horrific dystopia not utopia. Or ironic by Alanis Morrissette, good song but the only ironic thing is how a song about irony includes nothing that's actually ironic.
While we're complaining about Lennon, I can't ever remember not hating "Merry Christmas War is Over". Even to a six year old who didn't know the meaning of the words 'smug' and 'pious' it sounded smug and pious. And even at the age of 6, the line "so this is Christmas" followed up with "another year over and a new one just begun" struck me as the witterings of someone who didn't care about getting the details right. "Another year nearly over and a new one about to start" may not have scanned but would have been more internally consistent. Wouldn't have saved it from banality though.
You'll be complaining that there isn't actually a barber on Penny Lane next.
I’m still pissed off that however many times I played the album Pete Frampton singularly failed to “Come Alive”.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
"These changes will affect most 30mph roads but not all.
This legislation changes the default speed limited on restricted roads. These are generally residential or busy pedestrian streets with streetlights.
But not all 30mph roads are restricted roads, and these remain at 30mph, and will be signed.
For restricted roads, local authorities and the 2 Trunk Road Agencies, can also make exceptions to the default speed limit in consultation with their communities.
We have published a map on DataMapWales that shows which roads would stay at 30mph."
And in our area the ones remaining at 30mph are minimal
The argument about transport availability & cost highlights both the huge variances in availability and the huge gulf in understanding.
For your outer London resident there are riches in public transport options which are largely paid for out of general taxation. For your cundry bumpkins there is often a complete absence of public transport options despite paying general taxation.
For suburbanites it is optimal to encourage more public transport and less driving. For country folk the choice is driving or not going.*
Road pricing gets talked about as a replacement for fuel duty. And gets shouted at as being patently unfair. Which is probably true the way that shitbox UK would implement it. What we need is subsidised fuel for the countryside and heavier taxes in towns. ULEZ and similar is the right policy, just being implemented poorly.
* Before anyone says "what about walking or cycling", what about them? Too many roads between villages would be lethal to walk / cycle down, and thats before we ask about fitness / safety issues.
Agree. On your *, I agree that investment in walking and cycling, or even public transport, between villages isn't worth it.
But 83% of us live in urban areas, so investment in active and public transport makes sense for most.
Urban areas = towns, not cities.
I got a train (first time in about 5 years) recently, to and from the Airport, got the return train journey yesterday. To get to the train station took a car [in this case taxi] ride.
You seem to view the country as either Edinburgh or Sticksville. Reality is somewhat different.
I grew up in a town in rural Scotland. It had a train station. The main problem is you couldn't walk or cycle to it. Sounds like your problem too.
Even public transport in towns is designed for drivers.
Because cars work.
Towns require cars. The alternative to cars is taxis or buses. And that's the bulk of your 83%
You simply can't get your head around supply/demand, can you?
The only reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users is because there are lots of buses.
The reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users, is its a city. Its not a town, what part of this are you failing to understand?
Nothing wrong with buses existing, but buses in towns are a crappy mode of transportation that only those who can't afford their own car (or can't drive as they lack a licence) would use.
The thing with a car is if you want to get from A to B you drive there and are done.
With buses you are stuck with the bus routes, and in most towns the bus routes don't go between A and B if you aren't trying to get to the town centre. Get a bus into the bus depot in town, then another bus from the depot out of town to your destination. And of course that relies upo n the bus turning up, and the bus then follows its route stopping everywhere it has to stop.
My wife doesn't drive, she used to take two buses to get to work which took at least an hour, nearly an hour and a half sometimes one way. It took me 15 minutes to drive it, or 30 minutes return to go pick her up and drive her home.
Good luck finding a parking place at B unless your destination is a supermarket, or you are MD of the company.
I always find a parking place at B. 🤷♂️
Try leaving your bubble from time to time. Saying "oh but what about parking" to someone who drives everywhere and always finds parking, isn't much a problem.
You drive everywhere and always finds parking, in English towns, without a blue badge and without privileged access to private spaces?
I don't want to call you a liar, but happy to call you an outlier. 5 sigma.
Your kidding, right? The rest of the UK is not RBKC outside Harrods. There is plenty of parking all over the country in towns, villages, cities. Some even - gasp if you can believe this - for free.
Name me a town where you can't park without the criteria you specify.
Bath
Free Car Parks in Bath
Bath University Car Park BA2 7JX – free after 5pm every day, all day on public holidays. Sydney Road BA2 6NS – 4 hours maximum. Raby Mews BA2 4EJ – 2 hours maximum. Sydney Wharf BA2 4BG – 4 hours maximum. Daniel Street BA2 6NB – 2 hours maximum.
Those are just the free ones after a 46 millisecond google.
I was mildly joking. I agree you can generally park in most British towns quite easily. London is an outlier
I find the whole debate enervating and a bit depressing. Cars are shit and destroy townscapes. Thank god they are on the way out
What utter nonsense. A "Leon" post just to see who would bite.
Leon is right (unusually). I am someone who travels 30,000 miles a year and car travel is nightmarish. Main motorway arteries gridlocked adjacent to conurbations, particularly during rush hours. Parking is also difficult and expensive. Travel from the motorway to the parking spot is also slow and frustrating.
I'd take the bus if there were any.
Just looks better too
Take anywhere on earth, and remove the cars, and replace with people, trees, greenery, and it looks infinitely better
Cars are an abomination. Thank God they are in the Last Gasp Saloon. In decades to come we will look back and marvel - in a bad way - at how we allowed cars to destroy and desecrate beautiful towns and cities
Fuck knows what America is gonna do, tho. It is built for cars. Take them away and what is left?
And if you think the problem is colour photos vs black and white, consider these;
Both of those pictures look nice to me. 👍
Parks are a good thing to have, I think we can all agree with that. Most places, to get to somewhere like your bottom image, there's a parking lot, or road with parking, next to it. Which makes the park convenient and accessible. 👍
[Radio Norwich. Alan sits behind the mixing desks in the radio studio, wearing a Pringle sweater.] Alan Partridge: That was Big Yellow Taxi by Joni Mitchell, a song in which Joni complains they paved paradise to put up a parking lot, a measure which actually would have alleviated traffic congestion on the outskirts of paradise, something which Joni singularly fails to point out, perhaps because it doesn't quite fit in with her blinkered view of the world. Nevertheless, nice song. It's 4:35 AM, you're listening to Up With The Partridge.
Quite right.
It is a good song. But the "message" is complete bullshit.
"They took all the trees and put 'm in a tree museum". Oh really? Funny my road has countless of trees on it. In stretches, can't even see the houses through the trees from the main road.
There's many songs like that. Imagine by John Lennon, good song but describes an horrific dystopia not utopia. Or ironic by Alanis Morrissette, good song but the only ironic thing is how a song about irony includes nothing that's actually ironic.
While we're complaining about Lennon, I can't ever remember not hating "Merry Christmas War is Over". Even to a six year old who didn't know the meaning of the words 'smug' and 'pious' it sounded smug and pious. And even at the age of 6, the line "so this is Christmas" followed up with "another year over and a new one just begun" struck me as the witterings of someone who didn't care about getting the details right. "Another year nearly over and a new one about to start" may not have scanned but would have been more internally consistent. Wouldn't have saved it from banality though.
Though there are 12 days of Christmas, ending on 12th night, so 6th Jan is the final night.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
And Plaid. Don't forget them.
That might be significant given where their seats are.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
What, was Sunak's helicopter limited to 20mph? Sounds a bit dangerous.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
And Plaid. Don't forget them.
That might be significant given where their seats are.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
"These changes will affect most 30mph roads but not all.
This legislation changes the default speed limited on restricted roads. These are generally residential or busy pedestrian streets with streetlights.
But not all 30mph roads are restricted roads, and these remain at 30mph, and will be signed.
For restricted roads, local authorities and the 2 Trunk Road Agencies, can also make exceptions to the default speed limit in consultation with their communities.
We have published a map on DataMapWales that shows which roads would stay at 30mph."
That seems quite sensible. Default 20 mph in built up areas unless there is a strong case (eg lack of road collisions or schools) to revert to 30mph. Significantly reduced injuries in Edinburgh (particularly car occupants) when we brought it in.
Several more collisions on the A9 this weekend (tourist season), the usual junctions. Almost certainly have to introduce 40/50mph limits until a permanent solution is found.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
What, was Sunak's helicopter limited to 20mph? Sounds a bit dangerous.
I like it, but helicopters can move at whatever speed they want
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
The argument will be in England, not in Wales.
Vote Labour and see 20 limits and ULEZ schemes everywhere, just as Labour authorities have already been doing with the powers they have in London and in Wales.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
What, was Sunak's helicopter limited to 20mph? Sounds a bit dangerous.
I don’t think it’s a problem. AIUI they can hover.
The argument about transport availability & cost highlights both the huge variances in availability and the huge gulf in understanding.
For your outer London resident there are riches in public transport options which are largely paid for out of general taxation. For your cundry bumpkins there is often a complete absence of public transport options despite paying general taxation.
For suburbanites it is optimal to encourage more public transport and less driving. For country folk the choice is driving or not going.*
Road pricing gets talked about as a replacement for fuel duty. And gets shouted at as being patently unfair. Which is probably true the way that shitbox UK would implement it. What we need is subsidised fuel for the countryside and heavier taxes in towns. ULEZ and similar is the right policy, just being implemented poorly.
* Before anyone says "what about walking or cycling", what about them? Too many roads between villages would be lethal to walk / cycle down, and thats before we ask about fitness / safety issues.
Agree. On your *, I agree that investment in walking and cycling, or even public transport, between villages isn't worth it.
But 83% of us live in urban areas, so investment in active and public transport makes sense for most.
Urban areas = towns, not cities.
I got a train (first time in about 5 years) recently, to and from the Airport, got the return train journey yesterday. To get to the train station took a car [in this case taxi] ride.
You seem to view the country as either Edinburgh or Sticksville. Reality is somewhat different.
I grew up in a town in rural Scotland. It had a train station. The main problem is you couldn't walk or cycle to it. Sounds like your problem too.
Even public transport in towns is designed for drivers.
Because cars work.
Towns require cars. The alternative to cars is taxis or buses. And that's the bulk of your 83%
You simply can't get your head around supply/demand, can you?
The only reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users is because there are lots of buses.
The reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users, is its a city. Its not a town, what part of this are you failing to understand?
Nothing wrong with buses existing, but buses in towns are a crappy mode of transportation that only those who can't afford their own car (or can't drive as they lack a licence) would use.
The thing with a car is if you want to get from A to B you drive there and are done.
With buses you are stuck with the bus routes, and in most towns the bus routes don't go between A and B if you aren't trying to get to the town centre. Get a bus into the bus depot in town, then another bus from the depot out of town to your destination. And of course that relies upo n the bus turning up, and the bus then follows its route stopping everywhere it has to stop.
My wife doesn't drive, she used to take two buses to get to work which took at least an hour, nearly an hour and a half sometimes one way. It took me 15 minutes to drive it, or 30 minutes return to go pick her up and drive her home.
Good luck finding a parking place at B unless your destination is a supermarket, or you are MD of the company.
I always find a parking place at B. 🤷♂️
Try leaving your bubble from time to time. Saying "oh but what about parking" to someone who drives everywhere and always finds parking, isn't much a problem.
You drive everywhere and always finds parking, in English towns, without a blue badge and without privileged access to private spaces?
I don't want to call you a liar, but happy to call you an outlier. 5 sigma.
Your kidding, right? The rest of the UK is not RBKC outside Harrods. There is plenty of parking all over the country in towns, villages, cities. Some even - gasp if you can believe this - for free.
Name me a town where you can't park without the criteria you specify.
Bath
Free Car Parks in Bath
Bath University Car Park BA2 7JX – free after 5pm every day, all day on public holidays. Sydney Road BA2 6NS – 4 hours maximum. Raby Mews BA2 4EJ – 2 hours maximum. Sydney Wharf BA2 4BG – 4 hours maximum. Daniel Street BA2 6NB – 2 hours maximum.
Those are just the free ones after a 46 millisecond google.
I was mildly joking. I agree you can generally park in most British towns quite easily. London is an outlier
I find the whole debate enervating and a bit depressing. Cars are shit and destroy townscapes. Thank god they are on the way out
What utter nonsense. A "Leon" post just to see who would bite.
Leon is right (unusually). I am someone who travels 30,000 miles a year and car travel is nightmarish. Main motorway arteries gridlocked adjacent to conurbations, particularly during rush hours. Parking is also difficult and expensive. Travel from the motorway to the parking spot is also slow and frustrating.
I'd take the bus if there were any.
Just looks better too
Take anywhere on earth, and remove the cars, and replace with people, trees, greenery, and it looks infinitely better
Cars are an abomination. Thank God they are in the Last Gasp Saloon. In decades to come we will look back and marvel - in a bad way - at how we allowed cars to destroy and desecrate beautiful towns and cities
Fuck knows what America is gonna do, tho. It is built for cars. Take them away and what is left?
And if you think the problem is colour photos vs black and white, consider these;
Both of those pictures look nice to me. 👍
Parks are a good thing to have, I think we can all agree with that. Most places, to get to somewhere like your bottom image, there's a parking lot, or road with parking, next to it. Which makes the park convenient and accessible. 👍
[Radio Norwich. Alan sits behind the mixing desks in the radio studio, wearing a Pringle sweater.] Alan Partridge: That was Big Yellow Taxi by Joni Mitchell, a song in which Joni complains they paved paradise to put up a parking lot, a measure which actually would have alleviated traffic congestion on the outskirts of paradise, something which Joni singularly fails to point out, perhaps because it doesn't quite fit in with her blinkered view of the world. Nevertheless, nice song. It's 4:35 AM, you're listening to Up With The Partridge.
Quite right.
It is a good song. But the "message" is complete bullshit.
"They took all the trees and put 'm in a tree museum". Oh really? Funny my road has countless of trees on it. In stretches, can't even see the houses through the trees from the main road.
There's many songs like that. Imagine by John Lennon, good song but describes an horrific dystopia not utopia. Or ironic by Alanis Morrissette, good song but the only ironic thing is how a song about irony includes nothing that's actually ironic.
While we're complaining about Lennon, I can't ever remember not hating "Merry Christmas War is Over". Even to a six year old who didn't know the meaning of the words 'smug' and 'pious' it sounded smug and pious. And even at the age of 6, the line "so this is Christmas" followed up with "another year over and a new one just begun" struck me as the witterings of someone who didn't care about getting the details right. "Another year nearly over and a new one about to start" may not have scanned but would have been more internally consistent. Wouldn't have saved it from banality though.
You'll be complaining that there isn't actually a barber on Penny Lane next.
I’m still pissed off that however many times I played the album Pete Frampton singularly failed to “Come Alive”.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
What, was Sunak's helicopter limited to 20mph? Sounds a bit dangerous.
I like it, but helicopters can move at whatever speed they want
The argument about transport availability & cost highlights both the huge variances in availability and the huge gulf in understanding.
For your outer London resident there are riches in public transport options which are largely paid for out of general taxation. For your cundry bumpkins there is often a complete absence of public transport options despite paying general taxation.
For suburbanites it is optimal to encourage more public transport and less driving. For country folk the choice is driving or not going.*
Road pricing gets talked about as a replacement for fuel duty. And gets shouted at as being patently unfair. Which is probably true the way that shitbox UK would implement it. What we need is subsidised fuel for the countryside and heavier taxes in towns. ULEZ and similar is the right policy, just being implemented poorly.
* Before anyone says "what about walking or cycling", what about them? Too many roads between villages would be lethal to walk / cycle down, and thats before we ask about fitness / safety issues.
Agree. On your *, I agree that investment in walking and cycling, or even public transport, between villages isn't worth it.
But 83% of us live in urban areas, so investment in active and public transport makes sense for most.
Urban areas = towns, not cities.
I got a train (first time in about 5 years) recently, to and from the Airport, got the return train journey yesterday. To get to the train station took a car [in this case taxi] ride.
You seem to view the country as either Edinburgh or Sticksville. Reality is somewhat different.
I grew up in a town in rural Scotland. It had a train station. The main problem is you couldn't walk or cycle to it. Sounds like your problem too.
Even public transport in towns is designed for drivers.
Because cars work.
Towns require cars. The alternative to cars is taxis or buses. And that's the bulk of your 83%
You simply can't get your head around supply/demand, can you?
The only reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users is because there are lots of buses.
The reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users, is its a city. Its not a town, what part of this are you failing to understand?
Nothing wrong with buses existing, but buses in towns are a crappy mode of transportation that only those who can't afford their own car (or can't drive as they lack a licence) would use.
The thing with a car is if you want to get from A to B you drive there and are done.
With buses you are stuck with the bus routes, and in most towns the bus routes don't go between A and B if you aren't trying to get to the town centre. Get a bus into the bus depot in town, then another bus from the depot out of town to your destination. And of course that relies upo n the bus turning up, and the bus then follows its route stopping everywhere it has to stop.
My wife doesn't drive, she used to take two buses to get to work which took at least an hour, nearly an hour and a half sometimes one way. It took me 15 minutes to drive it, or 30 minutes return to go pick her up and drive her home.
Good luck finding a parking place at B unless your destination is a supermarket, or you are MD of the company.
I always find a parking place at B. 🤷♂️
Try leaving your bubble from time to time. Saying "oh but what about parking" to someone who drives everywhere and always finds parking, isn't much a problem.
You drive everywhere and always finds parking, in English towns, without a blue badge and without privileged access to private spaces?
I don't want to call you a liar, but happy to call you an outlier. 5 sigma.
Your kidding, right? The rest of the UK is not RBKC outside Harrods. There is plenty of parking all over the country in towns, villages, cities. Some even - gasp if you can believe this - for free.
Name me a town where you can't park without the criteria you specify.
Bath
Free Car Parks in Bath
Bath University Car Park BA2 7JX – free after 5pm every day, all day on public holidays. Sydney Road BA2 6NS – 4 hours maximum. Raby Mews BA2 4EJ – 2 hours maximum. Sydney Wharf BA2 4BG – 4 hours maximum. Daniel Street BA2 6NB – 2 hours maximum.
Those are just the free ones after a 46 millisecond google.
I was mildly joking. I agree you can generally park in most British towns quite easily. London is an outlier
I find the whole debate enervating and a bit depressing. Cars are shit and destroy townscapes. Thank god they are on the way out
What utter nonsense. A "Leon" post just to see who would bite.
Leon is right (unusually). I am someone who travels 30,000 miles a year and car travel is nightmarish. Main motorway arteries gridlocked adjacent to conurbations, particularly during rush hours. Parking is also difficult and expensive. Travel from the motorway to the parking spot is also slow and frustrating.
I'd take the bus if there were any.
Just looks better too
Take anywhere on earth, and remove the cars, and replace with people, trees, greenery, and it looks infinitely better
Cars are an abomination. Thank God they are in the Last Gasp Saloon. In decades to come we will look back and marvel - in a bad way - at how we allowed cars to destroy and desecrate beautiful towns and cities
Fuck knows what America is gonna do, tho. It is built for cars. Take them away and what is left?
"remove cars, and replace with people" is the most foolish comment yet. Its the cars that enable people to be brought to an area generally.
I know you love to be a manic Cassandra forecasting scenarios of doom and gloom, but of all of them your suggestion of the doom and gloom of the end of cars is the most crazy you have - and furthest from the truth.
Far from the end of the age of the car, the reality is that cars are better, safer, cleaner and driven more than they have ever been in history.
Cars may be better safer and cleaner than ever but that's like saying "Look we've perfected mass execution, why stop at Auschwitz?"
Cars are evil and everyone now knows it. The whole tendency of modern societies is therefore AWAY from the car, as they destroy cities and alienate humans. I know you don't like this, but this is the arrow of time, and it points in the opposite direction to the one you want to go. Ah well, you will cope
Here is an excellent essay on how cars destroyed America
"The road to ruin — how the car drove US cities to the brink
"Car-centric infrastructure turned many into unwalkable wastelands. Planners now look to prewar cities to find inspiration for the future"
Only problem is cars are very popular in a country like Germany, and they haven't destroyed that country. So it must be something specific to the United States.
The US has 900 cars per 1,000 people, and Germany has 628, which is quite a difference.
I suspect the answer, for what it's worth, is that urban areas that are built around cars, and where land is (or was) plentiful will tend to be very spread out. (See Los Angeles for example.)
This makes it difficult to implement sensible public transport, as your nearest metro/subway station will be a long way away.
German cities were built before cars, and therefore tend to have decent public transport options.
London would undoubtedly be better with fewer private passenger cars and better alternatives.
But what is true of London is not true of many other places.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
What, was Sunak's helicopter limited to 20mph? Sounds a bit dangerous.
I like it, but helicopters can move at whatever speed they want
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
It's just stupid (well, it's a Drakeford policy, of course it's stupid, but even by his standards it's impressive).
It's actually quite difficult to drive a modern car at 20mph consistently in anything other than second gear. Not good for the car, not good for emissions and not good from a noise point of view.
It also really does risk two things (1) idiots ignoring speed limits altogether on the grounds that they're a load of nonsense, so where you have important speed limits they get lost too and (2) idiots ignoring road conditions and constantly driving slowly regardless of the situation, causing massive tailbacks and/or crashes. Wales is already cursed with far too many of both these groups and it doesn't need more of either.
If Drakeford wanted to do something useful on road safety, perhaps he could clamp down on people like the twat with an undersized cock and a quad bike doing wheelies on the A48 at St Fagan's yesterday afternoon. But no, when they crash and kill themselves he writes articles blaming Tory cuts and a lack of social workers.
Honestly, if Wales get the politicians it deserves it must have done something epically bad.
Problem is 20 miles an hour isn't a problem if you have an automatic or electric car and at that speed there is little chance of people being seriously injured..
All the villages/towns on the A68 are 20 miles an hour from the Scottish Border to Edinburgh. I happily stick to the limit (through the towns) while driving that way but boy does it annoy the locals...
You touch on the main problem with driving at 20.
I'd be quite happy to do 20 in built up areas if it wasn't for the fact that nobody else wants to.
It is like doing 30 in a 30, but worse. Maybe that will change.
Though I expect those that do 40 in a 60 and 40 in a 30 will continue to do 40.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
What, was Sunak's helicopter limited to 20mph? Sounds a bit dangerous.
I like it, but helicopters can move at whatever speed they want
Which reminds me of one of my favourite bits of etymology: helicopter comes from helico (spinning, like a helix) + pter (wing, like in pterodactyl)
Presumably the cost of parkway would not be so prohibitive if the cost of land was not so prohibitive?
Aberdeen City spent a few million building a Park and Ride facility on the main route in from the north west as it crosses the bypass. Next to the airport.
Because it doesn't control buses, and because neither of the bus companies are willing to back down on vast subsidy demands, a grand total of zero buses serve it, despite 5 routes literally passing the entrance and the airport shuttle running a few hundred metres away.
Meanwhile in Edinburgh, the bus company is fully owned by the council(s), comprehensive network, profitable, and our park and rides (Ingliston in particular) run out of space.
And that is the major difference!
The secret is it is at arm's length - no meddling councillors lobbying for a bus stop.
This is a source of frustration for some but the reason why the network is so efficient. The managers think in the round.
So payed for by council tax payers but absolutely no democratic input from those voters . You wonder why taxpayers say fuck you?
Three models for buses: 1. Privatised. Council forced to pay subsidy to private bus company to keep socially required routes on, but even then they get withdrawn. 2. Arms length. Council owns a commercial bus company and has indirect control over the business 3. Nationalised. Council directly runs the buses
We don't have any of 3 left - and its effectively illegal in the UK. Unless we change the law and give councils a load of money which they can't spend on the services they are required by law to provide but don't have the cash to do so, our options are the first two.
In what way is BusCo - owned by the council, run commercially on behalf of the council - a worse option than the alternative of let the market choose not to run any buses at all that don't make a level of profit set by the bus company?
Cars give people freedom. Many use that freedom to fully express what wankers they are
I pulled out of a street earlier, onto London Road in Marlborough - which is also the A4. In Marlborough it's all 30mph limit; for the mile and a half before it reaches Marlborough it's a 50mph limit. I'd already committed to pulling out when I noticed a car coming down the hill to left in the 50, travelling at 70mph
I'm quite good at approximating speeds: I play golf, so have got quite good at judging distances in yards; I can count seconds fairly reliably; I'm pretty decent at maths, and the approximate maths is easy - 1760 yards in a mile ≃ 1800 seconds in half an hour, so you double yards per second to get mph
The road I was turning onto, and he was stupidly speeding at, had roadworks and lights about 300 yards ahead. The lights had just changed to red and there were four or five cars stopped or stopping at them in front of me; so I just rolled down toward them at about 10mph
Our speedster then decided to entertain us all with an astonishing display of his fuckwittedness
He was continuing to ignore the speed limit - I can't tell how much, judging distances in wing mirrors is rather trickier, but I'd guess still going 50 when he chose to employ his horn. He held it down for a good ten seconds, while also swerving from left to right as he closed in on me
We still had about a hundred yards to go when he desisted with the noise and swerving, so I held my horn down and started swerving for a few seconds. Then I had to stop, to avoid hitting the stationary car in front of me. I then put my arm out of the window to pretend wave him past into the oncoming traffic
I then saw his door open. He was getting out of his car. I shouldn't think he was coming to apologise for his dickheadish driving. I had a moment where I was looking forward to giving him a critique of his coming crash, but then the lights changed so I headed off before I could find out what sensible driving advice he wanted to give to me
He got left behind a bit at the lights, having to get back in his car, but ever so skilfully caught me up with a bit of a tyre screech. I turned off at the next street. Gladly he didn't follow me, but did rather impress me with another tyre screech as he sped to catch up with the car a hundred yards ahead
I love freedom
Just that kind of shit-for-brains driver was the cause of the only auto accident I was ever involved with in the United Kingdom . . . or in the entire Eastern Hemisphere for that matter.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
What, was Sunak's helicopter limited to 20mph? Sounds a bit dangerous.
I like it, but helicopters can move at whatever speed they want
Subject to air traffic control restrictions. Aircraft are often asked to fly at a certain speed, or to fly at ‘not above’ or ‘not below’ speeds for traffic management in busy airspace.
Every aircraft approaching Heathrow, does so at 160 knots.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
What, was Sunak's helicopter limited to 20mph? Sounds a bit dangerous.
I like it, but helicopters can move at whatever speed they want
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
It's just stupid (well, it's a Drakeford policy, of course it's stupid, but even by his standards it's impressive).
It's actually quite difficult to drive a modern car at 20mph consistently in anything other than second gear. Not good for the car, not good for emissions and not good from a noise point of view.
It also really does risk two things (1) idiots ignoring speed limits altogether on the grounds that they're a load of nonsense, so where you have important speed limits they get lost too and (2) idiots ignoring road conditions and constantly driving slowly regardless of the situation, causing massive tailbacks and/or crashes. Wales is already cursed with far too many of both these groups and it doesn't need more of either.
If Drakeford wanted to do something useful on road safety, perhaps he could clamp down on people like the twat with an undersized cock and a quad bike doing wheelies on the A48 at St Fagan's yesterday afternoon. But no, when they crash and kill themselves he writes articles blaming Tory cuts and a lack of social workers.
Honestly, if Wales get the politicians it deserves it must have done something epically bad.
Problem is 20 miles an hour isn't a problem if you have an automatic or electric car and at that speed there is little chance of people being seriously injured..
All the villages/towns on the A68 are 20 miles an hour from the Scottish Border to Edinburgh. I happily stick to the limit (through the towns) while driving that way but boy does it annoy the locals...
You touch on the main problem with driving at 20.
I'd be quite happy to do 20 in built up areas if it wasn't for the fact that nobody else wants to.
It is like doing 30 in a 30, but worse. Maybe that will change.
Though I expect those that do 40 in a 60 and 40 in a 30 will continue to do 40.
Hmmm.
That would cost them their licence, if caught, wouldn't it?
I think we've suddenly found one benefit to this policy...
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
Vote Labour and see 20 limits and ULEZ schemes everywhere, just as Labour authorities have already been doing with the powers they have in London and in Wales.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
One sensible US import I saw a couple of decades ago was '20 when lights flash' signs.
Put them outside schools so people slow down at the critical moment, but are not bothered by blanket bans at 2am on a Sunday morning (as I was coming back from work past Ysgol Rhydypennau in my student days).
They really do work, although someone needs to remember to turn them off in the holidays.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
What, was Sunak's helicopter limited to 20mph? Sounds a bit dangerous.
I like it, but helicopters can move at whatever speed they want
Subject to air traffic control restrictions. Aircraft are often asked to fly at a certain speed, or to fly at ‘not above’ or ‘not below’ speeds for traffic management in busy airspace.
Every aircraft approaching Heathrow, does so at 160 knots.
"Echo Bravo Delta Golf: can you maintain 160 knots to the outer marker?"
"Roger that Heathrow Control. Maintaining 160 to the outer marker"
Meanwhile this is what America did to Kansas City, in some pioneering urbanism that still inspires car-tards like @BartholomewRoberts and @Casino_Royale
On to the Monday evening polls - it's interesting after Opinium's 10% Reform on Saturday evening, Deltapoll has a 4% rating which seems more realistic.
R&W has small movements withhin MoE but the net effect is to increase Labour's lead to 18 - again, this makes the Opinium poll look "odd" with the Labour number though R&W have Reform on 8% versus Deltapoll at 4%.
The R&W numbers for England have Labour on 47%, Conservatives 28%, Liberal Democrats 11%, Reform 7%, Greens 6% and Others 1% so a 13-point Conservative lead in December 2019 is now a 19-point Labour lead making a 16% swing from Conservative to Labour so still well in landslide territory.
The Liberal Democrats are also enjoying a 9% swing from the Conservatives on these numbers.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
How many of those were caused by vehicles travelling at between 20 and 30 mph, and in how many of them was the speed the determining factor in the outcome?
I can't access the data, annoyingly, but without that information you can't draw that conclusion.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
How many of those were caused by vehicles travelling at between 20 and 30 mph, and in how many of them was the speed the determining factor in the outcome?
I can't access the data, annoyingly, but without that information you can't draw that conclusion.
True, but the laws of physics would suggest that speed has something to do with it. You suggesting 10mph limits? 😉
Edinburgh's 20mph has been a huge success. Significant reduction in injuries.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
What, was Sunak's helicopter limited to 20mph? Sounds a bit dangerous.
I like it, but helicopters can move at whatever speed they want
Subject to air traffic control restrictions. Aircraft are often asked to fly at a certain speed, or to fly at ‘not above’ or ‘not below’ speeds for traffic management in busy airspace.
Every aircraft approaching Heathrow, does so at 160 knots.
"Echo Bravo Delta Golf: can you maintain 160 knots to the outer marker?"
"Roger that Heathrow Control. Maintaining 160 to the outer marker"
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
How many of those were caused by vehicles travelling at between 20 and 30 mph, and in how many of them was the speed the determining factor in the outcome?
I can't access the data, annoyingly, but without that information you can't draw that conclusion.
True, but the laws of physics would suggest that speed has something to do with it. You suggesting 10mph limits? 😉
Edinburgh's 20mph has been a huge success. Significant reduction in injuries.
Again, you are making claims but not providing data (for either Llandudno or Edinburgh). Emojis don't cover the emptiness of your argument. Show me the evidence and I'll consider it.
I will leave the detail of the physics to @Stuartinromford but AIUI below 30mph due to the reduced braking distance and much lower energy it's comparatively rare for speed to be a more important factor than either inattention or casualty error.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
One sensible US import I saw a couple of decades ago was '20 when lights flash' signs.
Put them outside schools so people slow down at the critical moment, but are not bothered by blanket bans at 2am on a Sunday morning (as I was coming back from work past Ysgol Rhydypennau in my student days).
They really do work, although someone needs to remember to turn them off in the holidays.
Yes, all the schools have them around here. It's pretty sensible.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
How many of those were caused by vehicles travelling at between 20 and 30 mph, and in how many of them was the speed the determining factor in the outcome?
I can't access the data, annoyingly, but without that information you can't draw that conclusion.
Well quite, most Welsh car fatalities that make the news seem to be 3 or 4 teenagers, early hours Saturday or Sunday morning, probability of adherence to speed limit slim.
I don't think dragging motorists into the culture war will work for Sunak. Those who drive around in cities in their SUVs thinking it's their god-given right to park wherever they wish, including on pavements, are obviously already Tories (or Reform). Most motorists, however, have a more nuanced view of the pros and cons of cars, particularly in cities and towns, and it won't have any effect on their voting intention. Also, though it almost hurts me to say it, I'm with Leon on this one.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
What, was Sunak's helicopter limited to 20mph? Sounds a bit dangerous.
I like it, but helicopters can move at whatever speed they want
Subject to air traffic control restrictions. Aircraft are often asked to fly at a certain speed, or to fly at ‘not above’ or ‘not below’ speeds for traffic management in busy airspace.
Every aircraft approaching Heathrow, does so at 160 knots.
"Echo Bravo Delta Golf: can you maintain 160 knots to the outer marker?"
"Roger that Heathrow Control. Maintaining 160 to the outer marker"
I have a funny story about that. In 2002 I was working on a project in Barcelona, my boss in the UK had just got his twin rating and decided to fly himself out to a meeting in his new Seneca.
So going into Barcelona airport, he was asked to do 160 to 4 DME, and replied “negative, but can do 150 to 4”. ATC were okay with that, until right on the 4 mile marker he chopped the throttles to get down to about 90kt for his approach. The next thing he hears on the radio “Iberia 321 go around. I say again go around, acknowledge” followed by “Golf Alpha Bravo Charlie Delta please contact the tower by phone after landing”.
He was actually in the right, but the large airport wasn’t used to dealing with small planes and had messed up the spacing! Iberia got a bill for a couple of tonnes of fuel they weren’t expecting to use.
The argument about transport availability & cost highlights both the huge variances in availability and the huge gulf in understanding.
For your outer London resident there are riches in public transport options which are largely paid for out of general taxation. For your cundry bumpkins there is often a complete absence of public transport options despite paying general taxation.
For suburbanites it is optimal to encourage more public transport and less driving. For country folk the choice is driving or not going.*
Road pricing gets talked about as a replacement for fuel duty. And gets shouted at as being patently unfair. Which is probably true the way that shitbox UK would implement it. What we need is subsidised fuel for the countryside and heavier taxes in towns. ULEZ and similar is the right policy, just being implemented poorly.
* Before anyone says "what about walking or cycling", what about them? Too many roads between villages would be lethal to walk / cycle down, and thats before we ask about fitness / safety issues.
Agree. On your *, I agree that investment in walking and cycling, or even public transport, between villages isn't worth it.
But 83% of us live in urban areas, so investment in active and public transport makes sense for most.
Urban areas = towns, not cities.
I got a train (first time in about 5 years) recently, to and from the Airport, got the return train journey yesterday. To get to the train station took a car [in this case taxi] ride.
You seem to view the country as either Edinburgh or Sticksville. Reality is somewhat different.
I grew up in a town in rural Scotland. It had a train station. The main problem is you couldn't walk or cycle to it. Sounds like your problem too.
Even public transport in towns is designed for drivers.
Because cars work.
Towns require cars. The alternative to cars is taxis or buses. And that's the bulk of your 83%
You simply can't get your head around supply/demand, can you?
The only reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users is because there are lots of buses.
The reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users, is its a city. Its not a town, what part of this are you failing to understand?
Nothing wrong with buses existing, but buses in towns are a crappy mode of transportation that only those who can't afford their own car (or can't drive as they lack a licence) would use.
The thing with a car is if you want to get from A to B you drive there and are done.
With buses you are stuck with the bus routes, and in most towns the bus routes don't go between A and B if you aren't trying to get to the town centre. Get a bus into the bus depot in town, then another bus from the depot out of town to your destination. And of course that relies upo n the bus turning up, and the bus then follows its route stopping everywhere it has to stop.
My wife doesn't drive, she used to take two buses to get to work which took at least an hour, nearly an hour and a half sometimes one way. It took me 15 minutes to drive it, or 30 minutes return to go pick her up and drive her home.
Good luck finding a parking place at B unless your destination is a supermarket, or you are MD of the company.
I always find a parking place at B. 🤷♂️
Try leaving your bubble from time to time. Saying "oh but what about parking" to someone who drives everywhere and always finds parking, isn't much a problem.
You drive everywhere and always finds parking, in English towns, without a blue badge and without privileged access to private spaces?
I don't want to call you a liar, but happy to call you an outlier. 5 sigma.
Your kidding, right? The rest of the UK is not RBKC outside Harrods. There is plenty of parking all over the country in towns, villages, cities. Some even - gasp if you can believe this - for free.
Name me a town where you can't park without the criteria you specify.
Bath
Free Car Parks in Bath
Bath University Car Park BA2 7JX – free after 5pm every day, all day on public holidays. Sydney Road BA2 6NS – 4 hours maximum. Raby Mews BA2 4EJ – 2 hours maximum. Sydney Wharf BA2 4BG – 4 hours maximum. Daniel Street BA2 6NB – 2 hours maximum.
Those are just the free ones after a 46 millisecond google.
I was mildly joking. I agree you can generally park in most British towns quite easily. London is an outlier
I find the whole debate enervating and a bit depressing. Cars are shit and destroy townscapes. Thank god they are on the way out
What utter nonsense. A "Leon" post just to see who would bite.
Leon is right (unusually). I am someone who travels 30,000 miles a year and car travel is nightmarish. Main motorway arteries gridlocked adjacent to conurbations, particularly during rush hours. Parking is also difficult and expensive. Travel from the motorway to the parking spot is also slow and frustrating.
I'd take the bus if there were any.
Just looks better too
Take anywhere on earth, and remove the cars, and replace with people, trees, greenery, and it looks infinitely better
Cars are an abomination. Thank God they are in the Last Gasp Saloon. In decades to come we will look back and marvel - in a bad way - at how we allowed cars to destroy and desecrate beautiful towns and cities
Fuck knows what America is gonna do, tho. It is built for cars. Take them away and what is left?
And if you think the problem is colour photos vs black and white, consider these;
Both of those pictures look nice to me. 👍
Parks are a good thing to have, I think we can all agree with that. Most places, to get to somewhere like your bottom image, there's a parking lot, or road with parking, next to it. Which makes the park convenient and accessible. 👍
[Radio Norwich. Alan sits behind the mixing desks in the radio studio, wearing a Pringle sweater.] Alan Partridge: That was Big Yellow Taxi by Joni Mitchell, a song in which Joni complains they paved paradise to put up a parking lot, a measure which actually would have alleviated traffic congestion on the outskirts of paradise, something which Joni singularly fails to point out, perhaps because it doesn't quite fit in with her blinkered view of the world. Nevertheless, nice song. It's 4:35 AM, you're listening to Up With The Partridge.
Quite right.
It is a good song. But the "message" is complete bullshit.
"They took all the trees and put 'm in a tree museum". Oh really? Funny my road has countless of trees on it. In stretches, can't even see the houses through the trees from the main road.
There's many songs like that. Imagine by John Lennon, good song but describes an horrific dystopia not utopia. Or ironic by Alanis Morrissette, good song but the only ironic thing is how a song about irony includes nothing that's actually ironic.
While we're complaining about Lennon, I can't ever remember not hating "Merry Christmas War is Over". Even to a six year old who didn't know the meaning of the words 'smug' and 'pious' it sounded smug and pious. And even at the age of 6, the line "so this is Christmas" followed up with "another year over and a new one just begun" struck me as the witterings of someone who didn't care about getting the details right. "Another year nearly over and a new one about to start" may not have scanned but would have been more internally consistent. Wouldn't have saved it from banality though.
Though there are 12 days of Christmas, ending on 12th night, so 6th Jan is the final night.
Strictly speaking Lennon would be correct.
Many leave Christmas trees out and decorations up until 6 January, but few wish each other merry Christmas after New Year's Eve.
Other possibilities include
1. He counted the year as turning at the winter solstice. (He wouldn't be the only one.) 2. He was using "year" to mean "a 12-month period", in the way that you might say a year has passed since a person's previous birthday. 3. He was going by the Orthodox date for Christmas. 4. Everything he said was wrong, because let's face it, this man dared to give his MBE back in protest at the British government's support for the US war effort in Vietnam and its support for the Nigerian government over Biafra. How dare he?
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
One sensible US import I saw a couple of decades ago was '20 when lights flash' signs.
Put them outside schools so people slow down at the critical moment, but are not bothered by blanket bans at 2am on a Sunday morning (as I was coming back from work past Ysgol Rhydypennau in my student days).
They really do work, although someone needs to remember to turn them off in the holidays.
Yes, all the schools have them around here. It's pretty sensible.
My father first saw them when we were in Oregon. He thought it was a brilliant idea (and my father was hardly an anti-car nut) because people are more inclined to obey speed limits they see a reason for.
He was very pleased when a couple of years later they started being rolled out here. Obviously somebody with the power to do something had been to America and thought the same!
Cars give people freedom. Many use that freedom to fully express what wankers they are
I pulled out of a street earlier, onto London Road in Marlborough - which is also the A4. In Marlborough it's all 30mph limit; for the mile and a half before it reaches Marlborough it's a 50mph limit. I'd already committed to pulling out when I noticed a car coming down the hill to left in the 50, travelling at 70mph
I'm quite good at approximating speeds: I play golf, so have got quite good at judging distances in yards; I can count seconds fairly reliably; I'm pretty decent at maths, and the approximate maths is easy - 1760 yards in a mile ≃ 1800 seconds in half an hour, so you double yards per second to get mph
The road I was turning onto, and he was stupidly speeding at, had roadworks and lights about 300 yards ahead. The lights had just changed to red and there were four or five cars stopped or stopping at them in front of me; so I just rolled down toward them at about 10mph
Our speedster then decided to entertain us all with an astonishing display of his fuckwittedness
He was continuing to ignore the speed limit - I can't tell how much, judging distances in wing mirrors is rather trickier, but I'd guess still going 50 when he chose to employ his horn. He held it down for a good ten seconds, while also swerving from left to right as he closed in on me
We still had about a hundred yards to go when he desisted with the noise and swerving, so I held my horn down and started swerving for a few seconds. Then I had to stop, to avoid hitting the stationary car in front of me. I then put my arm out of the window to pretend wave him past into the oncoming traffic
I then saw his door open. He was getting out of his car. I shouldn't think he was coming to apologise for his dickheadish driving. I had a moment where I was looking forward to giving him a critique of his coming crash, but then the lights changed so I headed off before I could find out what sensible driving advice he wanted to give to me
He got left behind a bit at the lights, having to get back in his car, but ever so skilfully caught me up with a bit of a tyre screech. I turned off at the next street. Gladly he didn't follow me, but did rather impress me with another tyre screech as he sped to catch up with the car a hundred yards ahead
I love freedom
Just that kind of shit-for-brains driver was the cause of the only auto accident I was ever involved with in the United Kingdom . . . or in the entire Eastern Hemisphere for that matter.
Pedantry alert - technically speaking most of the U.K. (ie that bit west of the Greenwich Meridian) is in the Western Hemisphere.
Fun fact. I don’t know whether I was born in the Eastern or Western Hemisphere because Whipps Cross Hospital sits on said meridian.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
One sensible US import I saw a couple of decades ago was '20 when lights flash' signs.
Put them outside schools so people slow down at the critical moment, but are not bothered by blanket bans at 2am on a Sunday morning (as I was coming back from work past Ysgol Rhydypennau in my student days).
They really do work, although someone needs to remember to turn them off in the holidays.
Yes, all the schools have them around here. It's pretty sensible.
My father first saw them when we were in Oregon. He thought it was a brilliant idea (and my father was hardly an anti-car nut) because people are more inclined to obey speed limits they see a reason for.
He was very pleased when a couple of years later they started being rolled out here. Obviously somebody with the power to do something had been to America and thought the same!
I’ve heard it stated, that because they aren’t enforcement systems, they are much cheaper than speed cameras. No elaborate calibration and proof of correctness.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
How many of those were caused by vehicles travelling at between 20 and 30 mph, and in how many of them was the speed the determining factor in the outcome?
I can't access the data, annoyingly, but without that information you can't draw that conclusion.
True, but the laws of physics would suggest that speed has something to do with it. You suggesting 10mph limits? 😉
Edinburgh's 20mph has been a huge success. Significant reduction in injuries.
Just to take one example, your 'couple of fatalities' would include Finlay Jones, who was killed last October apparently overtaking in a 40mph zone and skidding off the road to hit a wall (details are still a little vague).
That would suggest (a) he was speeding at the time (b) if he was speeding then he would speed still if it was a 20 zone and (c) although he was speeding that wasn't the deciding factor.
It should be noted that this road however might actually have its speed limit cut to 20mph (as it was reduced to 30mph after the accident) but it wasn't the key in that particular accident.
The argument about transport availability & cost highlights both the huge variances in availability and the huge gulf in understanding.
For your outer London resident there are riches in public transport options which are largely paid for out of general taxation. For your cundry bumpkins there is often a complete absence of public transport options despite paying general taxation.
For suburbanites it is optimal to encourage more public transport and less driving. For country folk the choice is driving or not going.*
Road pricing gets talked about as a replacement for fuel duty. And gets shouted at as being patently unfair. Which is probably true the way that shitbox UK would implement it. What we need is subsidised fuel for the countryside and heavier taxes in towns. ULEZ and similar is the right policy, just being implemented poorly.
* Before anyone says "what about walking or cycling", what about them? Too many roads between villages would be lethal to walk / cycle down, and thats before we ask about fitness / safety issues.
Agree. On your *, I agree that investment in walking and cycling, or even public transport, between villages isn't worth it.
But 83% of us live in urban areas, so investment in active and public transport makes sense for most.
Urban areas = towns, not cities.
I got a train (first time in about 5 years) recently, to and from the Airport, got the return train journey yesterday. To get to the train station took a car [in this case taxi] ride.
You seem to view the country as either Edinburgh or Sticksville. Reality is somewhat different.
I grew up in a town in rural Scotland. It had a train station. The main problem is you couldn't walk or cycle to it. Sounds like your problem too.
Even public transport in towns is designed for drivers.
Because cars work.
Towns require cars. The alternative to cars is taxis or buses. And that's the bulk of your 83%
You simply can't get your head around supply/demand, can you?
The only reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users is because there are lots of buses.
The reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users, is its a city. Its not a town, what part of this are you failing to understand?
Nothing wrong with buses existing, but buses in towns are a crappy mode of transportation that only those who can't afford their own car (or can't drive as they lack a licence) would use.
The thing with a car is if you want to get from A to B you drive there and are done.
With buses you are stuck with the bus routes, and in most towns the bus routes don't go between A and B if you aren't trying to get to the town centre. Get a bus into the bus depot in town, then another bus from the depot out of town to your destination. And of course that relies upo n the bus turning up, and the bus then follows its route stopping everywhere it has to stop.
My wife doesn't drive, she used to take two buses to get to work which took at least an hour, nearly an hour and a half sometimes one way. It took me 15 minutes to drive it, or 30 minutes return to go pick her up and drive her home.
Good luck finding a parking place at B unless your destination is a supermarket, or you are MD of the company.
I always find a parking place at B. 🤷♂️
Try leaving your bubble from time to time. Saying "oh but what about parking" to someone who drives everywhere and always finds parking, isn't much a problem.
You drive everywhere and always finds parking, in English towns, without a blue badge and without privileged access to private spaces?
I don't want to call you a liar, but happy to call you an outlier. 5 sigma.
Your kidding, right? The rest of the UK is not RBKC outside Harrods. There is plenty of parking all over the country in towns, villages, cities. Some even - gasp if you can believe this - for free.
Name me a town where you can't park without the criteria you specify.
Bath
Free Car Parks in Bath
Bath University Car Park BA2 7JX – free after 5pm every day, all day on public holidays. Sydney Road BA2 6NS – 4 hours maximum. Raby Mews BA2 4EJ – 2 hours maximum. Sydney Wharf BA2 4BG – 4 hours maximum. Daniel Street BA2 6NB – 2 hours maximum.
Those are just the free ones after a 46 millisecond google.
I was mildly joking. I agree you can generally park in most British towns quite easily. London is an outlier
I find the whole debate enervating and a bit depressing. Cars are shit and destroy townscapes. Thank god they are on the way out
What utter nonsense. A "Leon" post just to see who would bite.
Leon is right (unusually). I am someone who travels 30,000 miles a year and car travel is nightmarish. Main motorway arteries gridlocked adjacent to conurbations, particularly during rush hours. Parking is also difficult and expensive. Travel from the motorway to the parking spot is also slow and frustrating.
I'd take the bus if there were any.
Just looks better too
Take anywhere on earth, and remove the cars, and replace with people, trees, greenery, and it looks infinitely better
Cars are an abomination. Thank God they are in the Last Gasp Saloon. In decades to come we will look back and marvel - in a bad way - at how we allowed cars to destroy and desecrate beautiful towns and cities
Fuck knows what America is gonna do, tho. It is built for cars. Take them away and what is left?
And if you think the problem is colour photos vs black and white, consider these;
Both of those pictures look nice to me. 👍
Parks are a good thing to have, I think we can all agree with that. Most places, to get to somewhere like your bottom image, there's a parking lot, or road with parking, next to it. Which makes the park convenient and accessible. 👍
[Radio Norwich. Alan sits behind the mixing desks in the radio studio, wearing a Pringle sweater.] Alan Partridge: That was Big Yellow Taxi by Joni Mitchell, a song in which Joni complains they paved paradise to put up a parking lot, a measure which actually would have alleviated traffic congestion on the outskirts of paradise, something which Joni singularly fails to point out, perhaps because it doesn't quite fit in with her blinkered view of the world. Nevertheless, nice song. It's 4:35 AM, you're listening to Up With The Partridge.
Quite right.
It is a good song. But the "message" is complete bullshit.
"They took all the trees and put 'm in a tree museum". Oh really? Funny my road has countless of trees on it. In stretches, can't even see the houses through the trees from the main road.
There's many songs like that. Imagine by John Lennon, good song but describes an horrific dystopia not utopia. Or ironic by Alanis Morrissette, good song but the only ironic thing is how a song about irony includes nothing that's actually ironic.
While we're complaining about Lennon, I can't ever remember not hating "Merry Christmas War is Over". Even to a six year old who didn't know the meaning of the words 'smug' and 'pious' it sounded smug and pious. And even at the age of 6, the line "so this is Christmas" followed up with "another year over and a new one just begun" struck me as the witterings of someone who didn't care about getting the details right. "Another year nearly over and a new one about to start" may not have scanned but would have been more internally consistent. Wouldn't have saved it from banality though.
Though there are 12 days of Christmas, ending on 12th night, so 6th Jan is the final night.
Strictly speaking Lennon would be correct.
Many leave Christmas trees out and decorations up until 6 January, but few wish each other merry Christmas after New Year's Eve.
Other possibilities include
1. He counted the year as turning at the winter solstice. (He wouldn't be the only one.) 2. He was using "year" to mean "a 12-month period", in the way that you might say a year has passed since a person's previous birthday. 3. He was going by the Orthodox date for Christmas. 4. Everything he said was wrong, because let's face it, this man dared to give his MBE back in protest at the British government's support for the US war effort in Vietnam and its support for the Nigerian government over Biafra. How dare he?
And let's all pretend that he did not respond to Brian Epstein's request for suggestions for a title for his autobiography with "Queer Jew". Legend.
That refusing to convict Trump despite saying he was responsible for January 6th and walking on eggshells around him seems to be working out great for Mitch McConnell.
Cars give people freedom. Many use that freedom to fully express what wankers they are
I pulled out of a street earlier, onto London Road in Marlborough - which is also the A4. In Marlborough it's all 30mph limit; for the mile and a half before it reaches Marlborough it's a 50mph limit. I'd already committed to pulling out when I noticed a car coming down the hill to left in the 50, travelling at 70mph
I'm quite good at approximating speeds: I play golf, so have got quite good at judging distances in yards; I can count seconds fairly reliably; I'm pretty decent at maths, and the approximate maths is easy - 1760 yards in a mile ≃ 1800 seconds in half an hour, so you double yards per second to get mph
The road I was turning onto, and he was stupidly speeding at, had roadworks and lights about 300 yards ahead. The lights had just changed to red and there were four or five cars stopped or stopping at them in front of me; so I just rolled down toward them at about 10mph
Our speedster then decided to entertain us all with an astonishing display of his fuckwittedness
He was continuing to ignore the speed limit - I can't tell how much, judging distances in wing mirrors is rather trickier, but I'd guess still going 50 when he chose to employ his horn. He held it down for a good ten seconds, while also swerving from left to right as he closed in on me
We still had about a hundred yards to go when he desisted with the noise and swerving, so I held my horn down and started swerving for a few seconds. Then I had to stop, to avoid hitting the stationary car in front of me. I then put my arm out of the window to pretend wave him past into the oncoming traffic
I then saw his door open. He was getting out of his car. I shouldn't think he was coming to apologise for his dickheadish driving. I had a moment where I was looking forward to giving him a critique of his coming crash, but then the lights changed so I headed off before I could find out what sensible driving advice he wanted to give to me
He got left behind a bit at the lights, having to get back in his car, but ever so skilfully caught me up with a bit of a tyre screech. I turned off at the next street. Gladly he didn't follow me, but did rather impress me with another tyre screech as he sped to catch up with the car a hundred yards ahead
Mainstream media has been very poor on reporting the Trump trial(s) - largely repeating his shit without seriously questioning it.
They've never learned. You see so much better stuff delving into the issues elsewhere but a lot of big organisations just go 'Trump said X' and then about 8 paragraphs down go 'Others disagree though'.
The argument about transport availability & cost highlights both the huge variances in availability and the huge gulf in understanding.
For your outer London resident there are riches in public transport options which are largely paid for out of general taxation. For your cundry bumpkins there is often a complete absence of public transport options despite paying general taxation.
For suburbanites it is optimal to encourage more public transport and less driving. For country folk the choice is driving or not going.*
Road pricing gets talked about as a replacement for fuel duty. And gets shouted at as being patently unfair. Which is probably true the way that shitbox UK would implement it. What we need is subsidised fuel for the countryside and heavier taxes in towns. ULEZ and similar is the right policy, just being implemented poorly.
* Before anyone says "what about walking or cycling", what about them? Too many roads between villages would be lethal to walk / cycle down, and thats before we ask about fitness / safety issues.
Agree. On your *, I agree that investment in walking and cycling, or even public transport, between villages isn't worth it.
But 83% of us live in urban areas, so investment in active and public transport makes sense for most.
Urban areas = towns, not cities.
I got a train (first time in about 5 years) recently, to and from the Airport, got the return train journey yesterday. To get to the train station took a car [in this case taxi] ride.
You seem to view the country as either Edinburgh or Sticksville. Reality is somewhat different.
I grew up in a town in rural Scotland. It had a train station. The main problem is you couldn't walk or cycle to it. Sounds like your problem too.
Even public transport in towns is designed for drivers.
Because cars work.
Towns require cars. The alternative to cars is taxis or buses. And that's the bulk of your 83%
You simply can't get your head around supply/demand, can you?
The only reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users is because there are lots of buses.
The reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users, is its a city. Its not a town, what part of this are you failing to understand?
Nothing wrong with buses existing, but buses in towns are a crappy mode of transportation that only those who can't afford their own car (or can't drive as they lack a licence) would use.
The thing with a car is if you want to get from A to B you drive there and are done.
With buses you are stuck with the bus routes, and in most towns the bus routes don't go between A and B if you aren't trying to get to the town centre. Get a bus into the bus depot in town, then another bus from the depot out of town to your destination. And of course that relies upo n the bus turning up, and the bus then follows its route stopping everywhere it has to stop.
My wife doesn't drive, she used to take two buses to get to work which took at least an hour, nearly an hour and a half sometimes one way. It took me 15 minutes to drive it, or 30 minutes return to go pick her up and drive her home.
Good luck finding a parking place at B unless your destination is a supermarket, or you are MD of the company.
I always find a parking place at B. 🤷♂️
Try leaving your bubble from time to time. Saying "oh but what about parking" to someone who drives everywhere and always finds parking, isn't much a problem.
You drive everywhere and always finds parking, in English towns, without a blue badge and without privileged access to private spaces?
I don't want to call you a liar, but happy to call you an outlier. 5 sigma.
Your kidding, right? The rest of the UK is not RBKC outside Harrods. There is plenty of parking all over the country in towns, villages, cities. Some even - gasp if you can believe this - for free.
Name me a town where you can't park without the criteria you specify.
Bath
Free Car Parks in Bath
Bath University Car Park BA2 7JX – free after 5pm every day, all day on public holidays. Sydney Road BA2 6NS – 4 hours maximum. Raby Mews BA2 4EJ – 2 hours maximum. Sydney Wharf BA2 4BG – 4 hours maximum. Daniel Street BA2 6NB – 2 hours maximum.
Those are just the free ones after a 46 millisecond google.
I was mildly joking. I agree you can generally park in most British towns quite easily. London is an outlier
I find the whole debate enervating and a bit depressing. Cars are shit and destroy townscapes. Thank god they are on the way out
What utter nonsense. A "Leon" post just to see who would bite.
Leon is right (unusually). I am someone who travels 30,000 miles a year and car travel is nightmarish. Main motorway arteries gridlocked adjacent to conurbations, particularly during rush hours. Parking is also difficult and expensive. Travel from the motorway to the parking spot is also slow and frustrating.
I'd take the bus if there were any.
Just looks better too
Take anywhere on earth, and remove the cars, and replace with people, trees, greenery, and it looks infinitely better
Cars are an abomination. Thank God they are in the Last Gasp Saloon. In decades to come we will look back and marvel - in a bad way - at how we allowed cars to destroy and desecrate beautiful towns and cities
Fuck knows what America is gonna do, tho. It is built for cars. Take them away and what is left?
And if you think the problem is colour photos vs black and white, consider these;
Both of those pictures look nice to me. 👍
Parks are a good thing to have, I think we can all agree with that. Most places, to get to somewhere like your bottom image, there's a parking lot, or road with parking, next to it. Which makes the park convenient and accessible. 👍
[Radio Norwich. Alan sits behind the mixing desks in the radio studio, wearing a Pringle sweater.] Alan Partridge: That was Big Yellow Taxi by Joni Mitchell, a song in which Joni complains they paved paradise to put up a parking lot, a measure which actually would have alleviated traffic congestion on the outskirts of paradise, something which Joni singularly fails to point out, perhaps because it doesn't quite fit in with her blinkered view of the world. Nevertheless, nice song. It's 4:35 AM, you're listening to Up With The Partridge.
Quite right.
It is a good song. But the "message" is complete bullshit.
"They took all the trees and put 'm in a tree museum". Oh really? Funny my road has countless of trees on it. In stretches, can't even see the houses through the trees from the main road.
There's many songs like that. Imagine by John Lennon, good song but describes an horrific dystopia not utopia. Or ironic by Alanis Morrissette, good song but the only ironic thing is how a song about irony includes nothing that's actually ironic.
While we're complaining about Lennon, I can't ever remember not hating "Merry Christmas War is Over". Even to a six year old who didn't know the meaning of the words 'smug' and 'pious' it sounded smug and pious. And even at the age of 6, the line "so this is Christmas" followed up with "another year over and a new one just begun" struck me as the witterings of someone who didn't care about getting the details right. "Another year nearly over and a new one about to start" may not have scanned but would have been more internally consistent. Wouldn't have saved it from banality though.
Though there are 12 days of Christmas, ending on 12th night, so 6th Jan is the final night.
Strictly speaking Lennon would be correct.
Many leave Christmas trees out and decorations up until 6 January, but few wish each other merry Christmas after New Year's Eve.
Other possibilities include
1. He counted the year as turning at the winter solstice. (He wouldn't be the only one.) 2. He was using "year" to mean "a 12-month period", in the way that you might say a year has passed since a person's previous birthday. 3. He was going by the Orthodox date for Christmas. 4. Everything he said was wrong, because let's face it, this man dared to give his MBE back in protest at the British government's support for the US war effort in Vietnam and its support for the Nigerian government over Biafra. How dare he?
And let's all pretend that he did not respond to Brian Epstein's request for suggestions for a title for his autobiography with "Queer Jew". Legend.
Epstein was queer, and he was also a Jew. It’s a bit blunt as titles go, but it’s hardly proof Lennon was a Nazi
The argument about transport availability & cost highlights both the huge variances in availability and the huge gulf in understanding.
For your outer London resident there are riches in public transport options which are largely paid for out of general taxation. For your cundry bumpkins there is often a complete absence of public transport options despite paying general taxation.
For suburbanites it is optimal to encourage more public transport and less driving. For country folk the choice is driving or not going.*
Road pricing gets talked about as a replacement for fuel duty. And gets shouted at as being patently unfair. Which is probably true the way that shitbox UK would implement it. What we need is subsidised fuel for the countryside and heavier taxes in towns. ULEZ and similar is the right policy, just being implemented poorly.
* Before anyone says "what about walking or cycling", what about them? Too many roads between villages would be lethal to walk / cycle down, and thats before we ask about fitness / safety issues.
Agree. On your *, I agree that investment in walking and cycling, or even public transport, between villages isn't worth it.
But 83% of us live in urban areas, so investment in active and public transport makes sense for most.
Urban areas = towns, not cities.
I got a train (first time in about 5 years) recently, to and from the Airport, got the return train journey yesterday. To get to the train station took a car [in this case taxi] ride.
You seem to view the country as either Edinburgh or Sticksville. Reality is somewhat different.
I grew up in a town in rural Scotland. It had a train station. The main problem is you couldn't walk or cycle to it. Sounds like your problem too.
Even public transport in towns is designed for drivers.
Because cars work.
Towns require cars. The alternative to cars is taxis or buses. And that's the bulk of your 83%
You simply can't get your head around supply/demand, can you?
The only reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users is because there are lots of buses.
The reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users, is its a city. Its not a town, what part of this are you failing to understand?
Nothing wrong with buses existing, but buses in towns are a crappy mode of transportation that only those who can't afford their own car (or can't drive as they lack a licence) would use.
The thing with a car is if you want to get from A to B you drive there and are done.
With buses you are stuck with the bus routes, and in most towns the bus routes don't go between A and B if you aren't trying to get to the town centre. Get a bus into the bus depot in town, then another bus from the depot out of town to your destination. And of course that relies upo n the bus turning up, and the bus then follows its route stopping everywhere it has to stop.
My wife doesn't drive, she used to take two buses to get to work which took at least an hour, nearly an hour and a half sometimes one way. It took me 15 minutes to drive it, or 30 minutes return to go pick her up and drive her home.
Good luck finding a parking place at B unless your destination is a supermarket, or you are MD of the company.
I always find a parking place at B. 🤷♂️
Try leaving your bubble from time to time. Saying "oh but what about parking" to someone who drives everywhere and always finds parking, isn't much a problem.
You drive everywhere and always finds parking, in English towns, without a blue badge and without privileged access to private spaces?
I don't want to call you a liar, but happy to call you an outlier. 5 sigma.
Your kidding, right? The rest of the UK is not RBKC outside Harrods. There is plenty of parking all over the country in towns, villages, cities. Some even - gasp if you can believe this - for free.
Name me a town where you can't park without the criteria you specify.
Bath
Free Car Parks in Bath
Bath University Car Park BA2 7JX – free after 5pm every day, all day on public holidays. Sydney Road BA2 6NS – 4 hours maximum. Raby Mews BA2 4EJ – 2 hours maximum. Sydney Wharf BA2 4BG – 4 hours maximum. Daniel Street BA2 6NB – 2 hours maximum.
Those are just the free ones after a 46 millisecond google.
I was mildly joking. I agree you can generally park in most British towns quite easily. London is an outlier
I find the whole debate enervating and a bit depressing. Cars are shit and destroy townscapes. Thank god they are on the way out
What utter nonsense. A "Leon" post just to see who would bite.
Leon is right (unusually). I am someone who travels 30,000 miles a year and car travel is nightmarish. Main motorway arteries gridlocked adjacent to conurbations, particularly during rush hours. Parking is also difficult and expensive. Travel from the motorway to the parking spot is also slow and frustrating.
I'd take the bus if there were any.
Just looks better too
Take anywhere on earth, and remove the cars, and replace with people, trees, greenery, and it looks infinitely better
Cars are an abomination. Thank God they are in the Last Gasp Saloon. In decades to come we will look back and marvel - in a bad way - at how we allowed cars to destroy and desecrate beautiful towns and cities
Fuck knows what America is gonna do, tho. It is built for cars. Take them away and what is left?
And if you think the problem is colour photos vs black and white, consider these;
Both of those pictures look nice to me. 👍
Parks are a good thing to have, I think we can all agree with that. Most places, to get to somewhere like your bottom image, there's a parking lot, or road with parking, next to it. Which makes the park convenient and accessible. 👍
London actually has excellent public transport connections. They have buses, subway, trains, comprehensive cycle network. 👍
That's how that park was made possible. 👍
Indeed. I go to that park often. I have never gone there by car (or taxi).
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
One sensible US import I saw a couple of decades ago was '20 when lights flash' signs.
Put them outside schools so people slow down at the critical moment, but are not bothered by blanket bans at 2am on a Sunday morning (as I was coming back from work past Ysgol Rhydypennau in my student days).
They really do work, although someone needs to remember to turn them off in the holidays.
Yes, all the schools have them around here. It's pretty sensible.
My father first saw them when we were in Oregon. He thought it was a brilliant idea (and my father was hardly an anti-car nut) because people are more inclined to obey speed limits they see a reason for.
He was very pleased when a couple of years later they started being rolled out here. Obviously somebody with the power to do something had been to America and thought the same!
I’ve heard it stated, that because they aren’t enforcement systems, they are much cheaper than speed cameras. No elaborate calibration and proof of correctness.
They have a few round West London.
What you want is a few signs that flash a temporary speed limit during school peak hours, and one policeman who regularly turns up with his hairdryer across a dozen locations.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
I don't think dragging motorists into the culture war will work for Sunak. Those who drive around in cities in their SUVs thinking it's their god-given right to park wherever they wish, including on pavements, are obviously already Tories (or Reform). Most motorists, however, have a more nuanced view of the pros and cons of cars, particularly in cities and towns, and it won't have any effect on their voting intention. Also, though it almost hurts me to say it, I'm with Leon on this one.
Yeah this is true. Most people use their cars because they feel like there is no alternative, not because they love their car or are 'pro motorist'.
What the tories don't seem to think about is how this posturing puts other people off voting conservative. The 'pro motorist' stance is really off putting for a lot of voters. They can surely make something out of the ULEZ issue without turning themselves in to the 'pro motorist' party?
The argument about transport availability & cost highlights both the huge variances in availability and the huge gulf in understanding.
For your outer London resident there are riches in public transport options which are largely paid for out of general taxation. For your cundry bumpkins there is often a complete absence of public transport options despite paying general taxation.
For suburbanites it is optimal to encourage more public transport and less driving. For country folk the choice is driving or not going.*
Road pricing gets talked about as a replacement for fuel duty. And gets shouted at as being patently unfair. Which is probably true the way that shitbox UK would implement it. What we need is subsidised fuel for the countryside and heavier taxes in towns. ULEZ and similar is the right policy, just being implemented poorly.
* Before anyone says "what about walking or cycling", what about them? Too many roads between villages would be lethal to walk / cycle down, and thats before we ask about fitness / safety issues.
Agree. On your *, I agree that investment in walking and cycling, or even public transport, between villages isn't worth it.
But 83% of us live in urban areas, so investment in active and public transport makes sense for most.
Urban areas = towns, not cities.
I got a train (first time in about 5 years) recently, to and from the Airport, got the return train journey yesterday. To get to the train station took a car [in this case taxi] ride.
You seem to view the country as either Edinburgh or Sticksville. Reality is somewhat different.
I grew up in a town in rural Scotland. It had a train station. The main problem is you couldn't walk or cycle to it. Sounds like your problem too.
Even public transport in towns is designed for drivers.
Because cars work.
Towns require cars. The alternative to cars is taxis or buses. And that's the bulk of your 83%
You simply can't get your head around supply/demand, can you?
The only reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users is because there are lots of buses.
The reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users, is its a city. Its not a town, what part of this are you failing to understand?
Nothing wrong with buses existing, but buses in towns are a crappy mode of transportation that only those who can't afford their own car (or can't drive as they lack a licence) would use.
The thing with a car is if you want to get from A to B you drive there and are done.
With buses you are stuck with the bus routes, and in most towns the bus routes don't go between A and B if you aren't trying to get to the town centre. Get a bus into the bus depot in town, then another bus from the depot out of town to your destination. And of course that relies upo n the bus turning up, and the bus then follows its route stopping everywhere it has to stop.
My wife doesn't drive, she used to take two buses to get to work which took at least an hour, nearly an hour and a half sometimes one way. It took me 15 minutes to drive it, or 30 minutes return to go pick her up and drive her home.
Good luck finding a parking place at B unless your destination is a supermarket, or you are MD of the company.
I always find a parking place at B. 🤷♂️
Try leaving your bubble from time to time. Saying "oh but what about parking" to someone who drives everywhere and always finds parking, isn't much a problem.
You drive everywhere and always finds parking, in English towns, without a blue badge and without privileged access to private spaces?
I don't want to call you a liar, but happy to call you an outlier. 5 sigma.
Your kidding, right? The rest of the UK is not RBKC outside Harrods. There is plenty of parking all over the country in towns, villages, cities. Some even - gasp if you can believe this - for free.
Name me a town where you can't park without the criteria you specify.
Bath
Free Car Parks in Bath
Bath University Car Park BA2 7JX – free after 5pm every day, all day on public holidays. Sydney Road BA2 6NS – 4 hours maximum. Raby Mews BA2 4EJ – 2 hours maximum. Sydney Wharf BA2 4BG – 4 hours maximum. Daniel Street BA2 6NB – 2 hours maximum.
Those are just the free ones after a 46 millisecond google.
I was mildly joking. I agree you can generally park in most British towns quite easily. London is an outlier
I find the whole debate enervating and a bit depressing. Cars are shit and destroy townscapes. Thank god they are on the way out
What utter nonsense. A "Leon" post just to see who would bite.
Leon is right (unusually). I am someone who travels 30,000 miles a year and car travel is nightmarish. Main motorway arteries gridlocked adjacent to conurbations, particularly during rush hours. Parking is also difficult and expensive. Travel from the motorway to the parking spot is also slow and frustrating.
I'd take the bus if there were any.
Just looks better too
Take anywhere on earth, and remove the cars, and replace with people, trees, greenery, and it looks infinitely better
Cars are an abomination. Thank God they are in the Last Gasp Saloon. In decades to come we will look back and marvel - in a bad way - at how we allowed cars to destroy and desecrate beautiful towns and cities
Fuck knows what America is gonna do, tho. It is built for cars. Take them away and what is left?
And if you think the problem is colour photos vs black and white, consider these;
Both of those pictures look nice to me. 👍
Parks are a good thing to have, I think we can all agree with that. Most places, to get to somewhere like your bottom image, there's a parking lot, or road with parking, next to it. Which makes the park convenient and accessible. 👍
[Radio Norwich. Alan sits behind the mixing desks in the radio studio, wearing a Pringle sweater.] Alan Partridge: That was Big Yellow Taxi by Joni Mitchell, a song in which Joni complains they paved paradise to put up a parking lot, a measure which actually would have alleviated traffic congestion on the outskirts of paradise, something which Joni singularly fails to point out, perhaps because it doesn't quite fit in with her blinkered view of the world. Nevertheless, nice song. It's 4:35 AM, you're listening to Up With The Partridge.
Quite right.
It is a good song. But the "message" is complete bullshit.
"They took all the trees and put 'm in a tree museum". Oh really? Funny my road has countless of trees on it. In stretches, can't even see the houses through the trees from the main road.
There's many songs like that. Imagine by John Lennon, good song but describes an horrific dystopia not utopia. Or ironic by Alanis Morrissette, good song but the only ironic thing is how a song about irony includes nothing that's actually ironic.
While we're complaining about Lennon, I can't ever remember not hating "Merry Christmas War is Over". Even to a six year old who didn't know the meaning of the words 'smug' and 'pious' it sounded smug and pious. And even at the age of 6, the line "so this is Christmas" followed up with "another year over and a new one just begun" struck me as the witterings of someone who didn't care about getting the details right. "Another year nearly over and a new one about to start" may not have scanned but would have been more internally consistent. Wouldn't have saved it from banality though.
Though there are 12 days of Christmas, ending on 12th night, so 6th Jan is the final night.
Strictly speaking Lennon would be correct.
Many leave Christmas trees out and decorations up until 6 January, but few wish each other merry Christmas after New Year's Eve.
Other possibilities include
1. He counted the year as turning at the winter solstice. (He wouldn't be the only one.) 2. He was using "year" to mean "a 12-month period", in the way that you might say a year has passed since a person's previous birthday. 3. He was going by the Orthodox date for Christmas. 4. Everything he said was wrong, because let's face it, this man dared to give his MBE back in protest at the British government's support for the US war effort in Vietnam and its support for the Nigerian government over Biafra. How dare he?
And let's all pretend that he did not respond to Brian Epstein's request for suggestions for a title for his autobiography with "Queer Jew". Legend.
Epstein was queer, and he was also a Jew. It’s a bit blunt as titles go, but it’s hardly proof Lennon was a Nazi
The argument about transport availability & cost highlights both the huge variances in availability and the huge gulf in understanding.
For your outer London resident there are riches in public transport options which are largely paid for out of general taxation. For your cundry bumpkins there is often a complete absence of public transport options despite paying general taxation.
For suburbanites it is optimal to encourage more public transport and less driving. For country folk the choice is driving or not going.*
Road pricing gets talked about as a replacement for fuel duty. And gets shouted at as being patently unfair. Which is probably true the way that shitbox UK would implement it. What we need is subsidised fuel for the countryside and heavier taxes in towns. ULEZ and similar is the right policy, just being implemented poorly.
* Before anyone says "what about walking or cycling", what about them? Too many roads between villages would be lethal to walk / cycle down, and thats before we ask about fitness / safety issues.
Agree. On your *, I agree that investment in walking and cycling, or even public transport, between villages isn't worth it.
But 83% of us live in urban areas, so investment in active and public transport makes sense for most.
Urban areas = towns, not cities.
I got a train (first time in about 5 years) recently, to and from the Airport, got the return train journey yesterday. To get to the train station took a car [in this case taxi] ride.
You seem to view the country as either Edinburgh or Sticksville. Reality is somewhat different.
I grew up in a town in rural Scotland. It had a train station. The main problem is you couldn't walk or cycle to it. Sounds like your problem too.
Even public transport in towns is designed for drivers.
Because cars work.
Towns require cars. The alternative to cars is taxis or buses. And that's the bulk of your 83%
You simply can't get your head around supply/demand, can you?
The only reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users is because there are lots of buses.
The reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users, is its a city. Its not a town, what part of this are you failing to understand?
Nothing wrong with buses existing, but buses in towns are a crappy mode of transportation that only those who can't afford their own car (or can't drive as they lack a licence) would use.
The thing with a car is if you want to get from A to B you drive there and are done.
With buses you are stuck with the bus routes, and in most towns the bus routes don't go between A and B if you aren't trying to get to the town centre. Get a bus into the bus depot in town, then another bus from the depot out of town to your destination. And of course that relies upo n the bus turning up, and the bus then follows its route stopping everywhere it has to stop.
My wife doesn't drive, she used to take two buses to get to work which took at least an hour, nearly an hour and a half sometimes one way. It took me 15 minutes to drive it, or 30 minutes return to go pick her up and drive her home.
Good luck finding a parking place at B unless your destination is a supermarket, or you are MD of the company.
I always find a parking place at B. 🤷♂️
Try leaving your bubble from time to time. Saying "oh but what about parking" to someone who drives everywhere and always finds parking, isn't much a problem.
You drive everywhere and always finds parking, in English towns, without a blue badge and without privileged access to private spaces?
I don't want to call you a liar, but happy to call you an outlier. 5 sigma.
Your kidding, right? The rest of the UK is not RBKC outside Harrods. There is plenty of parking all over the country in towns, villages, cities. Some even - gasp if you can believe this - for free.
Name me a town where you can't park without the criteria you specify.
Bath
Free Car Parks in Bath
Bath University Car Park BA2 7JX – free after 5pm every day, all day on public holidays. Sydney Road BA2 6NS – 4 hours maximum. Raby Mews BA2 4EJ – 2 hours maximum. Sydney Wharf BA2 4BG – 4 hours maximum. Daniel Street BA2 6NB – 2 hours maximum.
Those are just the free ones after a 46 millisecond google.
I was mildly joking. I agree you can generally park in most British towns quite easily. London is an outlier
I find the whole debate enervating and a bit depressing. Cars are shit and destroy townscapes. Thank god they are on the way out
What utter nonsense. A "Leon" post just to see who would bite.
Leon is right (unusually). I am someone who travels 30,000 miles a year and car travel is nightmarish. Main motorway arteries gridlocked adjacent to conurbations, particularly during rush hours. Parking is also difficult and expensive. Travel from the motorway to the parking spot is also slow and frustrating.
I'd take the bus if there were any.
Just looks better too
Take anywhere on earth, and remove the cars, and replace with people, trees, greenery, and it looks infinitely better
Cars are an abomination. Thank God they are in the Last Gasp Saloon. In decades to come we will look back and marvel - in a bad way - at how we allowed cars to destroy and desecrate beautiful towns and cities
Fuck knows what America is gonna do, tho. It is built for cars. Take them away and what is left?
And if you think the problem is colour photos vs black and white, consider these;
Both of those pictures look nice to me. 👍
Parks are a good thing to have, I think we can all agree with that. Most places, to get to somewhere like your bottom image, there's a parking lot, or road with parking, next to it. Which makes the park convenient and accessible. 👍
[Radio Norwich. Alan sits behind the mixing desks in the radio studio, wearing a Pringle sweater.] Alan Partridge: That was Big Yellow Taxi by Joni Mitchell, a song in which Joni complains they paved paradise to put up a parking lot, a measure which actually would have alleviated traffic congestion on the outskirts of paradise, something which Joni singularly fails to point out, perhaps because it doesn't quite fit in with her blinkered view of the world. Nevertheless, nice song. It's 4:35 AM, you're listening to Up With The Partridge.
Quite right.
It is a good song. But the "message" is complete bullshit.
"They took all the trees and put 'm in a tree museum". Oh really? Funny my road has countless of trees on it. In stretches, can't even see the houses through the trees from the main road.
There's many songs like that. Imagine by John Lennon, good song but describes an horrific dystopia not utopia. Or ironic by Alanis Morrissette, good song but the only ironic thing is how a song about irony includes nothing that's actually ironic.
While we're complaining about Lennon, I can't ever remember not hating "Merry Christmas War is Over". Even to a six year old who didn't know the meaning of the words 'smug' and 'pious' it sounded smug and pious. And even at the age of 6, the line "so this is Christmas" followed up with "another year over and a new one just begun" struck me as the witterings of someone who didn't care about getting the details right. "Another year nearly over and a new one about to start" may not have scanned but would have been more internally consistent. Wouldn't have saved it from banality though.
Though there are 12 days of Christmas, ending on 12th night, so 6th Jan is the final night.
Strictly speaking Lennon would be correct.
Many leave Christmas trees out and decorations up until 6 January, but few wish each other merry Christmas after New Year's Eve.
Other possibilities include
1. He counted the year as turning at the winter solstice. (He wouldn't be the only one.) 2. He was using "year" to mean "a 12-month period", in the way that you might say a year has passed since a person's previous birthday. 3. He was going by the Orthodox date for Christmas. 4. Everything he said was wrong, because let's face it, this man dared to give his MBE back in protest at the British government's support for the US war effort in Vietnam and its support for the Nigerian government over Biafra. How dare he?
And let's all pretend that he did not respond to Brian Epstein's request for suggestions for a title for his autobiography with "Queer Jew". Legend.
Epstein was queer, and he was also a Jew. It’s a bit blunt as titles go, but it’s hardly proof Lennon was a Nazi
Not a Nazi. A bit of a shit though.
Oh yes. For sure. Indeed a pretentious shit
Just not convinced he was a Hitler fan. And he was a superb songwriter
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
Edit - having read it, you do realise it's about how to successfully bring people on board to accept 20mph changes, rather than about the impact of it once implemented?
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
One sensible US import I saw a couple of decades ago was '20 when lights flash' signs.
Put them outside schools so people slow down at the critical moment, but are not bothered by blanket bans at 2am on a Sunday morning (as I was coming back from work past Ysgol Rhydypennau in my student days).
They really do work, although someone needs to remember to turn them off in the holidays.
Have them in Jersey outside the schools. Good distance - guessing 100 yards - either side of the school and nobody can really have an issue with having to do 20 in a few areas during a couple of hours max a day if it avoids having to clean a mashed lollipop lady out of your front grill.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
I was unhappy at BigG's suggestion that all this comes from a weird fanaticism rather than personal experience, and then evidence.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
I care about people and one of the fatalities you refer to lived 400 yards away and was known to my family
He collided with a wall speeding so frankly no amount of 20 or 30 zones will eliminate speeding drivers
The change is unnecessary and just as Khan’s ULEZ badly implemented
I expect Local Authorities to be inundated with complaints and many of the changes reviewed and 30mph restored while 20 mph retained by schools and other congested areas
As long as anything moves accidents will happen and radical change needs popular support
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The intensity of the injury is directly related to the collision speed, and not in a linear manner. For instance, an impact at 30mph will have over twice the energy dissipation needed of an impact at 20mph. That makes a big difference in how far one is injured and how much damage one has to sustain and recover from (if at all)>
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
I don't think dragging motorists into the culture war will work for Sunak. Those who drive around in cities in their SUVs thinking it's their god-given right to park wherever they wish, including on pavements, are obviously already Tories (or Reform). Most motorists, however, have a more nuanced view of the pros and cons of cars, particularly in cities and towns, and it won't have any effect on their voting intention. Also, though it almost hurts me to say it, I'm with Leon on this one.
Yeah this is true. Most people use their cars because they feel like there is no alternative, not because they love their car or are 'pro motorist'.
What the tories don't seem to think about is how this posturing puts other people off voting conservative. The 'pro motorist' stance is really off putting for a lot of voters. They can surely make something out of the ULEZ issue without turning themselves in to the 'pro motorist' party?
It just makes me think the Tories are a bit weird and desperate. Like saying “we are the party of steak eaters” or “we are the party of wanking in the morning”
I like a steak. I’ve been known to have a strum before noon. I don’t change my vote because a party REALLY gets behind these pastimes
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Here is a serious question - if you are driving slowly, are you more likely to think you can get away with being inattentive?
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
"These changes will affect most 30mph roads but not all.
This legislation changes the default speed limited on restricted roads. These are generally residential or busy pedestrian streets with streetlights.
But not all 30mph roads are restricted roads, and these remain at 30mph, and will be signed.
For restricted roads, local authorities and the 2 Trunk Road Agencies, can also make exceptions to the default speed limit in consultation with their communities.
We have published a map on DataMapWales that shows which roads would stay at 30mph."
And in our area the ones remaining at 30mph are minimal
Most of my village remains at 30. Between the two central village pubs, about 300 yards it is due to go to 20, also past the school. The rest is due to remain at 30. Retired villagers are up in arms demanding the Vale of Glamorgan council designate the entire current 30 becomes 20.
When St Brides Major went entirely 20 in the pilot, I thought the idea ridiculous, but it does focus the mind. I believe 20 out in the country is unnecessary but 20 in central villages and city side streets, particularly past schools makes perfect sense.
Lafur have sold the idea poorly. RT promising when he becomes FM he will restore restriction-free roads might be successful electorally, but I believe it as mad from the opposite scale as a blanket 20.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
I care about people and one of the fatalities you refer to lived 400 yards away and was known to my family
He collided with a wall speeding so frankly no amount of 20 or 30 zones will eliminate speeding drivers
The change is unnecessary and just as Khan’s ULEZ badly implemented
I expect Local Authorities to be inundated with complaints and many of the changes reviewed and 30mph restored while 20 mph retained by schools and other congested areas
As long as anything moves accidents will happen and radical change needs popular support
Speeding is defined by the speed limit in force.
Speed limits slow down average speeds, and also reduce the activity of speeding drivers.
It all helps.
And remember - we're talking also about people who are knocked down at 30mph vs 20mph by the non-speeders. There is a huge mortality and morbidity difference there.
Bleating about the odd road hog while ignoring those other drivers is just trying to pick holes with Mr Drakeford for the sake of it.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Here is a serious question - if you are driving slowly, are you more likely to think you can get away with being inattentive?
Also, if you are driving an absolutely massive SUV how much more likely is it that you’ll be a lazy inattentive driver as you feel invulnerable in your tank of a car?
The stats on the greater damage inflicted on pedestrians by big fat bloated SUVs are quite horrific
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Here is a serious question - if you are driving slowly, are you more likely to think you can get away with being inattentive?
Also, if you are driving an absolutely massive SUV how much more likely is it that you’ll be a lazy inattentive driver as you feel invulnerable in your tank of a car?
The stats on the greater damage inflicted on pedestrians by big fat bloated SUVs are quite horrific
I think that's more to do with lack of forward visibility, particularly with children outside of schools.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Here is a serious question - if you are driving slowly, are you more likely to think you can get away with being inattentive?
Also, if you are driving an absolutely massive SUV how much more likely is it that you’ll be a lazy inattentive driver as you feel invulnerable in your tank of a car?
The stats on the greater damage inflicted on pedestrians by big fat bloated SUVs are quite horrific
There's an arguable case for passing a law that all drivers should only be allowed to drive a 2CV or Trabant, or the modern electric equivalent. They'd be a lot slower, and not just because of the engine.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Here is a serious question - if you are driving slowly, are you more likely to think you can get away with being inattentive?
Absolutely, ever sneezed while driving on a motorway?
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
I’m a fan of 25mph urban speed limits, but I recognise that’s pretty unlikely starting from where we are now.
It's all about trying to strike balances. Nobody would be killed by cars if they all did 0mph 100% of the time. Everyone would be at serious risk if they only did 70mph at all times.
Personally, I would say I'm not actually a fan of blanket speed limits. There are times when it really isn't a good idea to do 30mph (and not just in residential streets, either). Similarly, there are other times and places when it's fine to go much faster.
In an absolutely ideal world we'd assess on a case by case basis.
The world isn't ideal, unfortunately. But because actually 20mph comes with drawbacks of its own I would say the default should be to demonstrate it is needed rather than make exceptions where it isn't.
I will admit I may be coloured in my view by having seen a complete mess of a neighbourhood traffic scheme in Llandaff this weekend and having driven over the Heads of the Valleys dual carriageway, built at vast expense to relieve congestion and increase speeds, pretty much empty and with an average speed camera enforced 50mph limit due to Drakeford's dogmatic belief that speed is the only issue.
Mind you, it's not just him. There was a Chief Constable in Wales 25 years ago who said he only needed speed cameras and lower limits on the A55 to eliminate accidents altogether. When he got the first, and withdrew his traffic patrols, tailgating and undertaking skyrocketed.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
I care about people and one of the fatalities you refer to lived 400 yards away and was known to my family
He collided with a wall speeding so frankly no amount of 20 or 30 zones will eliminate speeding drivers
The change is unnecessary and just as Khan’s ULEZ badly implemented
I expect Local Authorities to be inundated with complaints and many of the changes reviewed and 30mph restored while 20 mph retained by schools and other congested areas
As long as anything moves accidents will happen and radical change needs popular support
Speeding is defined by the speed limit in force.
Speed limits slow down average speeds, and also reduce the activity of speeding drivers.
It all helps.
And remember - we're talking also about people who are knocked down at 30mph vs 20mph by the non-speeders. There is a huge mortality and morbidity difference there.
Bleating about the odd road hog while ignoring those other drivers is just trying to pick holes with Mr Drakeford for the sake of it.
It is not all or nothing but sensible application of the 20mph zones and Drakeford is coming under a lot of criticism much as Khan has
Anyway once implemented I expect LAS will come under intense pressure to review the blanket nature of the new limits
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Here is a serious question - if you are driving slowly, are you more likely to think you can get away with being inattentive?
Absolutely, ever sneezed while driving on a motorway?
If you have a way of controlling sneezing, let me know, as I'd like to use it.
Everyone meanwhile has a way to control their mobile phone use, called, er, not using it...
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Here is a serious question - if you are driving slowly, are you more likely to think you can get away with being inattentive?
Also, if you are driving an absolutely massive SUV how much more likely is it that you’ll be a lazy inattentive driver as you feel invulnerable in your tank of a car?
The stats on the greater damage inflicted on pedestrians by big fat bloated SUVs are quite horrific
I think that's more to do with lack of forward visibility, particularly with children outside of schools.
All the more reason for 20mph rather than 30mph.
Plus what is all this about 20mph only outside schools? Aren't children allowed to be anywhere else at all? How are they to get home? Do they have to stay carefully at home so as not to dirty the nice drivers' tyres and chrome with blood and phlegm and brains and fatty tissue?
And one of the biggest safety problems is parents insisting on taking their little dears to school - the last few yards - [edit] in the car.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Here is a serious question - if you are driving slowly, are you more likely to think you can get away with being inattentive?
Also, if you are driving an absolutely massive SUV how much more likely is it that you’ll be a lazy inattentive driver as you feel invulnerable in your tank of a car?
The stats on the greater damage inflicted on pedestrians by big fat bloated SUVs are quite horrific
There's an arguable case for passing a law that all drivers should only be allowed to drive a 2CV or Trabant, or the modern electric equivalent. They'd be a lot slower, and not just because of the engine.
If you care about pedestrian fatalities, you'd ban those cars. Terrible bonnet design.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
How many of those were caused by vehicles travelling at between 20 and 30 mph, and in how many of them was the speed the determining factor in the outcome?
I can't access the data, annoyingly, but without that information you can't draw that conclusion.
True, but the laws of physics would suggest that speed has something to do with it. You suggesting 10mph limits? 😉
Edinburgh's 20mph has been a huge success. Significant reduction in injuries.
Again, you are making claims but not providing data (for either Llandudno or Edinburgh). Emojis don't cover the emptiness of your argument. Show me the evidence and I'll consider it.
I will leave the detail of the physics to @Stuartinromford but AIUI below 30mph due to the reduced braking distance and much lower energy it's comparatively rare for speed to be a more important factor than either inattention or casualty error.
Pretty much. Reducing speed from 30 to 20 cuts the energy involved in the collision by half and makes the collisions less likely. The catch is that drivers often don't do 30 in a 30 area anyway, so cutting the speed limit to 20 has less effect than you might expect from physics.
For example, the results from Belfast were positive, but not big enough to be statistically significant (though that can be a high bar to cross);
I don't know enough about the road system in Wales to say whether alternating 30/20/30/20/30 is better than 20 all the way, but my intuition is that changing the limit a lot is more trouble, and causes more harm, than it's worth.
The argument about transport availability & cost highlights both the huge variances in availability and the huge gulf in understanding.
For your outer London resident there are riches in public transport options which are largely paid for out of general taxation. For your cundry bumpkins there is often a complete absence of public transport options despite paying general taxation.
For suburbanites it is optimal to encourage more public transport and less driving. For country folk the choice is driving or not going.*
Road pricing gets talked about as a replacement for fuel duty. And gets shouted at as being patently unfair. Which is probably true the way that shitbox UK would implement it. What we need is subsidised fuel for the countryside and heavier taxes in towns. ULEZ and similar is the right policy, just being implemented poorly.
* Before anyone says "what about walking or cycling", what about them? Too many roads between villages would be lethal to walk / cycle down, and thats before we ask about fitness / safety issues.
Agree. On your *, I agree that investment in walking and cycling, or even public transport, between villages isn't worth it.
But 83% of us live in urban areas, so investment in active and public transport makes sense for most.
Urban areas = towns, not cities.
I got a train (first time in about 5 years) recently, to and from the Airport, got the return train journey yesterday. To get to the train station took a car [in this case taxi] ride.
You seem to view the country as either Edinburgh or Sticksville. Reality is somewhat different.
I grew up in a town in rural Scotland. It had a train station. The main problem is you couldn't walk or cycle to it. Sounds like your problem too.
Even public transport in towns is designed for drivers.
Because cars work.
Towns require cars. The alternative to cars is taxis or buses. And that's the bulk of your 83%
You simply can't get your head around supply/demand, can you?
The only reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users is because there are lots of buses.
The reason Edinburgh has lots of bus users, is its a city. Its not a town, what part of this are you failing to understand?
Nothing wrong with buses existing, but buses in towns are a crappy mode of transportation that only those who can't afford their own car (or can't drive as they lack a licence) would use.
The thing with a car is if you want to get from A to B you drive there and are done.
With buses you are stuck with the bus routes, and in most towns the bus routes don't go between A and B if you aren't trying to get to the town centre. Get a bus into the bus depot in town, then another bus from the depot out of town to your destination. And of course that relies upo n the bus turning up, and the bus then follows its route stopping everywhere it has to stop.
My wife doesn't drive, she used to take two buses to get to work which took at least an hour, nearly an hour and a half sometimes one way. It took me 15 minutes to drive it, or 30 minutes return to go pick her up and drive her home.
Good luck finding a parking place at B unless your destination is a supermarket, or you are MD of the company.
I always find a parking place at B. 🤷♂️
Try leaving your bubble from time to time. Saying "oh but what about parking" to someone who drives everywhere and always finds parking, isn't much a problem.
You drive everywhere and always finds parking, in English towns, without a blue badge and without privileged access to private spaces?
I don't want to call you a liar, but happy to call you an outlier. 5 sigma.
Your kidding, right? The rest of the UK is not RBKC outside Harrods. There is plenty of parking all over the country in towns, villages, cities. Some even - gasp if you can believe this - for free.
Name me a town where you can't park without the criteria you specify.
Bath
Free Car Parks in Bath
Bath University Car Park BA2 7JX – free after 5pm every day, all day on public holidays. Sydney Road BA2 6NS – 4 hours maximum. Raby Mews BA2 4EJ – 2 hours maximum. Sydney Wharf BA2 4BG – 4 hours maximum. Daniel Street BA2 6NB – 2 hours maximum.
Those are just the free ones after a 46 millisecond google.
I was mildly joking. I agree you can generally park in most British towns quite easily. London is an outlier
I find the whole debate enervating and a bit depressing. Cars are shit and destroy townscapes. Thank god they are on the way out
What utter nonsense. A "Leon" post just to see who would bite.
Leon is right (unusually). I am someone who travels 30,000 miles a year and car travel is nightmarish. Main motorway arteries gridlocked adjacent to conurbations, particularly during rush hours. Parking is also difficult and expensive. Travel from the motorway to the parking spot is also slow and frustrating.
I'd take the bus if there were any.
Just looks better too
Take anywhere on earth, and remove the cars, and replace with people, trees, greenery, and it looks infinitely better
Cars are an abomination. Thank God they are in the Last Gasp Saloon. In decades to come we will look back and marvel - in a bad way - at how we allowed cars to destroy and desecrate beautiful towns and cities
Fuck knows what America is gonna do, tho. It is built for cars. Take them away and what is left?
And if you think the problem is colour photos vs black and white, consider these;
Both of those pictures look nice to me. 👍
Parks are a good thing to have, I think we can all agree with that. Most places, to get to somewhere like your bottom image, there's a parking lot, or road with parking, next to it. Which makes the park convenient and accessible. 👍
[Radio Norwich. Alan sits behind the mixing desks in the radio studio, wearing a Pringle sweater.] Alan Partridge: That was Big Yellow Taxi by Joni Mitchell, a song in which Joni complains they paved paradise to put up a parking lot, a measure which actually would have alleviated traffic congestion on the outskirts of paradise, something which Joni singularly fails to point out, perhaps because it doesn't quite fit in with her blinkered view of the world. Nevertheless, nice song. It's 4:35 AM, you're listening to Up With The Partridge.
Quite right.
It is a good song. But the "message" is complete bullshit.
"They took all the trees and put 'm in a tree museum". Oh really? Funny my road has countless of trees on it. In stretches, can't even see the houses through the trees from the main road.
There's many songs like that. Imagine by John Lennon, good song but describes an horrific dystopia not utopia. Or ironic by Alanis Morrissette, good song but the only ironic thing is how a song about irony includes nothing that's actually ironic.
While we're complaining about Lennon, I can't ever remember not hating "Merry Christmas War is Over". Even to a six year old who didn't know the meaning of the words 'smug' and 'pious' it sounded smug and pious. And even at the age of 6, the line "so this is Christmas" followed up with "another year over and a new one just begun" struck me as the witterings of someone who didn't care about getting the details right. "Another year nearly over and a new one about to start" may not have scanned but would have been more internally consistent. Wouldn't have saved it from banality though.
Though there are 12 days of Christmas, ending on 12th night, so 6th Jan is the final night.
Strictly speaking Lennon would be correct.
Many leave Christmas trees out and decorations up until 6 January, but few wish each other merry Christmas after New Year's Eve.
Other possibilities include
1. He counted the year as turning at the winter solstice. (He wouldn't be the only one.) 2. He was using "year" to mean "a 12-month period", in the way that you might say a year has passed since a person's previous birthday. 3. He was going by the Orthodox date for Christmas. 4. Everything he said was wrong, because let's face it, this man dared to give his MBE back in protest at the British government's support for the US war effort in Vietnam and its support for the Nigerian government over Biafra. How dare he?
And let's all pretend that he did not respond to Brian Epstein's request for suggestions for a title for his autobiography with "Queer Jew". Legend.
Epstein was queer, and he was also a Jew. It’s a bit blunt as titles go, but it’s hardly proof Lennon was a Nazi
Not a Nazi. A bit of a shit though.
Oh yes. For sure. Indeed a pretentious shit
Just not convinced he was a Hitler fan. And he was a superb songwriter
I'm just trying to imagine all thur peepurl getting together to agree about his staggering banality. You may sehehehey I'm a dreamer.....
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
I care about people and one of the fatalities you refer to lived 400 yards away and was known to my family
He collided with a wall speeding so frankly no amount of 20 or 30 zones will eliminate speeding drivers
The change is unnecessary and just as Khan’s ULEZ badly implemented
I expect Local Authorities to be inundated with complaints and many of the changes reviewed and 30mph restored while 20 mph retained by schools and other congested areas
As long as anything moves accidents will happen and radical change needs popular support
Speeding is defined by the speed limit in force.
Speed limits slow down average speeds, and also reduce the activity of speeding drivers.
It all helps.
And remember - we're talking also about people who are knocked down at 30mph vs 20mph by the non-speeders. There is a huge mortality and morbidity difference there.
Bleating about the odd road hog while ignoring those other drivers is just trying to pick holes with Mr Drakeford for the sake of it.
It is not all or nothing but sensible application of the 20mph zones and Drakeford is coming under a lot of criticism much as Khan has
Anyway once implemented I expect LAS will come under intense pressure to review the blanket nature of the new limits
It bloody well is all or nothing, given the massive differtence in stats between 20 vs 30.
I'm glad to see some conviction in a politician with - for once - a humane reason behind it.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Here is a serious question - if you are driving slowly, are you more likely to think you can get away with being inattentive?
No, quite the opposite, although I do use the speed limiter now as I try to obey the 20 prior to the September rollout. The reality is probably thus. When St Brides Major had a blanket 30 I did 40. When the blanket 20 came in I did 30. Go Safe now police the 20 speed limit rigourously. "Twenty is plenty "
Nonetheless it is a vote loser for Labour. Whether it should be is another debate.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
"These changes will affect most 30mph roads but not all.
This legislation changes the default speed limited on restricted roads. These are generally residential or busy pedestrian streets with streetlights.
But not all 30mph roads are restricted roads, and these remain at 30mph, and will be signed.
For restricted roads, local authorities and the 2 Trunk Road Agencies, can also make exceptions to the default speed limit in consultation with their communities.
We have published a map on DataMapWales that shows which roads would stay at 30mph."
And in our area the ones remaining at 30mph are minimal
Most of my village remains at 30. Between the two central village pubs, about 300 yards it is due to go to 20, also past the school. The rest is due to remain at 30. Retired villagers are up in arms demanding the Vale of Glamorgan council designate the entire current 30 becomes 20.
When St Brides Major went entirely 20 in the pilot, I thought the idea ridiculous, but it does focus the mind. I believe 20 out in the country is unnecessary but 20 in central villages and city side streets, particularly past schools makes perfect sense.
Lafur have sold the idea poorly. RT promising when he becomes FM he will restore restriction-free roads might be successful electorally, but I believe it as mad from the opposite scale as a blanket 20.
Drakeford is following the Khan playbook of poor implementation of a policy that has merits when applied sensibly but will enrage many by its blanket nature
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Here is a serious question - if you are driving slowly, are you more likely to think you can get away with being inattentive?
Also, if you are driving an absolutely massive SUV how much more likely is it that you’ll be a lazy inattentive driver as you feel invulnerable in your tank of a car?
The stats on the greater damage inflicted on pedestrians by big fat bloated SUVs are quite horrific
There's an arguable case for passing a law that all drivers should only be allowed to drive a 2CV or Trabant, or the modern electric equivalent. They'd be a lot slower, and not just because of the engine.
If you care about pedestrian fatalities, you'd ban those cars. Terrible bonnet design.
Indeed - that needs to go too, with the headlamp design modified as well. Thanks for the reminder.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
I care about people and one of the fatalities you refer to lived 400 yards away and was known to my family
He collided with a wall speeding so frankly no amount of 20 or 30 zones will eliminate speeding drivers
The change is unnecessary and just as Khan’s ULEZ badly implemented
I expect Local Authorities to be inundated with complaints and many of the changes reviewed and 30mph restored while 20 mph retained by schools and other congested areas
As long as anything moves accidents will happen and radical change needs popular support
Speeding is defined by the speed limit in force.
Speed limits slow down average speeds, and also reduce the activity of speeding drivers.
It all helps.
And remember - we're talking also about people who are knocked down at 30mph vs 20mph by the non-speeders. There is a huge mortality and morbidity difference there.
Bleating about the odd road hog while ignoring those other drivers is just trying to pick holes with Mr Drakeford for the sake of it.
It is not all or nothing but sensible application of the 20mph zones and Drakeford is coming under a lot of criticism much as Khan has
Anyway once implemented I expect LAS will come under intense pressure to review the blanket nature of the new limits
It's a bit like LTNs this. Lots of drivers don't like them.
But they want 20mph for their own street
It will take a brave local politician to face down the locals and put the speed limit UP.
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
"These changes will affect most 30mph roads but not all.
This legislation changes the default speed limited on restricted roads. These are generally residential or busy pedestrian streets with streetlights.
But not all 30mph roads are restricted roads, and these remain at 30mph, and will be signed.
For restricted roads, local authorities and the 2 Trunk Road Agencies, can also make exceptions to the default speed limit in consultation with their communities.
We have published a map on DataMapWales that shows which roads would stay at 30mph."
And in our area the ones remaining at 30mph are minimal
Most of my village remains at 30. Between the two central village pubs, about 300 yards it is due to go to 20, also past the school. The rest is due to remain at 30. Retired villagers are up in arms demanding the Vale of Glamorgan council designate the entire current 30 becomes 20.
When St Brides Major went entirely 20 in the pilot, I thought the idea ridiculous, but it does focus the mind. I believe 20 out in the country is unnecessary but 20 in central villages and city side streets, particularly past schools makes perfect sense.
Lafur have sold the idea poorly. RT promising when he becomes FM he will restore restriction-free roads might be successful electorally, but I believe it as mad from the opposite scale as a blanket 20.
Drakeford is following the Khan playbook of poor implementation of a policy that has merits when applied sensibly but will enrage many by its blanket nature
You'd rather see Drakeford lose votes and children lose lives than the opposite, then?
I don't think dragging motorists into the culture war will work for Sunak. Those who drive around in cities in their SUVs thinking it's their god-given right to park wherever they wish, including on pavements, are obviously already Tories (or Reform). Most motorists, however, have a more nuanced view of the pros and cons of cars, particularly in cities and towns, and it won't have any effect on their voting intention. Also, though it almost hurts me to say it, I'm with Leon on this one.
Yeah this is true. Most people use their cars because they feel like there is no alternative, not because they love their car or are 'pro motorist'.
What the tories don't seem to think about is how this posturing puts other people off voting conservative. The 'pro motorist' stance is really off putting for a lot of voters. They can surely make something out of the ULEZ issue without turning themselves in to the 'pro motorist' party?
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
I hate driving at 20 mph. But I am not going to base my vote on that. After 17th September, will the Tories be promising to restore the 30 mph limit?
Sunak has already criticised it on a recent trip to Wrexham, but of course in Wales we have Drakeford to thank for this decision
So vote Tory to get the 30 mph limit back? What if the number of road deaths and serious injuries goes down with the new limit?
There is no reason why the 20mph cannot be applied around schools and other congested areas
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
I am sure there will be an outcry. But are the Tories going to restore the 30 mph limit?
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
You cannot make such a conclusion without detail of each incident and the circumstances
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
I just care about people BigG. No fanaticism.
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
While I am very sorry your girlfriend was hit and am relieved she suffered only a temporary injury, can I ask what that has to do with speed limits? Inattention is surely a separate issue.
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
The slower you are going while being inattentive, the less serious the potential injuries should you crash into something.
Here is a serious question - if you are driving slowly, are you more likely to think you can get away with being inattentive?
No, quite the opposite, although I do use the speed limiter now as I try to obey the 20 prior to the September rollout. The reality is probably thus. When St Brides Major had a blanket 30 I did 40. When the blanket 20 came in I did 30. Go Safe now police the 20 speed limit rigourously. "Twenty is plenty "
Nonetheless it is a vote loser for Labour. Whether it should be is another debate.
When you consider that Welsh Labour make Truss look competent and Trump look honest, they should not have any votes left at all.
So it shouldn't lose them a single vote.
There would be a certain irony if they lost votes over speed limits than over - random example - their mishandling of education.
I don't think dragging motorists into the culture war will work for Sunak. Those who drive around in cities in their SUVs thinking it's their god-given right to park wherever they wish, including on pavements, are obviously already Tories (or Reform). Most motorists, however, have a more nuanced view of the pros and cons of cars, particularly in cities and towns, and it won't have any effect on their voting intention. Also, though it almost hurts me to say it, I'm with Leon on this one.
Yeah this is true. Most people use their cars because they feel like there is no alternative, not because they love their car or are 'pro motorist'.
What the tories don't seem to think about is how this posturing puts other people off voting conservative. The 'pro motorist' stance is really off putting for a lot of voters. They can surely make something out of the ULEZ issue without turning themselves in to the 'pro motorist' party?
Tories are deluding themselves if they think being "pro-car" can save the election
It's fecking nonsense
The private car is slowly becoming history, it will take time, a lot of time, but it is inevitable. The external negatives that come with the private car are far too great, even if cars are fun (and they are fun, I've owned plenty). Besides, the car will be replaced with something similar, an autonomous e-car that is yours for the duration you need it, or something of that ilk
This is an inexorable historic process, like trains replacing horse drawn carriages. It will happen over decades. It is not going to alter invididual elections at any one moment
Is there any real value in making a judgement about a party's political fortunes based upon a decadal long view? Not imo.
More immediately, there is a non-trivial minority which is about to have its motoring costs increased dramatically and I have no doubt that any party opposing that will gain electorally.
I have no wish to diminish the impact on some individuals but is it actually a ‘non-trivial minority’ or is it in fact an extremely small minority?
AIUI about 36 constituencies (say 6% of 650) are impacted by the ULEZ expansion, 54% of London households have a car, and about 10% of car owners have a non-ULEZ compliant car. So the percentage of the electorate affected is: 6% * 54% * 10% = 0.324%.
So less than half a percent.
Unless the next Parliament is very well hung, it won't affect the arithmetic.
Of those 36 seats, about half are inner outer London (roughly those touching the North/South Circular). In those areas, ULEZ expansion is popular, because air pollution. So the expansion is only a political issue in outer outer London. Like Uxbridge.
So how many of those outer outer London seats are close enough to flipping for the ULEZ effect to make a difference?
Good evening
I would suggest ULEZ was the catalyst of the debate over climate change, and more specifically the transition and speed of it, rather than low emissions that are a separate subject
However, I expect it to be an election issue as it is likely the conservatives will say it is coming to a town near you just as it has under the labour Mayor of London
On the 17th September we have the abolition of the 30mph limit, replaced with 20mph right across Wales and if the conversations I am having with locals and family, and a recent online poll by North Wales News it is not going to be received well with over 3,100 out of near 3,500 rejecting it
I understand it is coming to Scotland next year and I expect the same angry response
The problem with this authoritarian edict is that the policy of 20mph zones by schools and congested areas is sensible and acceptable to most, but a blanket ban is ill thought through, much maybe as is Khan's implementation of the ULEZ scheme
I would be very surprised if speed limits change many votes. They may entrench some and prevent further leakage away from the Tories, but you're not going to build a great swing back of support on the basis of vowing to make them higher. The other problem is that once you say you oppose the reductions, you risk owning the fatalities that any increases might create. Grieving mothers on TV blaming Sunak for their kids' deaths would be a political nightmare.
Nobody is suggesting they are higher, but that they remain at 30mph and with 20mph zones by schools and other congested areas
Just imagine you drive into Wales on the 17th September and every single road in former 30mph zones are now 20mph and you try to drive at that speed
"These changes will affect most 30mph roads but not all.
This legislation changes the default speed limited on restricted roads. These are generally residential or busy pedestrian streets with streetlights.
But not all 30mph roads are restricted roads, and these remain at 30mph, and will be signed.
For restricted roads, local authorities and the 2 Trunk Road Agencies, can also make exceptions to the default speed limit in consultation with their communities.
We have published a map on DataMapWales that shows which roads would stay at 30mph."
And in our area the ones remaining at 30mph are minimal
Most of my village remains at 30. Between the two central village pubs, about 300 yards it is due to go to 20, also past the school. The rest is due to remain at 30. Retired villagers are up in arms demanding the Vale of Glamorgan council designate the entire current 30 becomes 20.
When St Brides Major went entirely 20 in the pilot, I thought the idea ridiculous, but it does focus the mind. I believe 20 out in the country is unnecessary but 20 in central villages and city side streets, particularly past schools makes perfect sense.
Lafur have sold the idea poorly. RT promising when he becomes FM he will restore restriction-free roads might be successful electorally, but I believe it as mad from the opposite scale as a blanket 20.
Drakeford is following the Khan playbook of poor implementation of a policy that has merits when applied sensibly but will enrage many by its blanket nature
You'd rather see Drakeford lose votes and children lose lives than the opposite, then?
Utter nonsense - of course not but a blanket 20mph is just unnecessary
Comments
We are frequently told that Starmer and Sunak are viewed similarly by voters, but the polling data does not support that.
Strictly speaking Lennon would be correct.
That might be significant given where their seats are.
Several more collisions on the A9 this weekend (tourist season), the usual junctions. Almost certainly have to introduce 40/50mph limits until a permanent solution is found.
I expect an outcry across Wales about a policy that has been implemented as badly as Khan's ULEZ
Vote Labour and see 20 limits and ULEZ schemes everywhere, just as Labour authorities have already been doing with the powers they have in London and in Wales.
I suspect the answer, for what it's worth, is that urban areas that are built around cars, and where land is (or was) plentiful will tend to be very spread out. (See Los Angeles for example.)
This makes it difficult to implement sensible public transport, as your nearest metro/subway station will be a long way away.
German cities were built before cars, and therefore tend to have decent public transport options.
London would undoubtedly be better with fewer private passenger cars and better alternatives.
But what is true of London is not true of many other places.
(Edit to add: yes I know about retreating blade stall. It's rare, and this is a joke dammit.)
I'd be quite happy to do 20 in built up areas if it wasn't for the fact that nobody else wants to.
It is like doing 30 in a 30, but worse. Maybe that will change.
Though I expect those that do 40 in a 60 and 40 in a 30 will continue to do 40.
I think I might have learnt that on PB
Every aircraft approaching Heathrow, does so at 160 knots.
That would cost them their licence, if caught, wouldn't it?
I think we've suddenly found one benefit to this policy...
As @Sandpit says at 7.25pm
The argument will be in England, not in Wales.
Vote Labour and see 20 limits and ULEZ schemes everywhere, just as Labour authorities have already been doing with the powers they have in London and in Wales.
Face it, WE’RE COMING FOR YOUR CAR, FATSO
100 injuries in Llandudno (picked at random) in the last 5 years, a couple of fatalities. How many of those injuries are worth 30mph?
Put them outside schools so people slow down at the critical moment, but are not bothered by blanket bans at 2am on a Sunday morning (as I was coming back from work past Ysgol Rhydypennau in my student days).
They really do work, although someone needs to remember to turn them off in the holidays.
"Roger that Heathrow Control. Maintaining 160 to the outer marker"
R&W has small movements withhin MoE but the net effect is to increase Labour's lead to 18 - again, this makes the Opinium poll look "odd" with the Labour number though R&W have Reform on 8% versus Deltapoll at 4%.
The R&W numbers for England have Labour on 47%, Conservatives 28%, Liberal Democrats 11%, Reform 7%, Greens 6% and Others 1% so a 13-point Conservative lead in December 2019 is now a 19-point Labour lead making a 16% swing from Conservative to Labour so still well in landslide territory.
The Liberal Democrats are also enjoying a 9% swing from the Conservatives on these numbers.
I can't access the data, annoyingly, but without that information you can't draw that conclusion.
Edinburgh's 20mph has been a huge success. Significant reduction in injuries.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/sr-71-blackbird-pilot-tells-story-his-famed-ground-speed-check-72136
'Center, Aspen 20, you got a ground speed readout for us?'
There was a longer than normal pause
'Aspen, I show 1,942 knots.'
Yes, I know the story has… problems.
I will leave the detail of the physics to @Stuartinromford but AIUI below 30mph due to the reduced braking distance and much lower energy it's comparatively rare for speed to be a more important factor than either inattention or casualty error.
Also, though it almost hurts me to say it, I'm with Leon on this one.
However with respect you are very much a cycle fanatic with no love for cars so hardly neutral on the subject
So going into Barcelona airport, he was asked to do 160 to 4 DME, and replied “negative, but can do 150 to 4”. ATC were okay with that, until right on the 4 mile marker he chopped the throttles to get down to about 90kt for his approach. The next thing he hears on the radio “Iberia 321 go around. I say again go around, acknowledge” followed by “Golf Alpha Bravo Charlie Delta please contact the tower by phone after landing”.
He was actually in the right, but the large airport wasn’t used to dealing with small planes and had messed up the spacing! Iberia got a bill for a couple of tonnes of fuel they weren’t expecting to use.
Other possibilities include
1. He counted the year as turning at the winter solstice. (He wouldn't be the only one.)
2. He was using "year" to mean "a 12-month period", in the way that you might say a year has passed since a person's previous birthday.
3. He was going by the Orthodox date for Christmas.
4. Everything he said was wrong, because let's face it, this man dared to give his MBE back in protest at the British government's support for the US war effort in Vietnam and its support for the Nigerian government over Biafra. How dare he?
He was very pleased when a couple of years later they started being rolled out here. Obviously somebody with the power to do something had been to America and thought the same!
Fun fact. I don’t know whether I was born in the Eastern or Western Hemisphere because Whipps Cross Hospital sits on said meridian.
Here endeth the Seal Sermon
They have a few round West London.
sky news picks up on the Bryant manoeuvre
That would suggest (a) he was speeding at the time (b) if he was speeding then he would speed still if it was a 20 zone and (c) although he was speeding that wasn't the deciding factor.
It should be noted that this road however might actually have its speed limit cut to 20mph (as it was reduced to 30mph after the accident) but it wasn't the key in that particular accident.
https://nitter.net/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1688621828996993024#m
https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/en/publications/the-processes-of-transport-and-public-health-policy-change-20mph-
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/aug/07/william-friedkin-dies-age-87-director-the-exorcist
Two people in my year at school were killed in RTCs. I saw an elderly man lose his leg in a collision at the bottom of Leith Walk - he died shortly afterwards.
My girlfriend was knocked off her bike by a phone driver and was very lucky not to get more than a concussion.
And the evidence on 20mph backs me up.
https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/en/publications/the-processes-of-transport-and-public-health-policy-change-20mph-
What the tories don't seem to think about is how this posturing puts other people off voting conservative. The 'pro motorist' stance is really off putting for a lot of voters. They can surely make something out of the ULEZ issue without turning themselves in to the 'pro motorist' party?
Just not convinced he was a Hitler fan. And he was a superb songwriter
Thank you for the link, I will read it.
Edit - having read it, you do realise it's about how to successfully bring people on board to accept 20mph changes, rather than about the impact of it once implemented?
He collided with a wall speeding so frankly no amount of 20 or 30 zones will eliminate speeding drivers
The change is unnecessary and just as Khan’s ULEZ badly implemented
I expect Local Authorities to be inundated with complaints and many of the changes reviewed and 30mph restored while 20 mph retained by schools and other congested areas
As long as anything moves accidents will happen and radical change needs popular support
I like a steak. I’ve been known to have a strum before noon. I don’t change my vote because a party REALLY gets behind these pastimes
When St Brides Major went entirely 20 in the pilot, I thought the idea ridiculous, but it does focus the mind. I believe 20 out in the country is unnecessary but 20 in central villages and city side streets, particularly past schools makes perfect sense.
Lafur have sold the idea poorly. RT promising when he becomes FM he will restore restriction-free roads might be successful electorally, but I believe it as mad from the opposite scale as a blanket 20.
Speed limits slow down average speeds, and also reduce the activity of speeding drivers.
It all helps.
And remember - we're talking also about people who are knocked down at 30mph vs 20mph by the non-speeders. There is a huge mortality and morbidity difference there.
Bleating about the odd road hog while ignoring those other drivers is just trying to pick holes with Mr Drakeford for the sake of it.
The stats on the greater damage inflicted on pedestrians by big fat bloated SUVs are quite horrific
Personally, I would say I'm not actually a fan of blanket speed limits. There are times when it really isn't a good idea to do 30mph (and not just in residential streets, either). Similarly, there are other times and places when it's fine to go much faster.
In an absolutely ideal world we'd assess on a case by case basis.
The world isn't ideal, unfortunately. But because actually 20mph comes with drawbacks of its own I would say the default should be to demonstrate it is needed rather than make exceptions where it isn't.
I will admit I may be coloured in my view by having seen a complete mess of a neighbourhood traffic scheme in Llandaff this weekend and having driven over the Heads of the Valleys dual carriageway, built at vast expense to relieve congestion and increase speeds, pretty much empty and with an average speed camera enforced 50mph limit due to Drakeford's dogmatic belief that speed is the only issue.
Mind you, it's not just him. There was a Chief Constable in Wales 25 years ago who said he only needed speed cameras and lower limits on the A55 to eliminate accidents altogether. When he got the first, and withdrew his traffic patrols, tailgating and undertaking skyrocketed.
Anyway once implemented I expect LAS will come under intense pressure to review the blanket nature of the new limits
Everyone meanwhile has a way to control their mobile phone use, called, er, not using it...
Plus what is all this about 20mph only outside schools? Aren't children allowed to be anywhere else at all? How are they to get home? Do they have to stay carefully at home so as not to dirty the nice drivers' tyres and chrome with blood and phlegm and brains and fatty tissue?
And one of the biggest safety problems is parents insisting on taking their little dears to school - the last few yards - [edit] in the car.
For example, the results from Belfast were positive, but not big enough to be statistically significant (though that can be a high bar to cross);
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/news/motoring-news/do-20mph-speed-limits-reduce-the-number-of-car-crashes-and-casualties/
I don't know enough about the road system in Wales to say whether alternating 30/20/30/20/30 is better than 20 all the way, but my intuition is that changing the limit a lot is more trouble, and causes more harm, than it's worth.
I'm glad to see some conviction in a politician with - for once - a humane reason behind it.
Nonetheless it is a vote loser for Labour. Whether it should be is another debate.
But they want 20mph for their own street
It will take a brave local politician to face down the locals and put the speed limit UP.
I love my car.
So it shouldn't lose them a single vote.
There would be a certain irony if they lost votes over speed limits than over - random example - their mishandling of education.