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
Nothing will happen.
The whole of Wales has been gaslit into voting Labour for 100 years, and for once the electoral system is designed to keep them in forever.
Drakeford could pledge the death of the firstborn, and he'd still get back in.
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?
Wrong. The councils are represented on the management board, but it deters micromanagement.
Edit: also 100% council owned, and (before covid) something of a minor cash cow for the councils.
Oh wow represented, so that means one or two on the board of maybe seven or so. Taxpayers therefore irrelevant as they can be outvoted. No just fuck off if we pay for it we get the final say
Do you ever have a positive word for anything Pagan?
Yes actually I do, people like you tend to attack me for cynicism on these things....go on then tell us how many council representatives are on these management boards...quote a source....if I am cynical and I admit I am then prove me wrong they arent a token
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
Okay, tell me in your opinion where it's OK to kill children in an average Welsh village. If it's 30mph limit now, then the improved survival rate makes it a no-brainer (so to speak) to make it 20mph. Simple as that.
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
So do you want the Tories to publish a list of roads to keep at 30mph?
Two seconds later and you've got a NIMBY who doesn't want 30mph past their house telling North Wales Live "The Tories want to kill my Cockerpoo"
(Eureka - just link 20mph to dog deaths and it's a winner)
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?
Speak for yourself.
I love my car.
Are we back to the exhaust pipe
Now, now. We may not share those, erm, specialist amours, but as good woke types we should be accepting and uncensorious.
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?
Speak for yourself.
I love my car.
Does Mrs (or other Mr) Royale know about this? Cod therapist advice: never love anything that is incapable of loving you back
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
So do you want the Tories to publish a list of roads to keep at 30mph?
Two seconds later and you've got a NIMBY who doesn't want 30mph past their house telling North Wales Live "The Tories want to kill my Cockerpoo"
(Eureka - just link 20mph to dog deaths and it's a winner)
Much more so than child deaths (unless a puppy, when you get bonus points, or a pit bull*, in which the driver gets positive marks and a little transfer to put on his door).
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.
Thank you. Some evidence at last (even if it is only from the RAC). I must say I'm surprised they consider 22% 'statistically insignificant.' I would describe more than a fifth as pretty significant. The 0.8mph reduction in average speeds is more interesting and frankly disturbing as it suggests a proportion of high speeders are skewing the stats.
One point to make here of course is that Drakeford does have a stated aim of reducing traffic on all Wales' roads, for environmental reasons, so I think he probably would accept the reduction in traffic that article highlights.
One major snag however is that outside the Valleys - where public transport is OK-ish (better in some places than others) cars are really a sine qua non for living in Wales. Since the axing of the rural branch line network, with buses never having been particularly good, rural Wales has shockingly bad public transport. I couldn't have got to Aberystwyth reliably by train and one flatmate who tried it gave up after two terms and bought a car.
So unless he intends to do something really quite clever and dramatic (which can't be buses - buses need good roads) I wonder if this would be the best way of achieving that.
There is so much exaggeration on climate change it is hard to know where to start. For instance people on Twitter are going on about the oceans boiling. How can that be regarded as anything other than an exaggeration?
I think people can be led to agree either that climate change has potentially catastrophic consequences, and also that it is also sometimes exaggerated if for example they are presented with examples of the latter.
Personally I don't feel qualified to offer an opinion on climate change - other than to go along with the consensus of scientific opinion and to act accordingly.
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?
Speak for yourself.
I love my car.
Does Mrs (or other Mr) Royale know about this? Cod therapist advice: never love anything that is incapable of loving you back
I recommend the Guardian agony aunt column. Very good on that side of matters.
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
I agree it has been very poorly sold, but it is not a blanket 30 to 20 conversion. Local authorities have had the final say as to where the 20 begins and ends.. Although word from Senedd Cloud Base is if there are street lights, unless it states otherwise consider the limit to be 20. Yes, the messaging has been terrible.
They don't look terribly expensive to me, but I haven't bothered to find out how much they actually cost.
Those signs are effective in getting me to slow down, particularly if I've missed a sign with the speed limit on (too easy in the early summer with hedges growing over the bloody things).
One gripe I do have with them (and again it's particularly Wales - it doesn't seem to happen in England) is that they will start flashing at you some way before the speed limit comes into force. Now that's not on. By all means flash if I'm still doing 35 as I pass the sign, because I should have slowed to 30 by then, but not 250 yards away where the limit's still different.
It just makes the person who programmed them come across as a preachy twat.
Dropped in on the world's largest train set today, which has over 1,000 trains running on it...
As a matter of interest where is it ?
In one of the historic dockside warehouses of Hamburg that, despite levelling all the residential areas of the city, allies bombers managed to leave intact.
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.
Thank you. Some evidence at last (even if it is only from the RAC). I must say I'm surprised they consider 22% 'statistically insignificant.' I would describe more than a fifth as pretty significant. The 0.8mph reduction in average speeds is more interesting and frankly disturbing as it suggests a proportion of high speeders are skewing the stats.
One point to make here of course is that Drakeford does have a stated aim of reducing traffic on all Wales' roads, for environmental reasons, so I think he probably would accept the reduction in traffic that article highlights.
One major snag however is that outside the Valleys - where public transport is OK-ish (better in some places than others) cars are really a sine qua non for living in Wales. Since the axing of the rural branch line network, with buses never having been particularly good, rural Wales has shockingly bad public transport. I couldn't have got to Aberystwyth reliably by train and one flatmate who tried it gave up after two terms and bought a car.
So unless he intends to do something really quite clever and dramatic (which can't be buses - buses need good roads) I wonder if this would be the best way of achieving that.
They don't look terribly expensive to me, but I haven't bothered to find out how much they actually cost.
If they’re being used to give tickets to people, then they’re expensive ($10k ish) and require regular calibration. Someone receiving a ticket can ask the cops to produce a valid calibration certificate in court.
If they’re being used to give warnings and advice, then they’re cheap ($500 ish).
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.
Thank you. Some evidence at last (even if it is only from the RAC). I must say I'm surprised they consider 22% 'statistically insignificant.' I would describe more than a fifth as pretty significant. The 0.8mph reduction in average speeds is more interesting and frankly disturbing as it suggests a proportion of high speeders are skewing the stats.
One point to make here of course is that Drakeford does have a stated aim of reducing traffic on all Wales' roads, for environmental reasons, so I think he probably would accept the reduction in traffic that article highlights.
One major snag however is that outside the Valleys - where public transport is OK-ish (better in some places than others) cars are really a sine qua non for living in Wales. Since the axing of the rural branch line network, with buses never having been particularly good, rural Wales has shockingly bad public transport. I couldn't have got to Aberystwyth reliably by train and one flatmate who tried it gave up after two terms and bought a car.
So unless he intends to do something really quite clever and dramatic (which can't be buses - buses need good roads) I wonder if this would be the best way of achieving that.
Eabhal, I asked for evidence that cutting speed limits makes a major difference. That paper is not on that subject. It's on how to effectively persuade people to accept lower limits. Which is altogether different.
I did note that above, but as it was in an edit I'll forgive you for not seeing that.
You want the QUB study which Stuart linked to a report on above - which suggests bluntly that the picture is mixed. Fewer vehicles, meaning fewer crashes. Well, that may be an acceptable tradeoff. But if it doesn't really cut average speeds by a noticeable amount, that doesn't suggest it's working as intended.
There is so much exaggeration on climate change it is hard to know where to start. For instance people on Twitter are going on about the oceans boiling. How can that be regarded as anything other than an exaggeration?
I think people can be led to agree either that climate change has potentially catastrophic consequences, and also that it is also sometimes exaggerated if for example they are presented with examples of the latter.
Personally I don't feel qualified to offer an opinion on climate change - other than to go along with the consensus of scientific opinion and to act accordingly.
Two things -
1. Marine life is actually very sensitive to temperature - it's not as if it can sweat it off, etc. This is very evident when walking on a beach in SW England vs NE Scotland - the species balance is markedly different, especially the pelagic or planktonic forms (I had never seen cuttlefish in the wild before a wander in Dorset, for instance). Yet the sea doesn't feel that different ...
2. As noted before on here, water absorbs a hell of a lot of heat energy, so to be as warm as it is mewans there is a huge amount of energy in ther climate system not previously present.
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...
This month has been an interesting experiment for me in that respect. I’ve sneezed once since the start of July, and I instantly regretted it. Normally I’m a big sneezer but I’ve been stifling them. So it is actually possible to control sneezing if you have to.
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?
Speak for yourself.
I love my car.
Yeah but they could throw you a bit of meat over ULEZ and it will have pretty much the same effect as announcing they are 'pro motorist', only with the added advantage of not alienating lots of other voters.
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.
Thank you. Some evidence at last (even if it is only from the RAC). I must say I'm surprised they consider 22% 'statistically insignificant.' I would describe more than a fifth as pretty significant. The 0.8mph reduction in average speeds is more interesting and frankly disturbing as it suggests a proportion of high speeders are skewing the stats.
One point to make here of course is that Drakeford does have a stated aim of reducing traffic on all Wales' roads, for environmental reasons, so I think he probably would accept the reduction in traffic that article highlights.
One major snag however is that outside the Valleys - where public transport is OK-ish (better in some places than others) cars are really a sine qua non for living in Wales. Since the axing of the rural branch line network, with buses never having been particularly good, rural Wales has shockingly bad public transport. I couldn't have got to Aberystwyth reliably by train and one flatmate who tried it gave up after two terms and bought a car.
So unless he intends to do something really quite clever and dramatic (which can't be buses - buses need good roads) I wonder if this would be the best way of achieving that.
Eabhal, I asked for evidence that cutting speed limits makes a major difference. That paper is not on that subject. It's on how to effectively persuade people to accept lower limits. Which is altogether different.
I did note that above, but as it was in an edit I'll forgive you for not seeing that.
You want the QUB study which Stuart linked to a report on above - which suggests bluntly that the picture is mixed. Fewer vehicles, meaning fewer crashes. Well, that may be an acceptable tradeoff. But if it doesn't really cut average speeds by a noticeable amount, that doesn't suggest it's working as intended.
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...
This month has been an interesting experiment for me in that respect. I’ve sneezed once since the start of July, and I instantly regretted it. Normally I’m a big sneezer but I’ve been stifling them. So it is actually possible to control sneezing if you have to.
Well, don't keep it to yourself.* What's the trick?
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
Okay, tell me in your opinion where it's OK to kill children in an average Welsh village. If it's 30mph limit now, then the improved survival rate makes it a no-brainer (so to speak) to make it 20mph. Simple as that.
Bit odd of you to support the RNLI but ...
That is an unnecessary and unfair comment
Exceptions are being considered so even LAs accept a blanket ban is unnecessary and it is likely that many more will be reviewed once implemented in September
Indeed last time I visited Scotland many villages had 30 mph zones moderated to 20mph in the centre which seemed 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?
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.
There is so much exaggeration on climate change it is hard to know where to start. For instance people on Twitter are going on about the oceans boiling. How can that be regarded as anything other than an exaggeration?
I think people can be led to agree either that climate change has potentially catastrophic consequences, and also that it is also sometimes exaggerated if for example they are presented with examples of the latter.
Personally I don't feel qualified to offer an opinion on climate change - other than to go along with the consensus of scientific opinion and to act accordingly.
Two things -
1. Marine life is actually very sensitive to temperature - it's not as if it can sweat it off, etc. This is very evident when walking on a beach in SW England vs NE Scotland - the species balance is markedly different, especially the pelagic or planktonic forms (I had never seen cuttlefish in the wild before a wander in Dorset, for instance). Yet the sea doesn't feel that different ...
2. As noted before on here, water absorbs a hell of a lot of heat energy, so to be as warm as it is mewans there is a huge amount of energy in ther climate system not previously present.
Neither are good at all.
Boiling the ocean is related to reinventing the wheel and giving it war and peace in the wonderful world of biz speak.
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
Okay, tell me in your opinion where it's OK to kill children in an average Welsh village. If it's 30mph limit now, then the improved survival rate makes it a no-brainer (so to speak) to make it 20mph. Simple as that.
Bit odd of you to support the RNLI but ...
That is an unnecessary and unfair comment
Exceptions are being considered so even LAs accept a blanket ban is unnecessary and it is likely that many more will be reviewed once implemented in September
Indeed last time I visited Scotland many villages had 30 mph zones moderated to 20mph in the centre which seemed sensible
But as has been pointed out there is no blanket 20mph speed limit which is what you were complaining about. So it's a matter of 30 vs 20 in selected areas. And to my mind the 30 mph limit should only be used *outside* the villages to slow the traffic.
There is so much exaggeration on climate change it is hard to know where to start. For instance people on Twitter are going on about the oceans boiling. How can that be regarded as anything other than an exaggeration?
I think people can be led to agree either that climate change has potentially catastrophic consequences, and also that it is also sometimes exaggerated if for example they are presented with examples of the latter.
Personally I don't feel qualified to offer an opinion on climate change - other than to go along with the consensus of scientific opinion and to act accordingly.
Two things -
1. Marine life is actually very sensitive to temperature - it's not as if it can sweat it off, etc. This is very evident when walking on a beach in SW England vs NE Scotland - the species balance is markedly different, especially the pelagic or planktonic forms (I had never seen cuttlefish in the wild before a wander in Dorset, for instance). Yet the sea doesn't feel that different ...
2. As noted before on here, water absorbs a hell of a lot of heat energy, so to be as warm as it is mewans there is a huge amount of energy in ther climate system not previously present.
Neither are good at all.
IIRC the oceans are also a major sink for carbon dioxide, which they would give off if warmed.
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?
Speak for yourself.
I love my car.
Does Mrs (or other Mr) Royale know about this? Cod therapist advice: never love anything that is incapable of loving you back
I recommend the Guardian agony aunt column. Very good on that side of matters.
"...Dear Grauniad. I have just found out that Dear Hubby voted Conservative. I have tried an intervention and essential oils, and explained he's been influenced by Other People, but he insists that Conservatives are normal people. I'm at my wit's end. Can you please help him see sense..."
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.
Thank you. Some evidence at last (even if it is only from the RAC). I must say I'm surprised they consider 22% 'statistically insignificant.' I would describe more than a fifth as pretty significant. The 0.8mph reduction in average speeds is more interesting and frankly disturbing as it suggests a proportion of high speeders are skewing the stats.
One point to make here of course is that Drakeford does have a stated aim of reducing traffic on all Wales' roads, for environmental reasons, so I think he probably would accept the reduction in traffic that article highlights.
One major snag however is that outside the Valleys - where public transport is OK-ish (better in some places than others) cars are really a sine qua non for living in Wales. Since the axing of the rural branch line network, with buses never having been particularly good, rural Wales has shockingly bad public transport. I couldn't have got to Aberystwyth reliably by train and one flatmate who tried it gave up after two terms and bought a car.
So unless he intends to do something really quite clever and dramatic (which can't be buses - buses need good roads) I wonder if this would be the best way of achieving that.
Eabhal, I asked for evidence that cutting speed limits makes a major difference. That paper is not on that subject. It's on how to effectively persuade people to accept lower limits. Which is altogether different.
I did note that above, but as it was in an edit I'll forgive you for not seeing that.
You want the QUB study which Stuart linked to a report on above - which suggests bluntly that the picture is mixed. Fewer vehicles, meaning fewer crashes. Well, that may be an acceptable tradeoff. But if it doesn't really cut average speeds by a noticeable amount, that doesn't suggest it's working as intended.
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
Okay, tell me in your opinion where it's OK to kill children in an average Welsh village. If it's 30mph limit now, then the improved survival rate makes it a no-brainer (so to speak) to make it 20mph. Simple as that.
Bit odd of you to support the RNLI but ...
That is an unnecessary and unfair comment
Exceptions are being considered so even LAs accept a blanket ban is unnecessary and it is likely that many more will be reviewed once implemented in September
Indeed last time I visited Scotland many villages had 30 mph zones moderated to 20mph in the centre which seemed sensible
But as has been pointed out there is no blanket 20mph speed limit which is what you were complaining about. So it's a matter of 30 vs 20 in selected areas. And to my mind the 30 mph limit should only be used *outside* the villages to slow the traffic.
The policy is, 20mph will be put in place in residential areas unless an exemption is granted for it to be higher or lower.
Currently, and in England (and also I think in Scotland) it is 30, except where an exemption is granted for it to be higher or lower.
So yes, effectively it is a blanket change. Or at least, a change in presumption.
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.
I used to keep a copy of the official euro crash-test photo for my car on the dashboard as a reminder. It was a cheap little Fiat and there wasn't much driver's compartment left post-impact...
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
Okay, tell me in your opinion where it's OK to kill children in an average Welsh village. If it's 30mph limit now, then the improved survival rate makes it a no-brainer (so to speak) to make it 20mph. Simple as that.
Bit odd of you to support the RNLI but ...
That is an unnecessary and unfair comment
Exceptions are being considered so even LAs accept a blanket ban is unnecessary and it is likely that many more will be reviewed once implemented in September
Indeed last time I visited Scotland many villages had 30 mph zones moderated to 20mph in the centre which seemed sensible
But as has been pointed out there is no blanket 20mph speed limit which is what you were complaining about. So it's a matter of 30 vs 20 in selected areas. And to my mind the 30 mph limit should only be used *outside* the villages to slow the traffic.
The policy is, 20mph will be put in place in residential areas unless an exemption is granted for it to be higher or lower.
Currently, and in England (and also I think in Scotland) it is 30, except where an exemption is granted for it to be higher or lower.
So yes, effectively it is a blanket change. Or at least, a change in presumption.
Thanks - as a starting pointd for consideration, anyway.
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.
Thank you. Some evidence at last (even if it is only from the RAC). I must say I'm surprised they consider 22% 'statistically insignificant.' I would describe more than a fifth as pretty significant. The 0.8mph reduction in average speeds is more interesting and frankly disturbing as it suggests a proportion of high speeders are skewing the stats.
One point to make here of course is that Drakeford does have a stated aim of reducing traffic on all Wales' roads, for environmental reasons, so I think he probably would accept the reduction in traffic that article highlights.
One major snag however is that outside the Valleys - where public transport is OK-ish (better in some places than others) cars are really a sine qua non for living in Wales. Since the axing of the rural branch line network, with buses never having been particularly good, rural Wales has shockingly bad public transport. I couldn't have got to Aberystwyth reliably by train and one flatmate who tried it gave up after two terms and bought a car.
So unless he intends to do something really quite clever and dramatic (which can't be buses - buses need good roads) I wonder if this would be the best way of achieving that.
Eabhal, I asked for evidence that cutting speed limits makes a major difference. That paper is not on that subject. It's on how to effectively persuade people to accept lower limits. Which is altogether different.
I did note that above, but as it was in an edit I'll forgive you for not seeing that.
You want the QUB study which Stuart linked to a report on above - which suggests bluntly that the picture is mixed. Fewer vehicles, meaning fewer crashes. Well, that may be an acceptable tradeoff. But if it doesn't really cut average speeds by a noticeable amount, that doesn't suggest it's working as intended.
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?
Speak for yourself.
I love my car.
Does Mrs (or other Mr) Royale know about this? Cod therapist advice: never love anything that is incapable of loving you back
I recommend the Guardian agony aunt column. Very good on that side of matters.
"...Dear Grauniad. I have just found out that Dear Hubby voted Conservative. I have tried an intervention and essential oils, and explained he's been influenced by Other People, but he insists that Conservatives are normal people. I'm at my wit's end. Can you please help him see sense..."
The last but one column was titled "I recently got sober – and have stopped enjoying sex with my husband".
Dropped in on the world's largest train set today, which has over 1,000 trains running on it...
As a matter of interest where is it ?
In one of the historic dockside warehouses of Hamburg that, despite levelling all the residential areas of the city, allies bombers managed to leave intact.
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?
Speak for yourself.
I love my car.
Does Mrs (or other Mr) Royale know about this? Cod therapist advice: never love anything that is incapable of loving you back
I recommend the Guardian agony aunt column. Very good on that side of matters.
"...Dear Grauniad. I have just found out that Dear Hubby voted Conservative. I have tried an intervention and essential oils, and explained he's been influenced by Other People, but he insists that Conservatives are normal people. I'm at my wit's end. Can you please help him see sense..."
The last but one column was titled "I recently got sober – and have stopped enjoying sex with my husband".
Sounds like a high on whisky strategy was being used.
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.
Thank you. Some evidence at last (even if it is only from the RAC). I must say I'm surprised they consider 22% 'statistically insignificant.' I would describe more than a fifth as pretty significant. The 0.8mph reduction in average speeds is more interesting and frankly disturbing as it suggests a proportion of high speeders are skewing the stats.
One point to make here of course is that Drakeford does have a stated aim of reducing traffic on all Wales' roads, for environmental reasons, so I think he probably would accept the reduction in traffic that article highlights.
One major snag however is that outside the Valleys - where public transport is OK-ish (better in some places than others) cars are really a sine qua non for living in Wales. Since the axing of the rural branch line network, with buses never having been particularly good, rural Wales has shockingly bad public transport. I couldn't have got to Aberystwyth reliably by train and one flatmate who tried it gave up after two terms and bought a car.
So unless he intends to do something really quite clever and dramatic (which can't be buses - buses need good roads) I wonder if this would be the best way of achieving that.
Eabhal, I asked for evidence that cutting speed limits makes a major difference. That paper is not on that subject. It's on how to effectively persuade people to accept lower limits. Which is altogether different.
I did note that above, but as it was in an edit I'll forgive you for not seeing that.
You want the QUB study which Stuart linked to a report on above - which suggests bluntly that the picture is mixed. Fewer vehicles, meaning fewer crashes. Well, that may be an acceptable tradeoff. But if it doesn't really cut average speeds by a noticeable amount, that doesn't suggest it's working as intended.
Quite impressed Ydoethur is actrually considering the documentation. But then he'ss a historian. Spooner refers, so to speak.
Oi! I always consider documentation. Even when it doesn't say what I expect it to.
Otherwise I wouldn't have asked for it, would I?
Honestly, who do you think I am? A journalist at the National?
No: a PB commentator. Very refreshing change. I am always making myself a pain with certain colleagues in insisting on documentation and referencing and often publish an overlapping article in another journal if the editor of the original piece doesn't let me give full documentation.
Actually, although it wasn't the study @Eabhal was trying to communicate, that paper was rather interesting and I found it worth reading.
It is, for example, pretty explicit in how you need to do all the things the Senedd haven't done to get people on board with these controversial changes and prepare for them effectively...
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.
Thank you. Some evidence at last (even if it is only from the RAC). I must say I'm surprised they consider 22% 'statistically insignificant.' I would describe more than a fifth as pretty significant. The 0.8mph reduction in average speeds is more interesting and frankly disturbing as it suggests a proportion of high speeders are skewing the stats.
One point to make here of course is that Drakeford does have a stated aim of reducing traffic on all Wales' roads, for environmental reasons, so I think he probably would accept the reduction in traffic that article highlights.
One major snag however is that outside the Valleys - where public transport is OK-ish (better in some places than others) cars are really a sine qua non for living in Wales. Since the axing of the rural branch line network, with buses never having been particularly good, rural Wales has shockingly bad public transport. I couldn't have got to Aberystwyth reliably by train and one flatmate who tried it gave up after two terms and bought a car.
So unless he intends to do something really quite clever and dramatic (which can't be buses - buses need good roads) I wonder if this would be the best way of achieving that.
Eabhal, I asked for evidence that cutting speed limits makes a major difference. That paper is not on that subject. It's on how to effectively persuade people to accept lower limits. Which is altogether different.
I did note that above, but as it was in an edit I'll forgive you for not seeing that.
You want the QUB study which Stuart linked to a report on above - which suggests bluntly that the picture is mixed. Fewer vehicles, meaning fewer crashes. Well, that may be an acceptable tradeoff. But if it doesn't really cut average speeds by a noticeable amount, that doesn't suggest it's working as intended.
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
Okay, tell me in your opinion where it's OK to kill children in an average Welsh village. If it's 30mph limit now, then the improved survival rate makes it a no-brainer (so to speak) to make it 20mph. Simple as that.
Bit odd of you to support the RNLI but ...
That is an unnecessary and unfair comment
Exceptions are being considered so even LAs accept a blanket ban is unnecessary and it is likely that many more will be reviewed once implemented in September
Indeed last time I visited Scotland many villages had 30 mph zones moderated to 20mph in the centre which seemed sensible
But as has been pointed out there is no blanket 20mph speed limit which is what you were complaining about. So it's a matter of 30 vs 20 in selected areas. And to my mind the 30 mph limit should only be used *outside* the villages to slow the traffic.
The limit is 20mph unless otherwise stated and is defined the same way as 30mph areas are
The exclusions in our area are virtually non existant
Actually, although it wasn't the study @Eabhal was trying to communicate, that paper was rather interesting and I found it worth reading.
It is, for example, pretty explicit in how you need to do all the things the Senedd haven't done to get people on board with these controversial changes and prepare for them effectively...
I rather get the impression that some politicians think that a Proper Environmental/Safety Policy *has* to be unpleasant. At least for a significant minority.
Actually, although it wasn't the study @Eabhal was trying to communicate, that paper was rather interesting and I found it worth reading.
It is, for example, pretty explicit in how you need to do all the things the Senedd haven't done to get people on board with these controversial changes and prepare for them effectively...
I rather get the impression that some politicians think that a Proper Environmental/Safety Policy *has* to be unpleasant. At least for a significant minority.
Carnyx said: "Sure, but that doesn't answer the issue of how the children are to survive elsewhere for the rest of the time outside school."
True enough. Some children are driven to and from in school buses (regular ones and short ones), many are dropped off and picked up by their mothers driving "light trucks" like that Corolla I mentioned earlier, some are walked to and from school by parents, and a few walk to and from home on their own, often in pairs.
(By the way, the school district was so short of bus drivers that a year or so ago, they sent out post cards to everyone in the district, begging for applicants and offering, among other things, free training.)
And here's a question for you: Is "short bus" an insult in the UK, as it sometimes is in the US?
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.
The Conservatives often cite Labour in office in Wales as reason enough to stick with the very impressive Rishi over the lacklustre Starmer. Starmer like Drakeford is indeed lacklustre, so why in Wales do we not vote for RT as FM? Because he is head and shoulders worse than the Drake.
Actually, although it wasn't the study @Eabhal was trying to communicate, that paper was rather interesting and I found it worth reading.
It is, for example, pretty explicit in how you need to do all the things the Senedd haven't done to get people on board with these controversial changes and prepare for them effectively...
I rather get the impression that some politicians think that a Proper Environmental/Safety Policy *has* to be unpleasant. At least for a significant minority.
That is certainly the Conservative approach!
The Scottish Greens seem deeply committed to the idea of No Pain No Gain.
Carnyx said: "Sure, but that doesn't answer the issue of how the children are to survive elsewhere for the rest of the time outside school."
True enough. Some children are driven to and from in school buses (regular ones and short ones), many are dropped off and picked up by their mothers driving "light trucks" like that Corolla I mentioned earlier, some are walked to and from school by parents, and a few walk to and from home on their own, often in pairs.
(By the way, the school district was so short of bus drivers that a year or so ago, they sent out post cards to everyone in the district, begging for applicants and offering, among other things, free training.)
And here's a question for you: Is "short bus" an insult in the UK, as it sometimes is in the US?
“Short Bus” is a very American insult. In fact, almost anything to do with school buses is very American in nature. In the UK, they’re almost non-existent except for private schools and very rural areas. “Busing”, with all the connotations about why it was introduced, has never been a thing elsewhere.
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
Okay, tell me in your opinion where it's OK to kill children in an average Welsh village. If it's 30mph limit now, then the improved survival rate makes it a no-brainer (so to speak) to make it 20mph. Simple as that.
Bit odd of you to support the RNLI but ...
That is an unnecessary and unfair comment
Exceptions are being considered so even LAs accept a blanket ban is unnecessary and it is likely that many more will be reviewed once implemented in September
Indeed last time I visited Scotland many villages had 30 mph zones moderated to 20mph in the centre which seemed sensible
But as has been pointed out there is no blanket 20mph speed limit which is what you were complaining about. So it's a matter of 30 vs 20 in selected areas. And to my mind the 30 mph limit should only be used *outside* the villages to slow the traffic.
The policy is, 20mph will be put in place in residential areas unless an exemption is granted for it to be higher or lower.
Currently, and in England (and also I think in Scotland) it is 30, except where an exemption is granted for it to be higher or lower.
So yes, effectively it is a blanket change. Or at least, a change in presumption.
Yes it is a change in presumption, hence the notion that unless otherwise specified (which is important) if there are street lights present assume the speed limit to be 20.
I am less uncomfortable with the idea that 20 is plenty than I was when they first launched the pilot in St Brides. I suspect it is one of those situations that one gets used to over time. It certainly changes one's behaviour over time.
Actually, although it wasn't the study @Eabhal was trying to communicate, that paper was rather interesting and I found it worth reading.
It is, for example, pretty explicit in how you need to do all the things the Senedd haven't done to get people on board with these controversial changes and prepare for them effectively...
I rather get the impression that some politicians think that a Proper Environmental/Safety Policy *has* to be unpleasant. At least for a significant minority.
That is certainly the Conservative approach!
The Scottish Greens seem deeply committed to the idea of No Pain No Gain.
As much pain as possible, coupled with no economic gain whatsoever.
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?
Wrong. The councils are represented on the management board, but it deters micromanagement.
Edit: also 100% council owned, and (before covid) something of a minor cash cow for the councils.
Oh wow represented, so that means one or two on the board of maybe seven or so. Taxpayers therefore irrelevant as they can be outvoted. No just fuck off if we pay for it we get the final say
Do you ever have a positive word for anything Pagan?
Yes actually I do, people like you tend to attack me for cynicism on these things....go on then tell us how many council representatives are on these management boards...quote a source....if I am cynical and I admit I am then prove me wrong they arent a token
You misunderstand. I don’t know how many council reps are on these boards but I’d say the fewer the better. The council should set the parameters, select an operator, and step back. One of the parameters will be clear targets, another will be regular reviews and exit points. Councillors are unlikely to be qualified individuals to run transport systems.
We can all see what happens when councillors assume they know best, with the disastrous investment decisions taken by Thurrock and others
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?
Wrong. The councils are represented on the management board, but it deters micromanagement.
Edit: also 100% council owned, and (before covid) something of a minor cash cow for the councils.
Oh wow represented, so that means one or two on the board of maybe seven or so. Taxpayers therefore irrelevant as they can be outvoted. No just fuck off if we pay for it we get the final say
Do you ever have a positive word for anything Pagan?
Yes actually I do, people like you tend to attack me for cynicism on these things....go on then tell us how many council representatives are on these management boards...quote a source....if I am cynical and I admit I am then prove me wrong they arent a token
You misunderstand. I don’t know how many council reps are on these boards but I’d say the fewer the better. The council should set the parameters, select an operator, and step back. One of the parameters will be clear targets, another will be regular reviews and exit points. Councillors are unlikely to be qualified individuals to run transport systems.
We can all see what happens when councillors assume they know best, with the disastrous investment decisions taken by Thurrock and others
I dont actually disagree with you on councillors no knowing their ass from their elbow. Maybe you misunderstood what I was getting at.
If taxpayers are paying for it I think democratic oversight is needed. I dont trust a private company to take from the public purse but have no democratic oversight where voters can say....you are doing a crap job fuck off. That way lies corruption
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?
Wrong. The councils are represented on the management board, but it deters micromanagement.
Edit: also 100% council owned, and (before covid) something of a minor cash cow for the councils.
Oh wow represented, so that means one or two on the board of maybe seven or so. Taxpayers therefore irrelevant as they can be outvoted. No just fuck off if we pay for it we get the final say
Do you ever have a positive word for anything Pagan?
Yes actually I do, people like you tend to attack me for cynicism on these things....go on then tell us how many council representatives are on these management boards...quote a source....if I am cynical and I admit I am then prove me wrong they arent a token
You misunderstand. I don’t know how many council reps are on these boards but I’d say the fewer the better. The council should set the parameters, select an operator, and step back. One of the parameters will be clear targets, another will be regular reviews and exit points. Councillors are unlikely to be qualified individuals to run transport systems.
We can all see what happens when councillors assume they know best, with the disastrous investment decisions taken by Thurrock and others
I dont actually disagree with you on councillors no knowing their ass from their elbow. Maybe you misunderstood what I was getting at.
If taxpayers are paying for it I think democratic oversight is needed. I dont trust a private company to take from the public purse but have no democratic oversight where voters can say....you are doing a crap job fuck off. That way lies corruption
I dont in this case think democratic oversight necessarily means election in many ways I think a sortition thing where every area had a transport committe chosen each year of 2 car drivers, 2 public transport users, two active transport people and a chairman wouldn't be a bad idea. The year term probably means they aren't worth bribing. They also probably have a better idea of what is wrong in the area than some town hall tin pot despot that may not even live in the area.
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?
Wrong. The councils are represented on the management board, but it deters micromanagement.
Edit: also 100% council owned, and (before covid) something of a minor cash cow for the councils.
Oh wow represented, so that means one or two on the board of maybe seven or so. Taxpayers therefore irrelevant as they can be outvoted. No just fuck off if we pay for it we get the final say
Do you ever have a positive word for anything Pagan?
Yes actually I do, people like you tend to attack me for cynicism on these things....go on then tell us how many council representatives are on these management boards...quote a source....if I am cynical and I admit I am then prove me wrong they arent a token
You misunderstand. I don’t know how many council reps are on these boards but I’d say the fewer the better. The council should set the parameters, select an operator, and step back. One of the parameters will be clear targets, another will be regular reviews and exit points. Councillors are unlikely to be qualified individuals to run transport systems.
We can all see what happens when councillors assume they know best, with the disastrous investment decisions taken by Thurrock and others
Given what you said what makes you think councillors are qualified to set parameters, targets and do regular reviews. These are people with no idea how to run a transport system.
The problem is most democracies is politicians, they will tell you like Nick Palmer does "they put themselves forward to make the country a better place". I actually dont dispute that in the least. They do genuinely think they are doing it to do a good thing.
Simple fact of the matter is however they also meddle in a lot of things they don't really understand and do more harm than good which is how we ended up with RIPA for one, the online safety bill secondly to name but two. We have the french now demanding browsers obey a black list of sites, the spanish demanding an finish to end to end encryption, the australians declaring that the law of mathematics are great but in australia its australian laws that matter.
Politicians need to get back into their zones of knowledge, for example if nick palmer has things to say on animal welfare that is worth listening to and considering. If he has something to say about for instance public transport well he probably knows no more than most of us on here
Comments
The whole of Wales has been gaslit into voting Labour for 100 years, and for once the electoral system is designed to keep them in forever.
Drakeford could pledge the death of the firstborn, and he'd still get back in.
Bit odd of you to support the RNLI but ...
Two seconds later and you've got a NIMBY who doesn't want 30mph past their house telling North Wales Live "The Tories want to kill my Cockerpoo"
(Eureka - just link 20mph to dog deaths and it's a winner)
*Judging from my periodic delves in the DM.
One point to make here of course is that Drakeford does have a stated aim of reducing traffic on all Wales' roads, for environmental reasons, so I think he probably would accept the reduction in traffic that article highlights.
One major snag however is that outside the Valleys - where public transport is OK-ish (better in some places than others) cars are really a sine qua non for living in Wales. Since the axing of the rural branch line network, with buses never having been particularly good, rural Wales has shockingly bad public transport. I couldn't have got to Aberystwyth reliably by train and one flatmate who tried it gave up after two terms and bought a car.
So unless he intends to do something really quite clever and dramatic (which can't be buses - buses need good roads) I wonder if this would be the best way of achieving that.
There is so much exaggeration on climate change it is hard to know where to start. For instance people on Twitter are going on about the oceans boiling. How can that be regarded as anything other than an exaggeration?
I think people can be led to agree either that climate change has potentially catastrophic consequences, and also that it is also sometimes exaggerated if for example they are presented with examples of the latter.
Personally I don't feel qualified to offer an opinion on climate change - other than to go along with the consensus of scientific opinion and to act accordingly.
https://www.kirklandwa.gov/Whats-Happening/News/Speed-Enforcement-Cameras-Expanded-to-Two-More-School-Zones
They don't look terribly expensive to me, but I haven't bothered to find out how much they actually cost.
One gripe I do have with them (and again it's particularly Wales - it doesn't seem to happen in England) is that they will start flashing at you some way before the speed limit comes into force. Now that's not on. By all means flash if I'm still doing 35 as I pass the sign, because I should have slowed to 30 by then, but not 250 yards away where the limit's still different.
It just makes the person who programmed them come across as a preachy twat.
If they’re being used to give warnings and advice, then they’re cheap ($500 ish).
I did note that above, but as it was in an edit I'll forgive you for not seeing that.
You want the QUB study which Stuart linked to a report on above - which suggests bluntly that the picture is mixed. Fewer vehicles, meaning fewer crashes. Well, that may be an acceptable tradeoff. But if it doesn't really cut average speeds by a noticeable amount, that doesn't suggest it's working as intended.
1. Marine life is actually very sensitive to temperature - it's not as if it can sweat it off, etc. This is very evident when walking on a beach in SW England vs NE Scotland - the species balance is markedly different, especially the pelagic or planktonic forms (I had never seen cuttlefish in the wild before a wander in Dorset, for instance). Yet the sea doesn't feel that different ...
2. As noted before on here, water absorbs a hell of a lot of heat energy, so to be as warm as it is mewans there is a huge amount of energy in ther climate system not previously present.
Neither are good at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_the_Fall_of_Night
I would say that Lys (country) comes out ahead of Diaspar (city) in that novel, because it produces better people.
(And I have long been struck by the fact that the two Americans I believe have done the most for the world in the last fifty years, grew up on farms:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Hilleman )
https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/phr/XAZI9445/#/abstract
*unlike your sneezes!
Exceptions are being considered so even LAs accept a blanket ban is unnecessary and it is likely that many more will be reviewed once implemented in September
Indeed last time I visited Scotland many villages had 30 mph zones moderated to 20mph in the centre which seemed sensible
Another point is that consideration is being given to mandating Auto Emergency Braking. What effect will this have?
Thereby causing a rather nasty feedback loop.
Currently, and in England (and also I think in Scotland) it is 30, except where an exemption is granted for it to be higher or lower.
So yes, effectively it is a blanket change. Or at least, a change in presumption.
Otherwise I wouldn't have asked for it, would I?
Honestly, who do you think I am? A journalist at the National?
It is, for example, pretty explicit in how you need to do all the things the Senedd haven't done to get people on board with these controversial changes and prepare for them effectively...
Chapeau.
The exclusions in our area are virtually non existant
True enough. Some children are driven to and from in school buses (regular ones and short ones), many are dropped off and picked up by their mothers driving "light trucks" like that Corolla I mentioned earlier, some are walked to and from school by parents, and a few walk to and from home on their own, often in pairs.
(By the way, the school district was so short of bus drivers that a year or so ago, they sent out post cards to everyone in the district, begging for applicants and offering, among other things, free training.)
And here's a question for you: Is "short bus" an insult in the UK, as it sometimes is in the US?
I am less uncomfortable with the idea that 20 is plenty than I was when they first launched the pilot in St Brides. I suspect it is one of those situations that one gets used to over time. It certainly changes one's behaviour over time.
We can all see what happens when councillors assume they know best, with the disastrous investment decisions taken by Thurrock and others
If taxpayers are paying for it I think democratic oversight is needed. I dont trust a private company to take from the public purse but have no democratic oversight where voters can say....you are doing a crap job fuck off. That way lies corruption
Simple fact of the matter is however they also meddle in a lot of things they don't really understand and do more harm than good which is how we ended up with RIPA for one, the online safety bill secondly to name but two. We have the french now demanding browsers obey a black list of sites, the spanish demanding an finish to end to end encryption, the australians declaring that the law of mathematics are great but in australia its australian laws that matter.
Politicians need to get back into their zones of knowledge, for example if nick palmer has things to say on animal welfare that is worth listening to and considering. If he has something to say about for instance public transport well he probably knows no more than most of us on here