Wales becomes Trumpton

Oh dear, “We've put our hands up to say 'the guidance has to be corrected'.” He said, “this will enable councils to revert back those routes that are not appropriate. Whether the change will be radical will largely depend on what people want.”

So not dead, it's up to the people.
 
denso13 said:
Oh dear,
Click to expand...
The old boy is desperate. He's been bitterly disappointed a lot lately, started with lying scumbag Boris, AR, Mone, Tory catastrophe, wrong or ill informed about a lot of topics. The Wales thing is just another blow to the poor old sod. I think he's losing it.
 
denso13 said:
Oh dear, “We've put our hands up to say 'the guidance has to be corrected'.” He said, “this will enable councils to revert back those routes that are not appropriate. Whether the change will be radical will largely depend on what people want.”

So not dead, it's up to the people.
Click to expand...
So now we aren’t interested in following the science… it’s up to the people.

59% of Welsh voters, including 51% of those who voted Labour in the 2021 Senedd Election, said they oppose the introduction of the 20mph speed limit, up from 34% who said they opposed the new speed limit in mid-September. Support for the new, reduced speed limit has correspondingly fallen from 46% to 29%.

So the scheme is dead then. Good result.

Let’s spend money on things that improve road safety and follow the science.

And Skates had to embarrassingly admit that he foresees “relatively few changes” in some areas of the country, with “quite a lot more” in others.
 
noseall said:
He probably doesn't even know who they are.
Click to expand...
I know they are called RoSPA which you seem to struggle with. Poor older Noseall always arguing about subjects he knows nothing about.

You both might want to read p13 of their policy to see that they are not supporting widespread use of 20mph speed limits. They are quite clear.

motorbiking said:
A blanket 20mph on all restricted roads seems excessive.
Click to expand...
Proven right again it seems.
 
Last edited:
motorbiking said:
The RSPA.
Click to expand...
Correct...

Read and weep boyo....

From 1994, there was a widespread introduction of 20mph zones in Hull, and by 2003, there were 120 zones covering 500 streets. The casualty statistics between 1994 and 2001 showed a drop of 14% in Hull, compared to a rise of 1.5% in the rest of Yorkshire and Humberside. In the 20mph zones in Hull, there was a decrease in total accidents of 56% and in fatal and serious injuries of 90%. The biggest reductions were pedestrian casualties, which fell by 54%, child casualties, which dropped by 54% and child pedestrian casualties, which fell by 74%. These figures were reported in Local Transport Today12.A 2007 review of half of the 20mph zones which had been implemented in London (78 zones) found that they reduced injury accidents by about 42% and fatal or serious accidents by 53%13.

A major review of road casualties in London between 1986 and 2006 was published in the BMJ in 200914. It demonstrated that 20mph zones reduced the number of casualties by over 40% (41.9%). The 20mph zones were slightly more effective in preventing fatal or serious injuries to children, which were reduced by half (50.2%). There was a smaller reduction in casualties among cyclists than any of the other major groups of road users studied, with a reduction of 16.9%. The analysis showed that the reduction in road injuries in 20mph zones occurred at a greater rate than the overall trend of reduction in casualties in London, that this was not attributable to any regression-to-themeans effect, and that there was no displacement in accident risk to roads close to the 20mph zones.

Based on the casualty reductions seen in the 2009 BMJ paper, the North West Public Health Observatory predicted what the effect would be of introducing 20mph zones in all residential zones in the North West region15. Casualty figures collected by the police were used and the average number of casualties per year in the region was calculated using data from between 2004 and 2008. This study found that there would have been 140 fewer killed or seriously injured child casualties if there were 20mph zones in all residential areas in the region. This was an improvement of 26% on the actual figures. In addition, there would have been a 26% reduction of all pedestrian casualties and 14% reduction in all cyclist casualties.



RoSPA strongly supports the use of 20mph zones as they are an effective means of reducing road crashes and casualties. They are very effective at protecting our most vulnerable road users, including children, pedestrians and cyclists, and significantly decrease the risk of being injured in a collision. RoSPA encourages their greater use, especially in residential areas.
The majority of pedestrian casualties occur in built up areas: 29 of the 34 child pedestrians and 302 of the 413adult pedestrians who were killed in 2016, died on built-up roads. Pedal cyclists are also vulnerable in built up areas, with over half of cyclist deaths (58 of 102) and most cyclist casualties (16,934 of 18,477) occurring on these roads.1In 2016, 789 people were killed, 15,993 were seriously injured and 113,055 slightly injured in reported road collisions on built up* roads in Great Britain1. A large proportion of these accidents occurred on residential roads, with 90 deaths on B roads in built-up areas and 309 deaths on other minor roads in built-up areas2.Speed significantly increases the chance of being injured in a collision. Research has shown that the risk of death for pedestrians struck by cars increases at higher impact speeds, although the exact risk levels varied between the studies. One of the first studies of pedestrian injury and car impact speed3found that at 20mph there was a 2.5% chance of being fatally injured, compared to a 20% chance at 30mph, although this study is now regarded as having overestimated the risks. A recent review identified the studies which had produced the most reliable modern estimates4. The results from one of these studies is presented in figure 1, which shows a fatality risk of 1.5% at 20 mph versus 8% at 30 mph.

READ MORE
 
Although a high proportion of urban roads are suitable for 20mph limits, RoSPA does not believe that 20mph
speed limits are suitable for every road in a local authority area. They should be targeted at roads that are primarily residential in nature and on town or city streets where pedestrian and cyclist movements are high (or potentially high), such as around schools, shops, markets, playgrounds and other areas. Roads which are not suitable for 20mph limits are major through routes.

could it be clearer? apparently for some its not clear enough.

How's the wife getting on with helping you count the cas-stats for UK vs Wales and why Wales is not looking very good. Despite the PR spin.
 
Oh dear, "RoSPA supports and encourages the wider use of 20mph limits. They have been shown to reduce traffic speed, although not as much as 20mph zones with traffic calming.".
 
noseall said:
RoSPA strongly supports the use of 20mph zones as they are an effective means of reducing road crashes and casualties. They are very effective at protecting our most vulnerable road users, including children, pedestrians and cyclists, and significantly decrease the risk of being injured in a collision. RoSPA encourages their greater use, especially in residential areas.
Click to expand...
Good find.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top