|
Title: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: Tal on May 22, 2015, 07:51:46 AM Following on from (and in the same spirit as) the Education thread, you are summoned to Number 10 and informed that you will be made Secretary of State for Transport.
As before, you can suggest as many changes and as many policies as you like, but you get one "free pass", provided it's legal and within your brief. Will you scrap HS2? Will you have more carriages in the cities at rush hour? More buses in rural areas? Bring back trams? Replace tickets with smartphone apps and oyster cards? More Boris bikes? Would you increase spending on security on bus routes? How about speed cameras and the fines that accompany them? Maybe more cycle lanes? Tax savings for car sharers? If you were wondering who does all this now, you'll be filling the shoes of Patrick McLoughlin, a former coal miner: (http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2012/9/4/1346772765122/Patrick-McLoughlin-leavin-008.jpg) Ok. Over to you... Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: KarmaDope on May 22, 2015, 08:09:54 AM Following on from (and in the same spirit as) the Education thread, you are summoned to Number 10 and informed that you will be made Secretary of State for Transport. As before, you can suggest as many changes and as many policies as you like, but you get one "free pass", provided it's legal and within your brief. Will you scrap HS2? Will you have more carriages in the cities at rush hour? More buses in rural areas? Bring back trams? Replace tickets with smartphone apps and oyster cards? More Boris bikes? Would you increase spending on security on bus routes? How about speed cameras and the fines that accompany them? Maybe more cycle lanes? Tax savings for car sharers? If you were wondering who does all this now, you'll be filling the shoes of Patrick McLoughlin, a former coal miner: (http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2012/9/4/1346772765122/Patrick-McLoughlin-leavin-008.jpg) Ok. Over to you... My one free pass? I would change the way speed cameras are set up. They would be set to 10mph more than the advertised speed limit and would only be allowed on roads that are 40mph or lower...but I wouldnt tell anyone. This would hopefully stop people getting fined for being slightly over the speed limit but still catch people who are inappropriately speeding. Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: Kmac84 on May 22, 2015, 08:17:41 AM I'd make it a legal requirement for cyclists to have at the very least third party insurance cover.
Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: AdamM on May 22, 2015, 08:21:28 AM Following on from (and in the same spirit as) the Education thread, you are summoned to Number 10 and informed that you will be made Secretary of State for Transport. As before, you can suggest as many changes and as many policies as you like, but you get one "free pass", provided it's legal and within your brief. Will you scrap HS2? Will you have more carriages in the cities at rush hour? More buses in rural areas? Bring back trams? Replace tickets with smartphone apps and oyster cards? More Boris bikes? Would you increase spending on security on bus routes? How about speed cameras and the fines that accompany them? Maybe more cycle lanes? Tax savings for car sharers? If you were wondering who does all this now, you'll be filling the shoes of Patrick McLoughlin, a former coal miner: (http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2012/9/4/1346772765122/Patrick-McLoughlin-leavin-008.jpg) Ok. Over to you... My one free pass? I would change the way speed cameras are set up. They would be set to 10mph more than the advertised speed limit and would only be allowed on roads that are 40mph or lower...but I wouldnt tell anyone. This would hopefully stop people getting fined for being slightly over the speed limit but still catch people who are inappropriately speeding. Ah, see, I would increase the number of speed cameras on 60/70mph roads and make them hidden to stop people just slowing down for the cameras then resuming driving well over the limit. Just leave earlier. Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: Woodsey on May 22, 2015, 08:32:25 AM Common sense variable speed limits on motorways. When they are quiet you can do 90mph etc
Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: AdamM on May 22, 2015, 08:34:04 AM Common sense variable speed limits on motorways. When they are quiet you can do 90mph etc why only 90mph? why not unlimited? Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: Woodsey on May 22, 2015, 08:36:39 AM Common sense variable speed limits on motorways. When they are quiet you can do 90mph etc why only 90mph? why not unlimited? If the autobahn has been shown to be safe at quiet periods I'm not really against that. Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: The Camel on May 22, 2015, 09:12:39 AM Stiffer sentences for people caught drinking and driving.
I would like to see a short prison sentence, maybe 14 days + loss of license for 10 years. Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: Doobs on May 22, 2015, 09:22:11 AM Following on from (and in the same spirit as) the Education thread, you are summoned to Number 10 and informed that you will be made Secretary of State for Transport. As before, you can suggest as many changes and as many policies as you like, but you get one "free pass", provided it's legal and within your brief. Will you scrap HS2? Will you have more carriages in the cities at rush hour? More buses in rural areas? Bring back trams? Replace tickets with smartphone apps and oyster cards? More Boris bikes? Would you increase spending on security on bus routes? How about speed cameras and the fines that accompany them? Maybe more cycle lanes? Tax savings for car sharers? If you were wondering who does all this now, you'll be filling the shoes of Patrick McLoughlin, a former coal miner: (http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2012/9/4/1346772765122/Patrick-McLoughlin-leavin-008.jpg) Ok. Over to you... My one free pass? I would change the way speed cameras are set up. They would be set to 10mph more than the advertised speed limit and would only be allowed on roads that are 40mph or lower...but I wouldnt tell anyone. This would hopefully stop people getting fined for being slightly over the speed limit but still catch people who are inappropriately speeding. Ah, see, I would increase the number of speed cameras on 60/70mph roads and make them hidden to stop people just slowing down for the cameras then resuming driving well over the limit. Just leave earlier. Very early in the parliament this reshuffle. I'd make it easier to set them up without all her signage too, but I'd definitely concentrate on 30 mph zones. I am sure people get leeway up to 33 anyway and people who do 40 near schools should absolutely get a ticket. Driving that quickly through town is absolutely idiotic. I have hit someone at quite a bit below 30 and even then she was well and truly knocked off her feet. I'd move the cameras to places which are properly built up and not put them on dual carriageways which seem to be only 40 to catch speeding motorists. There is a road I used to travel on where the speed limit varies from 60 to 50 and just after several of the switches there is a camera. On several of these stretches there doesn't seem much of a reason for a 50 limit. The speed limits and attaching cameras on sites like this just give speed cameras a bad name. I'd definitely be tougher on drink drivers too. Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: AdamM on May 22, 2015, 10:15:58 AM The reduced speed limits and cameras are generally where they are because of a history of accidents.
They don't just throw a bit of 50 or 40 on the A road just to piss you off :) Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: AdamM on May 22, 2015, 10:23:19 AM While it's true that most accidents happen within a mile of your home (stats no doubt skewed because pretty much ALL your journeys include that mile) the most severe accidents happen on single carriage A roads with 60pmh speed limits, due to speeding and dangerous over taking.
Motorways accidents are less common and less severe (because you're all traveling in the same direction) getting speeds down on single carriageway A roads, along with clamping down on dangerous overtaking, mobile phone use, drink driving, having a picnic at the wheel, etc would be my priority. Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: George2Loose on May 22, 2015, 11:15:42 AM Think main reason autobahn isn't introduced or higher speed limits at night is due to unofficial races taking place on motorways.
I would hugely subsidie public transport and cycling into work schemes to try and get congestion and pollution down Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: Doobs on May 22, 2015, 11:30:45 AM While it's true that most accidents happen within a mile of your home (stats no doubt skewed because pretty much ALL your journeys include that mile) the most severe accidents happen on single carriage A roads with 60pmh speed limits, due to speeding and dangerous over taking. The number of deaths on 30mph roads is pretty much the same as those on 60 mph roads. I think it is safe to say that the number of third party deaths must be higher in 30mph limits? Motorways accidents are less common and less severe (because you're all traveling in the same direction) getting speeds down on single carriageway A roads, along with clamping down on dangerous overtaking, mobile phone use, drink driving, having a picnic at the wheel, etc would be my priority. FWIW I looked up the accident rates for the A420 between Oxford and Swindon, which is the road I was talking about. Whilst it is safe to say some of the cameras seem to be set on accident blackspots, a couple don't seem to be. So you are definitely mostly right there. I'd say there is still an issue with the road changing from dual carriageway to single carriageway to much. Where that happens there are always going to be idiots trying to get past the last car too near the switch to single carriageway. It strikes me that you should put the camera before the end of the dual carriageway and not half a mile down the road after it goes to single. Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: AdamM on May 22, 2015, 11:47:01 AM While it's true that most accidents happen within a mile of your home (stats no doubt skewed because pretty much ALL your journeys include that mile) the most severe accidents happen on single carriage A roads with 60pmh speed limits, due to speeding and dangerous over taking. The number of deaths on 30mph roads is pretty much the same as those on 60 mph roads. I think it is safe to say that the number of third party deaths must be higher in 30mph limits? Motorways accidents are less common and less severe (because you're all traveling in the same direction) getting speeds down on single carriageway A roads, along with clamping down on dangerous overtaking, mobile phone use, drink driving, having a picnic at the wheel, etc would be my priority. FWIW I looked up the accident rates for the A420 between Oxford and Swindon, which is the road I was talking about. Whilst it is safe to say some of the cameras seem to be set on accident blackspots, a couple don't seem to be. So you are definitely mostly right there. I'd say there is still an issue with the road changing from dual carriageway to single carriageway to much. Where that happens there are always going to be idiots trying to get past the last car too near the switch to single carriageway. It strikes me that you should put the camera before the end of the dual carriageway and not half a mile down the road after it goes to single. I'd have assumed that the fatalities would be higher at the higher speeds. I'm fairly confident the cameras aren't placed arbitrarily, but if I'm in charge, they're going all over the place, camouflaged and even mobile, plus additional unmarked camera equipped police cars. plus introduce penalties for discourteous driving on top of dangerous driving :) Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: Doobs on May 22, 2015, 12:10:35 PM While it's true that most accidents happen within a mile of your home (stats no doubt skewed because pretty much ALL your journeys include that mile) the most severe accidents happen on single carriage A roads with 60pmh speed limits, due to speeding and dangerous over taking. The number of deaths on 30mph roads is pretty much the same as those on 60 mph roads. I think it is safe to say that the number of third party deaths must be higher in 30mph limits? Motorways accidents are less common and less severe (because you're all traveling in the same direction) getting speeds down on single carriageway A roads, along with clamping down on dangerous overtaking, mobile phone use, drink driving, having a picnic at the wheel, etc would be my priority. FWIW I looked up the accident rates for the A420 between Oxford and Swindon, which is the road I was talking about. Whilst it is safe to say some of the cameras seem to be set on accident blackspots, a couple don't seem to be. So you are definitely mostly right there. I'd say there is still an issue with the road changing from dual carriageway to single carriageway to much. Where that happens there are always going to be idiots trying to get past the last car too near the switch to single carriageway. It strikes me that you should put the camera before the end of the dual carriageway and not half a mile down the road after it goes to single. I'd have assumed that the fatalities would be higher at the higher speeds. I'm fairly confident the cameras aren't placed arbitrarily, but if I'm in charge, they're going all over the place, camouflaged and even mobile, plus additional unmarked camera equipped police cars. plus introduce penalties for discourteous driving on top of dangerous driving :) Good thinking, we need middle lane cameras. Quite like the idea of ticketting anybody towing a caravan. Not sure I'd be fussed on which road they were towing it on! Fatalities are going to be higher at higher speeds, but am sure you get more accidents in 30mph areas, so the overall fatalities is about the same. Plus more pedestrians in 30 mph areas. Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: cish n fhips on May 22, 2015, 12:12:51 PM Its all bs anyway its not the queens law its just a bunch of corrupt statutes to make more money out of us all....If It was something it would certainly be something for people who chose to travel by car and not drive a car.
Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: AdamM on May 22, 2015, 12:44:05 PM While it's true that most accidents happen within a mile of your home (stats no doubt skewed because pretty much ALL your journeys include that mile) the most severe accidents happen on single carriage A roads with 60pmh speed limits, due to speeding and dangerous over taking. The number of deaths on 30mph roads is pretty much the same as those on 60 mph roads. I think it is safe to say that the number of third party deaths must be higher in 30mph limits? Motorways accidents are less common and less severe (because you're all traveling in the same direction) getting speeds down on single carriageway A roads, along with clamping down on dangerous overtaking, mobile phone use, drink driving, having a picnic at the wheel, etc would be my priority. FWIW I looked up the accident rates for the A420 between Oxford and Swindon, which is the road I was talking about. Whilst it is safe to say some of the cameras seem to be set on accident blackspots, a couple don't seem to be. So you are definitely mostly right there. I'd say there is still an issue with the road changing from dual carriageway to single carriageway to much. Where that happens there are always going to be idiots trying to get past the last car too near the switch to single carriageway. It strikes me that you should put the camera before the end of the dual carriageway and not half a mile down the road after it goes to single. I'd have assumed that the fatalities would be higher at the higher speeds. I'm fairly confident the cameras aren't placed arbitrarily, but if I'm in charge, they're going all over the place, camouflaged and even mobile, plus additional unmarked camera equipped police cars. plus introduce penalties for discourteous driving on top of dangerous driving :) Good thinking, we need middle lane cameras. Quite like the idea of ticketting anybody towing a caravan. Not sure I'd be fussed on which road they were towing it on! Fatalities are going to be higher at higher speeds, but am sure you get more accidents in 30mph areas, so the overall fatalities is about the same. Plus more pedestrians in 30 mph areas. From what I can see, for numbers of accidents, numbers of serious accidents and number of fatal accidents it remains: Rural B roads > Urban B Roads > Rural A Roads > Urban A Roads >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Motorways Title: Re: You are the Secretary of State for Transport Post by: Doobs on May 22, 2015, 02:12:27 PM While it's true that most accidents happen within a mile of your home (stats no doubt skewed because pretty much ALL your journeys include that mile) the most severe accidents happen on single carriage A roads with 60pmh speed limits, due to speeding and dangerous over taking. The number of deaths on 30mph roads is pretty much the same as those on 60 mph roads. I think it is safe to say that the number of third party deaths must be higher in 30mph limits? Motorways accidents are less common and less severe (because you're all traveling in the same direction) getting speeds down on single carriageway A roads, along with clamping down on dangerous overtaking, mobile phone use, drink driving, having a picnic at the wheel, etc would be my priority. FWIW I looked up the accident rates for the A420 between Oxford and Swindon, which is the road I was talking about. Whilst it is safe to say some of the cameras seem to be set on accident blackspots, a couple don't seem to be. So you are definitely mostly right there. I'd say there is still an issue with the road changing from dual carriageway to single carriageway to much. Where that happens there are always going to be idiots trying to get past the last car too near the switch to single carriageway. It strikes me that you should put the camera before the end of the dual carriageway and not half a mile down the road after it goes to single. I'd have assumed that the fatalities would be higher at the higher speeds. I'm fairly confident the cameras aren't placed arbitrarily, but if I'm in charge, they're going all over the place, camouflaged and even mobile, plus additional unmarked camera equipped police cars. plus introduce penalties for discourteous driving on top of dangerous driving :) Good thinking, we need middle lane cameras. Quite like the idea of ticketting anybody towing a caravan. Not sure I'd be fussed on which road they were towing it on! Fatalities are going to be higher at higher speeds, but am sure you get more accidents in 30mph areas, so the overall fatalities is about the same. Plus more pedestrians in 30 mph areas. From what I can see, for numbers of accidents, numbers of serious accidents and number of fatal accidents it remains: Rural B roads > Urban B Roads > Rural A Roads > Urban A Roads >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Motorways Non urban deaths 895 vs Urban 718 Non urban Serious Injuries 6554 vs urban 14443 page 103 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/359311/rrcgb-2013.pdf (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/359311/rrcgb-2013.pdf) But a much higher proportion of people who die in urban areas aren't car occupants. |