A FAIR DEAL FOR THE MOTORIST |
This is the ‘saferhandf’ page in response to the original proposal
RESIDENTS REJECTED BOROUGH-WIDE 20MPH1
IN THE
CONSULTATION, 55% DID NOT SUPPORT THE
COUNCIL. OUR VIEWS MUST BE RESPECTED. THIS WEBPAGE RELATES TO A PAST CAMPAIGN |
|||||
WE CAN STILL STOP THE DAFT BOROUGH-WIDE PROPOSAL LB Hammersmith & Fulham ran a
totally one-sided consultation. Its propaganda drive was paid for out of
money extracted from council tax payers. Even so, only 45% of those
responding supported the proposal. LBH&F won’t respect the 55% who
didn’t. In July, a TV film crew that interviewed several people in the
borough found nobody who would
support it. Even every cyclist was opposed, and local views expressed were often
quite strong! Opposition is
likely to be even deeper than LBH&F realise. The decision is likely to be
made by 8 February 2016. Every objection counts. Please help by briefly letting our Council Leader
and Transport Cabinet Member know you are not keen a.s.a.p, copying us in -
for instance, emailing: To: stephen.cowan@...; wesley.harcourt@...; Copy: saferhf30@... Subject: No to borough-wide 20mph! If you feel strongly, why not copy
your ward
councillors, too? (Councillors can also be reached by
post at: Town Hall, King Street, W6 9JU, and messages left for the governing
party on 020 8753 2018.) Please be as
concise as possible and avoid ‘getting personal’. You might mention
if you live, work or own a business in the borough. You don’t need to give
any reasons, but no harm reminding them that 55% did not
support the proposal. Finally, to download a PDF of our
appeal to circulate to your friends, click here. Some residents
have been receiving ‘interesting’ replies to their complaints against the
borough-wide 20mph proposal. Click here for
more information on this and our response putting the record straight. SUPPORTING CASUAL LAWBREAKERS, CRIMINALISING SAFE DRIVING…. Amazingly supporters want to change
the law to make life easier for those that couldn’t be bothered to respect road
safety laws and who senselessly step out in front of traffic. However safe
drivers could then be prosecuted for doing a speed – yes, 25mph or less - that
is legal in most of London and the UK.
(We have never claimed that LBHF is out
to make money from the scheme - it
is central government (the Treasury) that profits from speed camera fines.
However drivers stand to lose in other ways – fines, points on licence and
higher insurance costs from a mean-spirited speed limit.) |
|||||
THE WRONG ‘SOLUTION‘ TO THE ROAD SAFETY PROBLEM For far too long, bureaucrats’
emphasis has been on controlling speed, even
though other factors
are
more often found in accidents.
Looking through LB Hammersmith &
Fulham casualty
reports (2012-14), very few seem related to excess speed. Most involve
lapses of attention or judgment, and sadly there are repeated cases of
cyclists and pedestrians not taking due care. Your money should not be thrown
at tackling the wrong problem! |
|||||
|
|||||
‘BOROUGH-WIDE 20MPH LIMITS’ - A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY Sometimes a 20mph limit is justified –
for instance on a weak bridge or a newly maintained road with chippings. Unfortunately
some campaigners confuse slower with safer, and there is a well-orchestrated
campaign to impose blanket 20mph zones in our towns and cities – regardless
of need. These campaigners are sadly offering a false sense of security.
Pedestrians can be killed by traffic travelling legally at 20mph – or less!
‘CREAGHZY IDEA’ WOULD BE A LICENCE TO KILL? In 2014, Mary Creagh [briefly Labour
shadow transport secretary before she was ‘moved’] shocked by saying
that she wanted 20mph speed limits across the country so that children were
free to "roam wild”, 20mph zones have been
‘justified’ in case pedestrians suddenly dash out. But dashing out can be
very dangerous to other road users, too - particularly if it causes a pile-up
or a driver to swerve and collide with an innocent person. It should not be encouraged – it would be better to educate them in proper road safety,
particularly in using designated crossing places, to prevent them being hit at any speed, with all the grief to their
loved ones. The Highway Code is quite clear on
this – and the need for parental responsibility (drivers also have responsibility
to take due care over other road users and adjust their speed to the
conditions). In short, everyone
needs to act responsibly – and we’ll have a better society if we can all show
respect for each other. ‘ONE SIZE FITS
ALL’ OR REAL ROAD SAFETY FOR ALL? Norfolk’s director of environment, transport
and development, Mike Jackson, stated: “Within Norfolk at present, the commitment of
funds to the implementation of ‘blanket’ 20 mph schemes would not offer good
value for money compared to other measures to reduce casualties.” He added: “The council should continue to prioritise
schemes that target reductions in killed and serious injuries and should not
divert resources to area-wide 20 mph speed restrictions. (Local
Transport Today, 4.10.13) At a time when public finances are
stretched, there will be better uses of council taxpayers’ money. Rather than
impose a simplistic ‘one size fits all’ solution, regardless of local
conditions, transport authorities should be looking at a range of tailored
measures that will make a real difference to road safety. Accident records in Hammersmith and
Fulham examined suggest that many problems are due to drivers misjudging
turns or lane-changing, vehicle users being careless in opening doors, road
users misjudging space, cyclists and pedestrians not
taking due care…. There is no one easy ‘silver bullet’
solution, rather reduction in casualties will come from a range of tailored measures,
for example: · Improved cycle
training and road safety education in schools, · Better signage on
hazards · Reviewing the
provision of pedestrian crossings · LBHF publicity
materials such as posters reminding road users to take care · Targeted messages
aimed at those with mobile phones and headphones · Targeted messages
at drivers over keeping brakes and tyres in condition · Promoting refresher
training for drivers such as via the AA
Charitable Trust (can be at no charge to the taxpayer). · The ground-breaking
‘Mind Driving’ approach
for road users · Lobbying central
government and the GLA to do more to create a culture of responsibility for
road safety and consideration for others. This should both promote positives and
crack down on the few really thoughtless road users. SAY ‘NO’ TO LBHF AND DEMAND BETTER ALTERNATIVES…. LBHF’s consultation proposals are worryingly
one-sided and fail to include important information on accident
statistics and costs (you will be paying for it!). LBHF has relied on glossy
imagery and suggestive language to try to get residents to just nod them through.
Everyone deserves better…
|
|||||
FOR MORE INFORMATION ON ROAD SAFETY AND SPEED LIMITS... Independent
researcher presentation on 20mph limits (PDF): - “No examples found where 20mph has led to a
reduction in road casualties, after accounting for national trends and
traffic volume.” A local campaign outlines its objections
to wide-area 20mph limits. NB 69% of the local public voted against the proposal A look at recent Hammersmith & Fulham casualty statistics and causes Alliance of British Drivers’ London road safety webpage Alliance of
British Drivers’ July leaflet on 20mph in LBHF (PDF) (See website data protection note below before using contact info) Alliance of British Drivers’
response to a consultation on 20mph limits* Alliance of British
Drivers’ wider research on setting sensible speed limits* Alliance of
British Drivers’ more detailed research on 20mph limits Alliance of British
Drivers’ information on speed hump pitfalls Alliance of British Drivers on
speed limit reduction and casualties Alliance of British Drivers’ wider policies for improving road safety* *The Alliance of British Drivers was known as the Association of British Drivers before 2012. |
|||||
THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST AND SUPPORT This is a legacy webpage from 9 Jan
2016 relating to a past campaign. Click here for information on LBHF’s updated proposal. Feedback and suggestions may be sent to saferhf30
‘AT’ btinternet.com Data protection note: Safeguarding privacy, |
|||||
Footnotes 1.
On
borough-run roads; excludes TFL-run A4, A40 and A3220. 2.
At
the time of Road Sense going to press, LB Hounslow was looking at 20mph
limits outside schools. It since moved to consider wider
restrictions, albeit not fully borough-wide. |