Why reduce the speed limit to 50mph on rural roads?

[Cie]

Personally, I find myself leaning towards a more modular sort of learning with more demanding modules (e.g. a night driving course, a rural roads course with the limit point taught, busy urban roads)

That's pretty much how I learned to drive, car, test, night, land rover, off road, night off road, convoys. But they were just 'lessons'; becoming a better driver/rider takes experience, and in my case the penny dropped when I did the IAM about 6 months after getting my motorcycle license. Until then I'd been the stereotypical male driver.

It was probably the lack of protection sat perched on my KTM that gave me the need for the heightened state of awareness that advanced driving brings/is.

Any scheme must be incentive based, otherwise there will be no motivation for my 19 year old son to bother.

[Darren]

Had an email indicating whether we should do a petition to re-look at this "advice" on the No.10 website. Any thoughts?

[waremark]

Excellent release, well done and thanks to those involved. I wish the IAM would take this line.

[jont]

Had an email indicating whether we should do a petition to re-look at this "advice" on the No.10 website. Any thoughts?

Waste of time. I've never seen a useful response to any petition on that site. There have also been a number of anti-50mph NSL petitions already (you can probably find them, along with the government response).

[Darren]

Waste of time. I've never seen a useful response to any petition on that site. There have also been a number of anti-50mph NSL petitions already (you can probably find them, along with the government response).

This petition received over 45,000 signatories, but was closed and pushed to one side - basically the government have made their mind up.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/noNSLreduction/

[TripleS]

Waste of time. I've never seen a useful response to any petition on that site. There have also been a number of anti-50mph NSL petitions already (you can probably find them, along with the government response).

This petition received over 45,000 signatories, but was closed and pushed to one side - basically the government have made their mind up.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/noNSLreduction/

If a petition receiving 1.8 million signatories - which to my mind was a remarkable level of support - can be disregarded and pushed aside, what notice are they going to take of any petition? This government needs to be in receipt of direct action by the people on various counts, and certainly the motoring community ought to be part of that defiant movement. It is not the first UK government to get too big for its boots, but I'd say it was by far the worst.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Darren]

If a petition receiving 1.8 million signatories - which to my mind was a remarkable level of support - can be disregarded and pushed aside, what notice are they going to take of any petition? This government needs to be receipt of direct action by the people on various counts, and certainly the motoring community ought to be part of that defiant movement. It is not the first UK government to get too big for its boots, but I'd say it was by far the worst.

I think before 2010 is out, we will have a new government in power. Right now things such as the extra £15 on fine's is a silly thing to be bringing up, it'll help lose them votes. It could be more prudent for us to be trying to lobby the opposition rather than the current government - in 6 months or so time, it could all be a very different story.

[TripleS]

If a petition receiving 1.8 million signatories - which to my mind was a remarkable level of support - can be disregarded and pushed aside, what notice are they going to take of any petition? This government needs to be receipt of direct action by the people on various counts, and certainly the motoring community ought to be part of that defiant movement. It is not the first UK government to get too big for its boots, but I'd say it was by far the worst.

I think before 2010 is out, we will have a new government in power. Right now things such as the extra £15 on fine's is a silly thing to be bringing up, it'll help lose them votes. It could be more prudent for us to be trying to lobby the opposition rather than the current government - in 6 months or so time, it could all be a very different story.

Yes, it could be very different, and it needs to be. As far as I can see, though many of us may detest the present government, there is no certainty that the Conservatives will overturn the Labour majority by a good margin, even if they win at all. It looks like needing a big swing of votes, and they may not get that.

Despite being a Conservative supporter for well over 45 years, I'm not assuming that a Conservative victory will be the answer to our concerns, or indeed much of an improvement at all. To get my vote they will need to convince me that they are going to bring about a major change in the government of this country, and one of the things required there is less government.

It is all very well saying - as some do - that as societies progress and become more complex we need more laws and government activity: that may be so, up to a point, but there are limits, and IMHO we have passed the point where more government involvement means better lives for us.

Is is certainly true that most of us are substantially better off in financial and material terms than we were when I first voted in 1964, but so far as enjoyment of life, contentment and relative freedom from government meddling and intrusion are concerned, things have been heading in the wrong direction for quite a few years now.

Politicians being what they are it will not be easy to get them to 'butt out' of our lives, so to speak, but that's what they need to do, and if necessary they must be forced to do exactly that.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Laconic]

Speaking of speed limits, today I was coming back from Bath using the A46 (no way I was doing my sat nav's insane drop-you-down-a-hill route in reverse) and for part of it, it's sign-posted 50 mph, fair enough -- those sections were windy and there was quite a bit of a climb. However, the road straightens out, the NSL signposts come up and there are *still* 50 mph limit signs on the road and on signposts. Very confusing. I erred on the side of the lower limit and no one tailgated or overtook.

Is the meaning of NSL changing altogether now?


Dei

[Laconic]

what sort of curriculum changes would be nice though?

Make MIND DRIVING compulsory as well as general road theory in all schools at age 15

Age 15 is too late. Ones attitude to road safety is fixed by the age of 11.

Nigel

That's a rather depressing thought, but it also points to the potential for reaching concerned parents by encouraging them to model good driving behaviour and attitudes to their children. As I've passed too recently to be an accompanying driver for my cousin who'll shortly be starting driving lessons, I've been mooting what I could do and it's occurred to me to explain to her as we go from A to B what I look out for on the road and why (that and the basics of car care).

Your words make it sound like a not entirely mad idea.



D.

[martine]

Speaking of speed limits, today I was coming back from Bath using the A46 (no way I was doing my sat nav's insane drop-you-down-a-hill route in reverse) and for part of it, it's sign-posted 50 mph, fair enough -- those sections were windy and there was quite a bit of a climb. However, the road straightens out, the NSL signposts come up and there are *still* 50 mph limit signs on the road and on signposts. Very confusing. I erred on the side of the lower limit and no one tailgated or overtook.

Is the meaning of NSL changing altogether now?

Hi there 'Laconic'.
Are you talking about the A46 as it leaves Bath going north? If so, you are correct - the climb up is signed at 50 and it then has sections of NSL and 50 until you get to the M4 juntion. There was no abiguity however last time I drove it (2 weeks ago)...it does change up and down and up but it's clearly signed...I think.

[jont]

Speaking of speed limits, today I was coming back from Bath using the A46 (no way I was doing my sat nav's insane drop-you-down-a-hill route in reverse) and for part of it, it's sign-posted 50 mph, fair enough -- those sections were windy and there was quite a bit of a climb. However, the road straightens out, the NSL signposts come up and there are *still* 50 mph limit signs on the road and on signposts. Very confusing. I erred on the side of the lower limit and no one tailgated or overtook.

Is the meaning of NSL changing altogether now?

Hi there 'Laconic'.
Are you talking about the A46 as it leaves Bath going north?

North of the M4, the A46 is pretty much NSL all the way to Nailsworth other than a short section of 40 for the Chipping Sodbury crossroads.

Laconic - are you sure the NSL signs weren't at a junction and knocked out of position slightly? It's fairly common for 50s along nice, wide open A-roads, and NSL down all the single track side roads.

[IanH]

I heartily endorse the first response by Darren. Enough said! Why can't we get common sense to prevail?
Kind regards to all, IanH

[lyndon]

I assume we all agree that there are far too many deaths and serious injuries as a result of road accidents, and the Government is right to ask how these can be reduced. They will presumably use models such as this:
http://www.trl.co.uk/downloads/general/ ... rsion3.xls
or, if that is too long, try this:
http://tinyurl.com/y8tknzq

This spreadsheet shows 'possible' reductions in accidents if the speed limit is reduced.

So the question in my mind is 'How do you convince policy-makers that their model needs to be adjusted?'

Well, we could try to present evidence that advanced training reduces accidents. Do we have any hard data on this? If we do, do we have ideas on how we could ensure that all drivers take advantage of advanced training? If we can convince policymakers that more lives would be saved by, say, changes to the driver education, then they would have to incorporate that into their model. I submit that won't work is misrepresenting data from the Road Safety Research Report No. 87. Policymakers need to demonstrate that what they implement does actually reduce deaths and serious accidents. If we can help them do that, we will succeed in our aims.

[waremark]

I submit that won't work is misrepresenting data from the Road Safety Research Report No. 87.

Could you explain what you mean by that bit?

I don't know of anyone who can demonstrate that advanced training reduces accidents. The IAM used to claim ambitious figures (was it a 70% reduction?), then they said they were going to initiate research to update their claim, then they published what seemed to me to be very 'wishy-washy' research from Brunel University about the effect of advanced training on driver behaviours, not on accidents. I have the feeling that if they could establish a relationship between training and accidents they would - they do have a research department.

In the earlier days of fleet driver defensive training prorammes, fleet training companies used to claim they could demonstrate a payback from their training. Personally, I have not heard of such claims in the last few years, with fleet driver training programmes now being driven mainly by employer liability concerns. Has anyone heard of such claims being made credibly?

I looked at the spreadsheets for calculating the effect of speed limit reductions. Calculations are only as valid as the underlying assumptions. In this case, key assumptions are built in on a number of areas, in none of which I would have any confidence. Key assumptions are: the direct relationship between a reduction in mean speeds and a reduction in accidents, the effect of a reduction in the speed limit on the mean speed, the cost per accident, and the cost of additional journey time. Again, I would love to see good resources focused on challenging these assumptions.