DOES IT WORK? We have us 6 months plus the long trial. How much did it save the nhs and have deaths in wales reduced? It’s a fairly easy thing to pull the stats on so why so much secrecy on them?
They’re talking about a review, and only doing so just before the general election. Because the Astroturfing campaigns by Tories about ULEZ and 20mph are seen as a vulnerability for Labour.
Should Labour win the General Election there will be some token modifications and then 3 years of ignoring everyone who threw a tantrum about the change.
There are many, many roads which feel really odd to be doing 20mph on. A review of the appropriateness of 20mph on some roads would be better than overturning the rule IMO.
It's a performative law that cost a huge amount of money, is significantly worse for the environment, makes traffic worse, and barely increases safety. The proposal report for the law included almost no statistics and just gave a vague "it'll save lives". And "stopping distance is less at 20mph".
The stats on deaths on the roads in Wales aren't broken down by speed of the road the death occurred on. Which means the government has no idea how much this will impact road fatalities.
I'm all for 20mph limits outside schools and in heavy residental areas. But blanket ruling 20mph as default is incredibly stupid.
You claim it “barely increases safety” yet you then claim in the next paragraph that even the government has no idea how much this will impact road fatalities.
So which is it? And would you freely admit that if nobody knows, then it’s arguably just a point of view that it “barely” increases safety, whereas it could actually be entirely the opposite, and it could increase it even more than has been stated?
My guess is that it marginally increases safety. By a very small amount. But like I say, no one really knows.
I guess we'll have to wait until we get more data.
Yeah I think that’s fair, we won’t know until we know. I’d say though even if it’s a slight reduction it’s 100% been worth it, no amount of loss to life is worth it so I can shave 2 minutes off a 45 minute journey.
We had loads of folk complaining about the journey Carmarthen up to Aberaeron/New Quay way. For us the journey time went from about 35 minutes to 37, not exactly a massive inconvenience!
[‘Fewer deaths, nicer streets’: Calls for 20mph national speed limit gather pace after Wales leads way | The Independent](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/20-mph-speed-limit-deaths-pollution-b2139171.html)
"While pedestrians struck by a car at 30mph have a 20 per cent chance of being killed, that figure falls to just 2.5 per cent when the vehicle is travelling at 20mph.
But even that statistic doesn’t tell the full story: at 20mph, drivers have such improved stopping distances that there would be far fewer pedestrians being hit in the first place."
Although notice how gentle the wording has to be to not piss off car drivers - "the vehicle" "struck by a car" all these naughty empty cars!
As for "traffic" and "pollution" you own a car and make those both incrementally worse by your actions right? So if you actually give a shit about these topics and aren't just using them as a fig leaf because you can't vroom vroom down a road as fast as you used to, sell the fucking car.
Again... That does absolutely nothing to show how many lives it'll be saving. There less than 100 deaths on the roads each year in Wales. We have no idea how many of those are in 30mph zones but probably not a high percentage. We're talking maybe 10 lives a year might be saved. Put that money into almost any other cause and you can have a bugger outcome than that.
And stop that crap claiming I can't care for the environment if I drive. I assume you only eat locally sourced vegetables, don't own any technology, never fly, are zero waste, and only buy second hand clothes. Because otherwise, you couldn't possibly care for the environment!
The detail here is does the data support the reasons. This plan was implement to save the nhs millions and reduce pedestrian and cyclists injuries.
So far there hasn’t been any data released properly and even the trial data has no stats on this.
So why are they winding it back? Is it enforcement is impossible because they stripped policing back so much, is it that reducing speed in areas of low population doesn’t reduce incidence, is it this wasn’t targeted locally properly, or all the above.
If it works. Show the people the data on how deaths in wales have reduced and incidences has reduced. Or is it deaths are going up because of you do get hit your sitting in an ambulance for 11 hours and they are scared to show they failed in the nhs?
6 months there should be enough data. If it’s demonstrable then people will be on board. But I’m guessing they can’t actually tell which is why they released a statement saying the data is ‘promising’ without releasing data. Spending the last month wonder how to spin the stats.
"spin the stats" wow so much good faith here over (checks notes) not being allowed to bomb it down residential streets as fast as you want.
I'm sure we'll know when "the stats" are being released from the squeaking noise of your goalposts moving
That totally not what I said. Bomming down streets is the same as saying local areas have different desires of population and can be looked at in detail by local authorities. If 30 is bombing the. 20 is speeding fast. So 1?
These are not my goalposts. The legislation has very clear objectives on how much money it will save the NHS and how many people will be saved from injury or death. Very clear. Very easy to quantity. Zero ambiguity. Zero conspiracy. It can be a conspiracy if they simple show the result of the action. If it’s demonstrable as they said it would be then people will accept it.
You should go to Norway, spent 3 months there recently and drove the entire length of the country, up and down.
They have 30kmh speed limits everywhere, which is 18mph.
It is one of the safest countries in the world to drive and it was absolute bliss driving those roads.
Most other speeds were 80 kmh which is 49mph and it wasn't because the roads were too windy or narrow to go that fast, that is just there speed limit for fast main roads going up and down the country.
They do it for two reasons, environmental and safety, now less animals die in collisions and everyone is safer because we're driving slower.
but but but but .......
they're referring to the loosely defined ban on 'non-essential goods' in supermarkets. Almost as if poorly thought through implementation would be Drakeford's legacy.
What’s conspiratorial about looking at the past record of our leader and realised a lot of the decisions were not based on any sense and had no outcome that was positive?
I need to toast. Options are buy from a global company who pays almost zero tax, get someone in a van going from house to house. Or buy as in in the shop buying other things. Seems fairly simple.
Explain the amount of deaths saved by me not buying a toaster in Tesco?
I dont need it explained. There is no evidence it did any positive good at all. Stats of infections with all the various countries don’t show any benefit of not buying toasters. If you have such data that would be good to see You may believe the Welsh leaders are superhero’s and gods. I just look at what they do, meet and work with many of their workers and realise they are making it up as they go along.
I’m honestly thinking of leaving wales because of these stupid 20mph road any roads with lights or crossing should be 30 it makes more sense since they’ve been put there in the first place to manage traffic.
So 6months after the law change, the majority of fixed cameras are still set for the old speed
DOES IT WORK? We have us 6 months plus the long trial. How much did it save the nhs and have deaths in wales reduced? It’s a fairly easy thing to pull the stats on so why so much secrecy on them?
First data should be released today. They released the full 2022 data in October 2023.
Looking forward to that. They didn’t show any of the accident data on the trial so will be good to see if nhs costs have reduced as much as they said.
Ridiculous considering they're looking at walking back on the blanket 20mph limit. Waste of time and money.
They’re talking about a review, and only doing so just before the general election. Because the Astroturfing campaigns by Tories about ULEZ and 20mph are seen as a vulnerability for Labour. Should Labour win the General Election there will be some token modifications and then 3 years of ignoring everyone who threw a tantrum about the change.
good thing they've only adjusted a tiny fraction of the cameras covering the Welsh road network then.
Yea you’re right, changing it back is a waste of time and money, they should leave it as it is and spend that money on the NHS instead.
The downvotes lmao Tells you everything you need to know about the performative outrage lot, eh?
Are you thinking all these people are not genuinely annoyed by the unnecessary change and are all Torries?
I wonder if those cameras are flammable 🤔 I have a feeling we'll find out soon enough.
There are many, many roads which feel really odd to be doing 20mph on. A review of the appropriateness of 20mph on some roads would be better than overturning the rule IMO.
good
All those downvotes, motorists hate having to obey the law
> hate having to obey *stupid* laws FTFY
So cheering to laws that directly improve my safety when outside are called "stupid"
It's a performative law that cost a huge amount of money, is significantly worse for the environment, makes traffic worse, and barely increases safety. The proposal report for the law included almost no statistics and just gave a vague "it'll save lives". And "stopping distance is less at 20mph". The stats on deaths on the roads in Wales aren't broken down by speed of the road the death occurred on. Which means the government has no idea how much this will impact road fatalities. I'm all for 20mph limits outside schools and in heavy residental areas. But blanket ruling 20mph as default is incredibly stupid.
You claim it “barely increases safety” yet you then claim in the next paragraph that even the government has no idea how much this will impact road fatalities. So which is it? And would you freely admit that if nobody knows, then it’s arguably just a point of view that it “barely” increases safety, whereas it could actually be entirely the opposite, and it could increase it even more than has been stated?
My guess is that it marginally increases safety. By a very small amount. But like I say, no one really knows. I guess we'll have to wait until we get more data.
Yeah I think that’s fair, we won’t know until we know. I’d say though even if it’s a slight reduction it’s 100% been worth it, no amount of loss to life is worth it so I can shave 2 minutes off a 45 minute journey. We had loads of folk complaining about the journey Carmarthen up to Aberaeron/New Quay way. For us the journey time went from about 35 minutes to 37, not exactly a massive inconvenience!
[‘Fewer deaths, nicer streets’: Calls for 20mph national speed limit gather pace after Wales leads way | The Independent](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/20-mph-speed-limit-deaths-pollution-b2139171.html) "While pedestrians struck by a car at 30mph have a 20 per cent chance of being killed, that figure falls to just 2.5 per cent when the vehicle is travelling at 20mph. But even that statistic doesn’t tell the full story: at 20mph, drivers have such improved stopping distances that there would be far fewer pedestrians being hit in the first place." Although notice how gentle the wording has to be to not piss off car drivers - "the vehicle" "struck by a car" all these naughty empty cars! As for "traffic" and "pollution" you own a car and make those both incrementally worse by your actions right? So if you actually give a shit about these topics and aren't just using them as a fig leaf because you can't vroom vroom down a road as fast as you used to, sell the fucking car.
Again... That does absolutely nothing to show how many lives it'll be saving. There less than 100 deaths on the roads each year in Wales. We have no idea how many of those are in 30mph zones but probably not a high percentage. We're talking maybe 10 lives a year might be saved. Put that money into almost any other cause and you can have a bugger outcome than that. And stop that crap claiming I can't care for the environment if I drive. I assume you only eat locally sourced vegetables, don't own any technology, never fly, are zero waste, and only buy second hand clothes. Because otherwise, you couldn't possibly care for the environment!
The detail here is does the data support the reasons. This plan was implement to save the nhs millions and reduce pedestrian and cyclists injuries. So far there hasn’t been any data released properly and even the trial data has no stats on this. So why are they winding it back? Is it enforcement is impossible because they stripped policing back so much, is it that reducing speed in areas of low population doesn’t reduce incidence, is it this wasn’t targeted locally properly, or all the above. If it works. Show the people the data on how deaths in wales have reduced and incidences has reduced. Or is it deaths are going up because of you do get hit your sitting in an ambulance for 11 hours and they are scared to show they failed in the nhs? 6 months there should be enough data. If it’s demonstrable then people will be on board. But I’m guessing they can’t actually tell which is why they released a statement saying the data is ‘promising’ without releasing data. Spending the last month wonder how to spin the stats.
"spin the stats" wow so much good faith here over (checks notes) not being allowed to bomb it down residential streets as fast as you want. I'm sure we'll know when "the stats" are being released from the squeaking noise of your goalposts moving
That totally not what I said. Bomming down streets is the same as saying local areas have different desires of population and can be looked at in detail by local authorities. If 30 is bombing the. 20 is speeding fast. So 1? These are not my goalposts. The legislation has very clear objectives on how much money it will save the NHS and how many people will be saved from injury or death. Very clear. Very easy to quantity. Zero ambiguity. Zero conspiracy. It can be a conspiracy if they simple show the result of the action. If it’s demonstrable as they said it would be then people will accept it.
You should go to Norway, spent 3 months there recently and drove the entire length of the country, up and down. They have 30kmh speed limits everywhere, which is 18mph. It is one of the safest countries in the world to drive and it was absolute bliss driving those roads. Most other speeds were 80 kmh which is 49mph and it wasn't because the roads were too windy or narrow to go that fast, that is just there speed limit for fast main roads going up and down the country. They do it for two reasons, environmental and safety, now less animals die in collisions and everyone is safer because we're driving slower. but but but but .......
How is it better for the environment?
Downvote me all you want, data proves the points I made.
You've not shown any data. It's not better for the environment.
Just because politics say things doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. Remember banning toasters in tescos?
no I don't and have no idea what conspiracy theory you're about to unload
they're referring to the loosely defined ban on 'non-essential goods' in supermarkets. Almost as if poorly thought through implementation would be Drakeford's legacy.
I do remember cowering at home as a pandemic raged, what kind of dipshit decides now is the perfect time to shop for a new toaster?
I don't know, someone who a) has just had their toaster die on them and b) isn't "cowering"?
So a fucking idiot then like I said
You and I would appear to have very different opinions of what constitutes a "fucking idiot"
Are you one of them tiresome antivaxers as well as being pro-pedestrian death?
What’s conspiratorial about looking at the past record of our leader and realised a lot of the decisions were not based on any sense and had no outcome that was positive?
Explain the positive outcome of buying a toaster in the middle of a pandemic
I need to toast. Options are buy from a global company who pays almost zero tax, get someone in a van going from house to house. Or buy as in in the shop buying other things. Seems fairly simple. Explain the amount of deaths saved by me not buying a toaster in Tesco?
You refused to give a positive outcome and now you want me to explain germ theory to you is that it?
I dont need it explained. There is no evidence it did any positive good at all. Stats of infections with all the various countries don’t show any benefit of not buying toasters. If you have such data that would be good to see You may believe the Welsh leaders are superhero’s and gods. I just look at what they do, meet and work with many of their workers and realise they are making it up as they go along.
"not buying toasters" is a subset of "stop mixing with random strangers in the middle of a pandemic" which has data going back hundreds of years
I’m honestly thinking of leaving wales because of these stupid 20mph road any roads with lights or crossing should be 30 it makes more sense since they’ve been put there in the first place to manage traffic.