Today is my youngest daughters birthday - she is 2. Bit of a drama on the present front as the store (who shall remain nameless) told us the present was in stock but forgot to mention it was in Northampton!! Fortunately as she is 2 whether it is here today or tomorrow hopefully will not scar her for life!
The party announced a new policy on the motorist, ending the attacks that are unfairly being launched. The trouble is that the law abiding motorist gets caught up in these draconian road measures and the poor motorist who pays, along with smokers and those who drink, probably the highest level of taxation and fines in the country. In return he gets crumbling road surfaces, road humps and pariah status!
Spent an early evening getting soaked whilst delivering.
2 comments:
John,
Sorry I had to delete the first comment you made. No problems with the issues you raise, although I disagree with them. However I was not happy about what is a public webspace having the name and details of the young girl killed in the accident you described. I publicise this blog and it would be unfair for a friend of hers to log on and see us debating it.
On the issues:
Not enforcing banned turns? Not a clue what you are on about. Was not in the press release this blog is about.
Bus lanes used by multiple occupancy vehicles - environmentally sound as it will encourage car sharing to work and prevent the single occupancy car. It works very well in the USA. Seen it in Atlanta and there are no problems.
Cameras - no problem when cameras are used for genuine road safety issues. They are not always used in this way. The camera on the A3 between Tolworth and New Malden actually only causes cars to slam on their breaks when they get close and then to roar away again once they have passed over the markings on the road. Sudden breaking and accelleration is not safe.
On London Ambulance Service I have pasted below the press release from their website which will clarify matters for you and others. No idea who Jenny Jones is but she ought to be better briefed before asking questions:
9 July 2003
Traffic-calming measures in London
THE Chairman of the London Ambulance Service has welcomed the move by some local authorities to review their existing traffic-calming measures.
Sigurd Reinton, who called for a review of traffic-calming policies in London earlier this year, said: "We remain concerned about the extent of traffic-calming measures in the capital and the knock-on effect of delayed ambulance response times to emergency calls. It is therefore encouraging that some local authorities are reviewing their current policies.
"We feel that the focus on reducing road deaths by cutting traffic speeds through the introduction of traffic-calming measures is well-intentioned but misplaced. Despite a reduction in average road speeds between 1995 and 2002, the number of road deaths in the capital actually increased from 217 to 280 a year during this period.
He added: "We believe the focus on reducing road deaths alone through the implementation of traffic-calming is too narrow. We should be focusing on all avoidable death or, at the very least, on accidental death - including medical accidents such as heart attacks or cardiac arrests. Road deaths are only the tip of the iceberg."
Last year there were 280 road deaths in London but approximately 8,000 cardiac arrests. It is estimated that a reduction of one minute in average ambulance response times could save in the region of 500 lives a year.
Discussions continue to take place between the Service and other key agencies.
Ends
No one can argue that an ambulance slowed down by traffic calming will not slow down the action the officers can take with a heart attack victim. No one can argue that a spinal injuries victim runs a higher risk of damaging themselves further if their ambulance has to pass over road humps. I speak to an number of elderly and infirm who are pained and inconvenienced by the vehicle they are travelling in going over road humps.
As for Kingston, at the Conservatives bidding, we now have a presumption in Surbiton against humps and cushions in traffic calming. This has now been copied, I understand, by the Lib Dems in Chessington.
I think we need to agree we are going to disagree on this.
I am not 100% certain (unlike some politicans I admit fallability) but I do not think traffic wardens have the power described - yet! I think it is something the Government is proposing. Frankly the parking ontrol companies seem unable to properly administer parking restrictions so giving them the power over traffic would be crazy. They are also private companies and we now how over zealous they are in issuing tickects for so called parking violations.
I am afraid I have no confidence in parking wardens to deliver anything except massive income streams for Councils! The most interesting innovation on that front is the London Borough who have set up a system of reverse fines so if the member of the public appeals and wins it is the traffic warden that suffers a penalty for implementing an incorrect fine.
Post a Comment