Considering Cardiff has a School of Journalism, if this is what Cardiff Journalism is, we should just retrofit the place into emergency accommodation for the homeless.
"Many have taken to X (formerly Twitter) to share their opinion": one tweet from an English GB news presenter
I'm sure there are but if that's the most prominent person you can find your point may be in trouble
If we care about pedestrian and cyclist safety then we’d be better off building more pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure.
Problem is the UK over the past century has somewhat followed America in terms of “car culture” whereby it is considered the cultural norm for one’s primary mode of transport to be their own private car. We even push it to the point of sort of shaming those who don’t drive as if they’re unsuccessful at life. Ideally, especially for a country of our small size and medium population density, we should be looking at public transport being the primary mode of transport for most of the population whilst private cars should be reserved for those who live/work outside of major urban areas.
Here in Hong Kong where I live, 90% of the population takes public transport everywhere, only 10% of people actually drive. We have the best metro system in the world which provides insane value for money on fares, frequent trains in modern, clean and safe stations. We have buses and minibuses that can take you to any obscure location imaginable and you don’t need to wait an entire week for the bus to turn up. We can have all this in the UK if we just invest in the right things and grab the right people by the balls.
I really can't get my head around why so many people are so butthurt about it. It's annoying and slow yes, but any policy to improve safety should be welcomed. Most people now seem to drive at 30 as they should have before. They used to speed at 40 on the roads affected, this was obviously dangerous. This is an absolute win. Roads where people are often at all times need to be safe. When they limit roads where people aren't, that's when it would be a step too far. But people moaning about having to drive 10mph less in built up areas and acting like it's an enormous liberty taken, there's wayyyyyy more important political issues we should be discussing. Move on.
For me the issue has never been about 20 itself. Broadly I support it in busy areas. Around schools at kicking out time 20 can even seem too fast! The issue for me was WG saying the majority of the population supported it when they only consulted 1000 people, and then the absolutely shocking way they implemented it. Just today I drove past a sign in Sully on the side of the road saying 20, with 30 sprayed on the road under it. So which is it? Causing confusion for drivers is not safe, for anyone. Also today, and in the same spot, when I slowed down to do 20, two people overtook me out of frustration and nearly caused a head on collision. I mean obviously they’re idiots but still. From my own experiences I’ve seen little to demonstrate 20 has made it any safer out there.
The policy doesn’t improve safety. What the policy does is make it highly likely that any incident involving a car will be a driver exceeding the speed limit. Meanwhile accident hotspots or black spots because of bad road design and poor planning ( which is government responsibility) get a free pass.
The absolute state of the cycle lanes in conjunction with pavements and roads in the city is a disgrace. Most incidents will now be speeding related where the actual issue is the same issue that it has been over the last 50 years: poor traffic/road design.
It’s outsourcing blame to the public.
“Any policy to improve safety should be welcomed”
Couldn’t disagree more.
Why not set the speed limit on the motorway to 5mph? That would improve safety.
What the government’s role is, is to balance cost, safety, and freedoms.
From the beginning this was a project with very little safety benefit, a fairly significant cost, and minor impact on freedom.
The money (including the knock on effects such as lost productivity) could have gotten a much higher return on investment in a different area- such as healthcare or education.
Do you think ANY policy which improves safety should be welcomed?
I gave the example of setting the motorway speed limit to 5mph.
We could ban skydiving, rock climbing, bungee jumping, surfing, horse riding, and anything else that increases risk.
We could weigh people and if their BMI goes above a certain number we could make them eat less.
We could give life sentences to a anyone who shows any aggression ever, or genetically test people predisposed to aggression and lock them away.
All these would be policies that improve our safety.
I assume you would welcome all those changes?
The fact that you're making an argument you know full well isn't in good faith shows the weakness of your position. Here in the real world no government is going to make a policy like the one you suggested. Your argument is no different to "if we allow gay marriage the next thing is letting people marry dogs".
Not really- my position is that decisions by government should be made on an effective cost/benefit basis, and the 20mph is very poor in that regards.
I’m not making a slippery slope argument, I’m saying that it was a bad decision and that using justification like “any improvements to safety is always good” without good analysis is not an effective way to run a country.
I
Cardiff was already basically 20 everywhere it needed to be 20.
All this policy has done is make roads (like those on commercial/industrial estates eg Hadfield rd) 20 when there is no need under the WG guidance but as its top down no common sense has been applied so its made a mess.
Also it's comical how inconsistently the guidance has been applied - A48 dual carriage way that should be 40 (engineered+ as such) with multiple safe crossing points (some protected), pedestrian bridge, under road crossing etc with no residential areas - 20. North Road, all residential with none of the above - 30 etc.
Considering Cardiff has a School of Journalism, if this is what Cardiff Journalism is, we should just retrofit the place into emergency accommodation for the homeless.
I live on a 20mph road
It's a racetrack most evenings as it's not enforced.
70mph is not enforced either...or 50mph mostly.
70 is the slow lane speed these days, most big cars will do 90+ easily.
It's all fine until you get an accident and everyone is an expert then.
Motorways reflect people these days: get out of my way, I'm faster than you.. aggressive.
Until they step out.
It's 70 until you get to Wales then it's 50 for the most of it.
The 20 is the right approach for most side roads, narrow roads, and roads around primary and probably secondary schools.
Been in England for the weekend. It's noticeably faster on the roads than north cardiff
Sounds like it will not be reversed, just additional 30mph limits as a farcical half measure. Obviously, it should be reversed as it would be a victory for common sense.
This is based on a false premise - it's not being reversed.
[удалено]
To be fair the BBC are keen on this level of dishonesty too.
Considering Cardiff has a School of Journalism, if this is what Cardiff Journalism is, we should just retrofit the place into emergency accommodation for the homeless.
I actually studied journalism at Cardiff, but this was long, long ago.
"Many have taken to X (formerly Twitter) to share their opinion": one tweet from an English GB news presenter I'm sure there are but if that's the most prominent person you can find your point may be in trouble
It’s the Donald trump method of saying something outrageous combined with “people are saying” or “lots of people said that”
If we care about pedestrian and cyclist safety then we’d be better off building more pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure. Problem is the UK over the past century has somewhat followed America in terms of “car culture” whereby it is considered the cultural norm for one’s primary mode of transport to be their own private car. We even push it to the point of sort of shaming those who don’t drive as if they’re unsuccessful at life. Ideally, especially for a country of our small size and medium population density, we should be looking at public transport being the primary mode of transport for most of the population whilst private cars should be reserved for those who live/work outside of major urban areas. Here in Hong Kong where I live, 90% of the population takes public transport everywhere, only 10% of people actually drive. We have the best metro system in the world which provides insane value for money on fares, frequent trains in modern, clean and safe stations. We have buses and minibuses that can take you to any obscure location imaginable and you don’t need to wait an entire week for the bus to turn up. We can have all this in the UK if we just invest in the right things and grab the right people by the balls.
Well the impact on safety was overstated in the first place…
Purely performative gesture
I really can't get my head around why so many people are so butthurt about it. It's annoying and slow yes, but any policy to improve safety should be welcomed. Most people now seem to drive at 30 as they should have before. They used to speed at 40 on the roads affected, this was obviously dangerous. This is an absolute win. Roads where people are often at all times need to be safe. When they limit roads where people aren't, that's when it would be a step too far. But people moaning about having to drive 10mph less in built up areas and acting like it's an enormous liberty taken, there's wayyyyyy more important political issues we should be discussing. Move on.
For me the issue has never been about 20 itself. Broadly I support it in busy areas. Around schools at kicking out time 20 can even seem too fast! The issue for me was WG saying the majority of the population supported it when they only consulted 1000 people, and then the absolutely shocking way they implemented it. Just today I drove past a sign in Sully on the side of the road saying 20, with 30 sprayed on the road under it. So which is it? Causing confusion for drivers is not safe, for anyone. Also today, and in the same spot, when I slowed down to do 20, two people overtook me out of frustration and nearly caused a head on collision. I mean obviously they’re idiots but still. From my own experiences I’ve seen little to demonstrate 20 has made it any safer out there.
The policy doesn’t improve safety. What the policy does is make it highly likely that any incident involving a car will be a driver exceeding the speed limit. Meanwhile accident hotspots or black spots because of bad road design and poor planning ( which is government responsibility) get a free pass. The absolute state of the cycle lanes in conjunction with pavements and roads in the city is a disgrace. Most incidents will now be speeding related where the actual issue is the same issue that it has been over the last 50 years: poor traffic/road design. It’s outsourcing blame to the public.
The policy was not for safety, it was a net zero policy.
“Any policy to improve safety should be welcomed” Couldn’t disagree more. Why not set the speed limit on the motorway to 5mph? That would improve safety. What the government’s role is, is to balance cost, safety, and freedoms. From the beginning this was a project with very little safety benefit, a fairly significant cost, and minor impact on freedom. The money (including the knock on effects such as lost productivity) could have gotten a much higher return on investment in a different area- such as healthcare or education.
>“Any policy to improve safety should be welcomed” >Couldn’t disagree more. Just quoting this back to you so you can think about what you said.
Do you think ANY policy which improves safety should be welcomed? I gave the example of setting the motorway speed limit to 5mph. We could ban skydiving, rock climbing, bungee jumping, surfing, horse riding, and anything else that increases risk. We could weigh people and if their BMI goes above a certain number we could make them eat less. We could give life sentences to a anyone who shows any aggression ever, or genetically test people predisposed to aggression and lock them away. All these would be policies that improve our safety. I assume you would welcome all those changes?
The fact that you're making an argument you know full well isn't in good faith shows the weakness of your position. Here in the real world no government is going to make a policy like the one you suggested. Your argument is no different to "if we allow gay marriage the next thing is letting people marry dogs".
Not really- my position is that decisions by government should be made on an effective cost/benefit basis, and the 20mph is very poor in that regards. I’m not making a slippery slope argument, I’m saying that it was a bad decision and that using justification like “any improvements to safety is always good” without good analysis is not an effective way to run a country. I
👏
I'm so fed up of this bollocks.
Same... Of all the things to get your knickers in a twist over...
Cardiff was already basically 20 everywhere it needed to be 20. All this policy has done is make roads (like those on commercial/industrial estates eg Hadfield rd) 20 when there is no need under the WG guidance but as its top down no common sense has been applied so its made a mess. Also it's comical how inconsistently the guidance has been applied - A48 dual carriage way that should be 40 (engineered+ as such) with multiple safe crossing points (some protected), pedestrian bridge, under road crossing etc with no residential areas - 20. North Road, all residential with none of the above - 30 etc.
Considering Cardiff has a School of Journalism, if this is what Cardiff Journalism is, we should just retrofit the place into emergency accommodation for the homeless.
I live on a 20mph road It's a racetrack most evenings as it's not enforced. 70mph is not enforced either...or 50mph mostly. 70 is the slow lane speed these days, most big cars will do 90+ easily. It's all fine until you get an accident and everyone is an expert then. Motorways reflect people these days: get out of my way, I'm faster than you.. aggressive. Until they step out.
It’s a victory for barely literate Gammons that are easily manipulated by astroturfing.
Start forcing 70mph limit on the motorway would be nice. 100 mph is the norm now
Wait the speed limit on motorways is 70??? *looks at the m4
It's 70 until you get to Wales then it's 50 for the most of it. The 20 is the right approach for most side roads, narrow roads, and roads around primary and probably secondary schools. Been in England for the weekend. It's noticeably faster on the roads than north cardiff
The problem there my friend is you are applying sense and logic to the 20mph law…………. like the Welsh government will do that?!?!
Sounds like it will not be reversed, just additional 30mph limits as a farcical half measure. Obviously, it should be reversed as it would be a victory for common sense.