As the Guardian notes this morning:
Rishi Sunak is to prioritise the interests of millions of car owners with a series of measures that will provoke environmentalists and curb the power of local councils.
In a package expected to be announced at the Tory conference on Monday, the prime minister will set out his “plan for motorists” that will limit the number of 20mph speed restrictions and favour drivers over bus passengers.
It seems that Sunak wants controversy and is determined to find it. There are massive issues inherent in this planned suggestion, which it is thought will be announced on Monday.
First, there is the issue of constraining local democracy when local democracy matters to a lot of people because Westminster is so alien to many.
Second, there is the risk of upsetting those who want these restrictions. I recently wrote to my local council supporting their plan to introduce a 20mph limit in the whole of Ely - which would massively reduce risk in a town with many small roads and a lot of pedestrians (including me, on the vast majority of my local journeys). Sunak seems to want to sacrifice the safety of those who walk to the car.
Third, this is meant to divide the population between those who have cars and those who do not. Sunak clearly wants to exploit this divide by driving a wedge between the two.
Fourth, there is a massive green dimension to this as well: the bias is anti-public transport and pro-the most fuel-consuming form of travel that we have.
I am sure that there is a hard core of people who will support Sunak on this. The petrol-head community is real, and already Tory voting in the main. He will be seeking to keep them in the fold with measures like this.
But can you really win an election on policies known to be deeply unpopular in society precisely because they drive wedges into it? Is that really possible for long? I doubt it. This, like so much that Sunak is doing, appears to be the action of a desperate man whose time is up.
And precisely because he seems to be anticipating that fact, I am beginning to wonder whether November is now on the cards for a general election date. I dismissed this idea until very recently. Now I am not so sure.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Thank you, Richard.
There are some Australian and American staff at No 10 and Tory HQ. They specialise in that very tactic. They enjoy it, too. My former manager’s son is returning to Tory HQ as the machine cranks up. Like Isaac Levido, he’s a disciple of Lynton Crosby.
You’re not the only wondering about November, but, I hear, April is still under consideration. Few currently expect the term to go the maximum permitted.
British socialists need a Lee Atwater.
British socialists need a political party. We could all do without the Lee Atwaters of this world.
Thank you, Helen.
I don’t disagree with you about such a movement, but having gone to school with and worked with and for these types, a socialist party is not going to be enough, unfortunately and sadly.
At some personal and professional risk, Corbyn’s insider sympathisers offered ammunition, but neither he nor his team was interested in even a mild push back against his tormentors, none of whom is fit to lace Corbyn’s shoes.
I worked in regulatory and trade policy from 2007 – 16 and may again from next year. Up close and personal with neoliberals and neocons.
(US) statistics show that @ 30mph you have a 50% chance, as a pedestrian of being killed by a …4×4. (compared to 23% chance by an ordinary, non-4×4). At 20mph the risk reduces to circa 30%. Although these are US figures, there is little doubt that the situation is similar in the UK, working on the basis that 4x4s (also known as “wanks” because they are driven by .. etc) are very similar the world over & people are… well people. (I mention 4×4 due to their increasing prevelance – which remains a puzzle to me).
Thus Wedgie Sunak wants more people to die. He will legislate so that, when (there is no “if” involved) a 4×4 hits a person in a zone that could have been 20mph – but retains its 30mph limit – the risk is 50/50 (death) instead of 30/70. Naturally Wedgie (I can call you Wedgie can’t I?) won’t be there as a policeman, or as an ambulance person (or indeed those in the hospital) dealing with dead people. But that is as it should be, Wedgie lives in his cocoon, without ever posing the question at the end of these excellent lyrics:
And you may find yourself in another part of the world
And you may find yourself behind the wheel of a large automobile
And you may find yourself in a beautiful house, with a beautiful wife
And you may ask yourself, “Well, how did I get here?”
Apologies for posting again:
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/rishi-sunak-department-for-transport-20mph-speed-limit-attack-motorists/
The headline: Government’s own research contradicts Sunak’s 20mph speed limit claim: Study in 2018 found most drivers backed plans despite PM’s claim they ‘don’t reflect people’s priorities’
Wedgie Sunak – staying true to form & lying – whilst knowing that what he says & what people want are wholly different things. What a pathetic excuse for a human being he is, but one could say that for all vile-tories.
The only people who count as ‘people’are Tories
I’m sorry to very unusually disagree with you, Richard, but I do not support blanket 20 mph speed limits.
I regard myself as a professional driver having worked in the motor trade for 30 years of my life, and I am a RoSPA gold advanced driving certificate holder (admittedly now expired because you have to resit the test every 3 years).
The high incidence of collisions in towns is not a matter of driving too fast but bad driving. As an advanced driver I learned the trick of hazzard anticipation and driving at an appropriate speed for the observed conditions. That may well be 20 mph, and I often drive at that speed even when the posted limit is higher. Obviously, I never exceed the posted limit, except once 25 years ago which resulted in a driver awareness course and my decision to take the advanced driving test.
I do support the use of 20 limits in certain areas such as near schools or other roads where there are likely to be children in the streets. This is generally the case where I live, however one town has introduced a blanket limit and I therefore avoid going there if at all possible other than on the bus.
Having said that, I do accept that very few drivers have such training. But isn’t it a pity that everyone has to suffer the consequences? Better driving training and regular reassessment seem to me to be a better solution than sticking plater 20 mph blanket speed limit.
Sadly, I can’t drive at all at the moment because of a broken leg and I have just put my car on a SORN declaration as the medics tell me I will not be signed off to do so for at least another 6 weeks.
Because most people are nit good drivers we need 20mph on crowded urban roads with multiple risks -as we have. IMO
I”m glad to added the diplomatic “IMO”. I suspect you are right on the basis that if the limit is 30 some people will drive at 40 and if it’s 20 they’ll drive at 30. I will be watching the KSI data and those for Bristol are not encouraging. I am at the moment using taxis and I am displeased that the drivers are not observing the limits. One was doing nearly 40 in a 20 limit.
There are other problems with the 20 limit. I previously stayed in a narrow residential street. Essentially parked cars both sides all the time. No room for two vehicles to pass unless one an pull in somewhere. It was also a rat run. I would say a safe speed was 10 to 12 mph. The designation of twenty presumably gives some cover to someone if that was the speed they were doing. I would nver go down the street at twenty.
Otherwise there is the problem of pollution. Modern cars are not really designed for low gear driving. Pollution will increase as a result.
There was at least one experiment, (I think it was Manchester but not sure). They divided the city in 2 and had restrictions in one half and not the other. I think it ran for a year. The results reference safety were worse in the restricted traffic area and the scheme was scrapped.
Stewart, If you’re interested in looking at a bit of research about the extent of successful 20mph speed limits, the Guardian has a piece today (2 Oct) by Roger Harrabin.
You’re falling for Sunak’s lies here, though.
There are really no “blanket” 20mph limits even in Wales because wherever there are 30mph signs, the limit remains at 30. In my experience this covers an awful lot of urban roads. The 30 limit will stay until & unless the signs are replaced.
He really can’t be trusted at all, can he? Lies as much as Johnson.
I suspect replacing those signs will not take long
The btl pile-on in the Guardian is over the top. Authorities have never seriously tried to enforce the 30mph limit. Serious fines and publicity of such for breaking 30 could shift acceptable behaviour in the majority to observe the 30mph.
Implementation of the 20 is haphazard and bonkers in many cases.
I would be more in favour of a campaign that says we’re coming for you if you break 30. A big fine and public humiliation are good deterrents.
In the US, the standard speed limit in urban neighborhoods is 25 mph, except around schools where it is 15 mph. The top speed is generally 70 mph. It does vary by state, however. Many states have a maximum of 65 mph. How any driver is expected to keep track of the differences, I don’t know.
I know of an instance where a driver was being chased by the PA state police for speeding but was able to avoid being caught and prosecuted simply by crossing into Ohio, where their jurisdiction ended, before they caught up with him. He viewed this as a great triumph. Apparently, the PA state police did not communicate with the Ohio state police, so the latter were not waiting for him over the border. They also apparently failed to take down his license number, and, as far as I know, no action was ever taken out against him.
My observation is that driving standards have indeed got worse and we need to slow down.
I’m struck (no pun intended) by how many new electric cars are SUVs with front ends that look like mouths ready to gobble up pedestrians and cyclists.
Anyone who falls for Sunak’s wedges at the next election can only be described as a moron.
I hate the look of most new cars
Why do they need to exude aggression?
In this case I couldn’t agree more. Especially these bloated Chelsea tractors. (Sorry to readers who own them). They’re meant to demonstrate how successful and superior the owner is. I run an 04 plate Fiat Punto which is the newest car I could buy that isn’t bristling with pointless electronics that go wrong and cost the earth to fix. Having said that it is inevitable these days and I know if the electric steering packs up it will cost more than the car is worth.
I hope my Volvo lasts a long time because that bis the most carbo efficient way to use it
It also does not do many miles a year
I personally already refer to them as Torons because, well we all know why.
Talking about the 20 MPH speed restriction, but changing the subject slightly, this is the letter I sent to the Guardian on 23rd July, which they did not publish. I feel it deserves an airing, so here it is. –
The Guardian
Dear Editor
The news of a driver being jailed for 12years having reached speeds of 123mph is horrifying enough.(‘Show-off’ driver jailed for 12years over killing of pregnant woman- National News July 20th).
But surely it is even more horrifying that irresponsible car makers are still lawfully allowed to sell cars capable of doing these speeds, when the maximum legal speed allowed is 70mph.
Is it not the time for government action to make it illegal to use a motor car on public roads that is capable of travelling at more than 70mph? The fitting of speed limiters should be a legal requirement.
Also the insurance industry could help by refusing to insure cars that can do these ridiculous speeds.
I will be interested to hear what others think.
I cannot see why cars cannot be legally regulated to say 80mph max
I also cannot see why regulators could not be capped by speed limit signs. The technology must be easy now
I have such a regulator on my car which I usually engage. It is a long way from perfect and does occasionally brake in response to a misaligned sign on a side road (which must annoy following drivers who must slow while I dis-engage the speed regulator). However, this is far outweighed by the occasions it keeps me from speeding in advertently.
And there I was thinking I had invented something 🙂
Interesting article here
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/29/uk-protests-planned-amid-epidemic-of-dangerous-driving
Also worth pointing out – sadly I cant find the report I got it from that 37% of car driver and occupant fatalities occur in crashes that dont involve another road user – ie they drive off the road
The UK sadly has decided not to adopt these EU rules which came in last year, report here
https://www.pacts.org.uk/still-unvaccinated-gsr-one-year-on/
If we are serious about preventing speeding we need massive numbers of small discrete cameras (both permanent and mobile) that would mean that you never know when/where you will be “zapped” and fined. The current system where you are warned is absurd.
Agreed
Some speeding /going to fast is down to poor but legal engineered street design, ie. basically the road lane is too wide and straight.
This is improving a bit but not enough on new build and renovating existing streets and roads, see The Manual for Streets
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1072722/Essex_Manual_for_Streets_Redacted.pdf
See An enlightened engineer talking about street design
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GFJ9GenVAs&t=2542s
What the petrol heads and wedgies overlook is the fact that many people who own cars also own bikes and prefer to cycle or walk for certain journeys, and appreciate the need for 20mph limits. Hence, incidentally, contrary to what petrol heads assume, many cyclists and walkers do pay what petrol heads wrongly call road tax.
Oh dear. I admit to being a petrolhead. The fastest I have driven is 160 mph on a German autobahn (where there was no limit) in a Lancia Dedra Turbo. In Italy I was regularly overtaken by supercars making me look as if I was standing still doing the posted 80 mph. A very small number of Italian stretches of motorway have a 100 mph limit. Friends there told me that you can’t lose your licence for speeding and that the rich simply treat the fine as a fee to drive fast. (It may have changed now). I once saw a Lamborghini police car pass at great speed which later pulled in an Audi.
You haven’t invented anything, Richard. Trucks and coaches have had speed limiters for years and there has been discussion in Government about fitting them to private cars. I am generally against that because there are occasions when you do need the extra speed to get out of trouble. RoSPA do allow that, though only in very unusual circumstances, for instance to overtake a vehicle travelling at slightly less than the speed limit, after which you must return to the limit. Normally, you shouldn’t try to accelerate out of trouble.
I believe that in the future we will see autonomous electric cars travelling in convoy at 100 mph or more on motorways, making HS2 redundant.
Sorry for the rant, but it’s one of my hobby horses.
Rants allowed
Have you heard of the concept of “you don’t have to overtake?” If someone is going at slightly less than speed limit then stay behind. If cars were limited to 70mph there would be no danger when overtaking something going slighlty below because nothing could catch up to you.
In reality the number of lives savec not implementing limiters is near 0 while implementing them would safe a fair few. It’s pointless to concoct hypothetical scenarios where lives could be saved by going faster than 70mph when in reality more would be saved with the limiter. Any decision whose aim is to limit casualties would therefore rationally implement it.
Unfortunately limiting casaulties is not the aim but appeasing the most pandered but self-proclaimed victims which is the car drivers.
In May 2021 Spain introduced an urban speed limit of 18mph (30mph on dual carriageways, and 12mph on one way streets). They’ve also pedestrianised many more city centre areas. And how people, locals and tourists, love the big increase in the quality of life. It’s also given a huge boosts to electric bicycle hire: in Madrid automatic re-charging hire stations are at least as frequent as tube stations in central London. All you have to do is buy a pin number for anything from an hour to a year (which is really, really cheap) to access the system, making electric bikes affordable to all, as well as generating new worthwhile jobs.
Here, in Mid Suffolk, we voted in the Green Party candidates who stood on a platform of environmental policies, including public transport and traffic pollution and safety, and who now control our Council. And here we have Sunak undermining our democratic decision. Disgraceful!
Spot on
Here’s a really good “wedge” issue:-
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/sep/30/the-quotes-were-5000-or-more-electric-vehicle-owners-face-soaring-insurance-costs
Labour under Neo-Con Starmer isn’t going to fix it either we know that by now!
Wow…..that is a massive obstacle to electric car ownership
Yes it is and when there is clearly a need for a political party to make clear tackling profiteering is an important of its Green mission there is deadly silence. This alone tells you what a rotten state the country’s in!
I’m a petrol head driving an Audi A5 convertible 3.0 TDi and I definitely don’t support these measures