News and views from Paul Bull, the Labour and Co-operative Councillor for the COWICK Ward of Exeter City Council. Promoted by Dom Collins on behalf of Paul Bull, both of 26b, Clifton Hill, Exeter, EX1 2DJ. Hosted by blogger, c/o Google UK Ltd Belgrave House 76 Buckingham Palace Road London SW1W 9TQ United Kingdom
Wednesday 18 December 2013
Full Council | The Living Wage
There was a thought from the Tory benches that now was not the correct time to introduce the Living Wage
Can the Leader confirm that he, like me, is confused that the Leader on the benches opposite feels that this is not the right time to introduce the Living Wage?
The Living Wage Foundation is very clear on the matter - the Living Wage is NOT a statutory provision; employers choose to pay the rate of £7.65 because it's the right thing to do for their employees.
I would have thought that Cllr Yolonda Henson would be in favour of the Living Wage as it seems to reflect current Tory ideology, in that:
The Living Wage will help reduce the benefits bill
The Living Wage will help hard working people
The Living Wage will make work pay, by paying people to work at a rate enough to afford a minimum acceptable standard of living.
The Leader of the Tory Group says that the Living Wage has no impact on
Is the Leader aware of the IPPR and Resolution Foundation report “Beyond the Bottom Line” which calculated that if the statutory National Minimum Wage was a genuine Living Wage, the gross savings on the benefit bill and the extra tax revenue would add up to £3.6bn a year to the public purse?
So could the Leader ask on my behalf if not now, then when?
Some other thoughts I had, but decided not to use:
Can the Leader confirm that this is just the first step and that the Cost of Living Forum will help find ways of working in partnership with business, workers and civil society throughout the city.
The public sector performs a key social function by being an exemplary employer.
It has a long history of leading the way in progressive employment practices, whether on gender equality, parental leave or flexible working.
The same should apply to the living wage.
Where it is affordable, the public sector should pay directly-employed staff the living wage and should extol the virtues of doing so.
Will the Leader join me in saying that The Living Wage will be good news for our 64 employees – but it’s also good news for HM Treasury, which would see income tax receipts and national insurance contributions rising, while spending on tax credits and in-work benefits falling.
A recorded vote was taken:
For (30 members):
Bialyk, Bowkett, Mrs Brock, Bull, Clark, Crew, Crow, Dawson, Denham, Donovan, The Deputy Lord Mayor (Hannaford), Edwards, Fullam, Leadbetter, The Right Worshipful The Lord Mayor (Lyons), Macdonald, Martin, Mitchell, Morris, Owen, Payne, Pearson, Prowse, Robson, Ruffle, Sheldon, Spackman, Sutton, Tippins, Wardle
Abstained (6 members)
Cllrs Baldwin, Henson, Mrs Henson, Mottram, Shiel, Winterbottom
Absent(4 members):
Cllrs Branston, Choules, Laws, Newby
Tuesday 17 December 2013
Full Council | Notice of motion on the Charter to Stop the Payday Rip-Off
There was broad consent to the principles contained within the motion that I didn't get to make this speech:
Payday loans
leave many people drowning in debt and it will take radical change to ensure
that families do not pay a high price for being poor.
I want to be
part of that radical change and I hope members in this Chamber want to be part
of that radical change too
The FCA’s recent
proposals for regulation are a step in the right direction, but they don’t go
far enough.
I’m pleased to acknowledge the lead already given by Labour's Stella Creasy in the campaign agains payday loansharks.
She has fought tooth and nail when the that the regulator was saying "look, we need the political will to make capping a reality".
The Coalition has now is listening and providing some of that political will.
She has fought tooth and nail when the that the regulator was saying "look, we need the political will to make capping a reality".
The Coalition has now is listening and providing some of that political will.
I believe irresponsible payday lending
and other high cost credit is damaging the health and wealth of our country.
I’ve recently
started volunteering at Exeter CAB
I’m seeing how these
loansharks are having devasting effects on some of the most vulnerable of our
society.
And those we are
seeing over at Wat Tyler House are only the tip of the iceburg – the ones that
have decided to come to ask Citizens Advice for help.
That’s a brave
step.
But I want to
help many more of Exeter’s residents who are tempted into using Payday loans to
deal with what starts off as short-term problems but turns into long term debt
The report by the Church Action on Poverty and Centre for Responsible Credit "Stopping thepayday loan rip-off: how we can tackle the scourge of irresponsible lending" highlights the human cost – that irresponsible lending is forcing people into serious debt
The
report contains a quote from Clive
Maxwell, Chief Executive of the Office of Fair Trading
“Competition appears not to
be working properly in the payday lending market, allowing firms to profit from making loans that cannot be
paid back on time.”
I hope members
have taken the chance to read the actual Charter to Stop the Payday Loan Rip-Off based around Paul Blomfield’s
High Cost Credit Bill.
If they did they
would see that payday lenders are breaking promises they made in their own
customer charter.
Self-regulation
has failed.
I want to call
for effective regulation of payday lenders and high cost credit, which is
properly enforced, to:
· Stop them giving loans to people who can’t realistically
afford to pay them back
· Stop them repeatedly rolling over loans and creating
spiralling debt
· Stop hidden or excessive charges
· Stop them raiding borrowers’ bank accounts without their
knowledge and leaving them in hardship
I also want
action to support the growth of credit unions and other forms of more
responsible lending; we want banks to increase the availability of credit to
people on low and middle incomes: and we want new research on capping the total
cost of credit undertaken now.
This is a ‘once
in a generation’ opportunity to tackle this problem one and for all
If we miss the opportunity, payday lenders will be able to carry on
exploiting people.
The Charter is
based on Paul Blomfield’s High Cost Credit Bill which had cross-party support within
parliament
Full Council | Notice of motion on "Rewiring Public Services"
With cross-party support, this motion was passed unanimously without debate.
Here is what I was going to say:
Here is what I was going to say:
I welcome the Rewiring Public Services document on
many levels…already through our Vanguard transformation process we have been
looking at the way the Council interacts with the public and this document
serves to enhance that progress -
transforming public services so that we prevent problems rather than just
picking up the pieces.
I believe that
elected members have already achieved much in making sure that Exeter gets the
services it needs…but as the Council is faced with even greater financial
pressures from central Government, we need to do more
Rewiring Public Services a fundamental look at what we need to do to change local
democracy to meet local needs – where local voices have much more say than
Ministers in Whitehall and developers with no democratic mandate.
I’m looking
forward to seeing the principles of Rewiring
Public Services permeating throughout all levels of the Council not least
in my role of Member Champion for Community Engagement where I hope it will help
rejuvenate democracy.
Even though we
are facing financial challenges – there are other aspects we have at our
fingertips – resources, facilities and knowledge
I’ve already been
meeting all types of neighbourhoods, community organisations and groups and
expect to be able to help them set up exciting new initiatives…
And its not just
community groups that will be involved – there’s also the voluntary sector and
others such as medical practitioners that can help partner us in the Rewiring of Public Services
So I’m hoping
that we can work with them to give people real reasons to participate in civic
life and with their help make public services effective, efficient and locally
responsive.
The 10 big ideas
outlined in Rewiring Public Services are
a great start to transforming the way this council works and I hope in this
Chamber everyone – elected member and senior office, alike - is gearing up to
the challenge presented by Rewiring
Public Services to enable this council to reap the potential benefits.
Saturday 14 December 2013
LGA | Rewiring public services
Rewiring public services
Rewiring Public Services is an ambitious campaign which provides much-needed solutions to how we can deliver public services within an ever-tightening fiscal environment.
Our objective is to lobby for a radical transformation of the way local government works and its relationship with Whitehall.
Following several months of discussions with our members in early 2013, we have drawn up a list of key propositions that we want to see adopted in full or in part within party manifestos and implemented by whoever forms the next Government in 2015.
Rewiring Public Services has been discussed and debated in the media and in Parliament. It's time to have the debate or discussion in the most important place of all, your council. We've put together a proposed motion and some other materials to help you get the conversation going.
Our ten key propositions
1. Give people a meaningful vote on local tax and spending issues: a local treasury in every place.
2. Cut red tape: bring local services and decisions together in one place.
3. Reduce bureaucracy and Whitehall silos: merge six government departments and create an England Office.
4. Share money fairly across the UK: replace the Barnett formula with a new needs-based funding model.
5. Take financial distribution out of ministers' hands: replace it with agreement across English local government.
6. Strengthen local say: reduce ministers' powers to intervene in local decisions.
7. End flawed, tick box inspections by bureaucrats: create local service user champions.
8. Boost investment in infrastructure: create a thriving market in municipal bonds.
9. A multi-year funding settlement tied to the life of a Parliament.
10. Protect local democracy: give the local government settlement formal constitutional protection.
- See more at: http://www.local.gov.uk/campaigns#sthash.yWNMEcTw.dpufCouncil Resolution - Rewiring Public Services
Council,
noting
- that England is now widely recognised to be the country with the most centralised system of government in Europe
- that devolution has brought decisions about tax and spending, and the quality of public services, closer to voters in Scotland and Wales, while English voters have not gained comparably greater influence over decision-making that affects their taxes and services; and
considers
- that the likely scale of change in how public services are funded and provided makes it democratically unsustainable for those changes to be decided within the existing over-centralised model;
- that services need to be reformed and integrated across local agencies to enable them to prevent problems rather than picking up the pieces;
- that voters should be given back a meaningful say on a wider range of tax and spending decisions, through place-based budgetary arrangements, the abolition of the discredited Barnett formula and the reinstatement of fair financial distribution agreed among English councils, the re-creation of a municipal bond market, and the certainty of multi-year funding settlements for the life of a Parliament;
- that central government should enable that local decision-making by joining up and reducing in size Whitehall departments in order to facilitate local place-based budgets, by reducing Ministers’ powers to intervene in local decisions, and replacing bureaucratic tick-box inspection regimes with local service users champions; and
- that such a new more mature settlement between central and local government should be put beyond future revision by giving formal constitutional protection to local democracy; and
resolves
- to support the Local Government Association’s Rewiring Public Services campaign, which embodies these objectives;
- to ask [the borough/city/county/district’s] Member[s] of Parliament to support the Rewiring Public Services campaign to improve local voters’ influence over services, tax and spending; and
EXETER CAB | My article for the newsletter
Add caption |
A new volunteer
As an elected member of Exeter City Council, I’m used
to being contacted by residents on a wide range of issues.
The casework could range from things that the City
Council look after (rubbish and dog poo are the most common), some that are
really covered by the remit of Devon County Council (my favourite is 20 mph
zones, I’m becoming an expert) and trying to get buses from by ward of Cowick
to pass by the nearest GP surgery.
But now and again, I would get the unusually case,
something not covered by the obvious responsibilities of councils, political
parties or agencies.
My first port of call in those days would always be Exeter CAB.
About a year ago, I started getting interested in the
effects of the current raft of Welfare Reforms (I prefer the term Welfare Cuts)
that are starting the remove the safety net that is covered by Social Security.
I attended some briefings put on for us local politicians– the threat caused by the
removal of legal aid in man of these cases, and the implications of the
benefits changes – and these were always provided by Exeter CAB.
Alongside this, Exeter City Council produced risk
assessments of the dangers – both to us as a council, and to individual
residents – that needed to be managed
Then in early 2013 I random tweet from a friend
activated something latent within me and I’ve become an active campaigner in
this field – Bedroom Tax, Universal Credit, etc.
Cut to September 2013 and the chance to volunteer
with Exeter CAB.
A trade fair was organised, where prospective
volunteers could find out about the range of roles required to keep the bureau
running – information guides being the first point of contact for many of our
clients; gateway assessors (my choice) to provide guidance, deciding if the
next step is to signpost to assisted information or refer to an more in-depth
interview; and the more specialist advisers.
Since then it’s been a busy series to observations of
experienced gateway assessment, training sessions oversee by Devon Welfare
Rights Unit, in-house work on IT systems and casework recording and just last
week, a skills session.
Within a few weeks, I’m to be let loos on my first
(supervised) interview of a client. It feels scary and refreshing at the same
time.
See the article in the December issue of Exeter CAB newletter
Thursday 5 December 2013
EXPRESS & ECHO Community News | Dog Fouling Woe
Thursday 05 December 2013
Local councillors Heather Morris and Paul Bull have recently been canvassing in Broadway and Cowick Hill and several residents have spoken to them about the increase in dog fouling in and around these tow areas.
Cllr Morris has brought this to the attention of Exeter City Council and asked if the bright orange sings which are being sprayed on pavements in Polsloe by the city council in an attempt to crack down on the menace of dog fouling could also be trialled in Cowick.
Cllr Morris said: "Canvassing always brings us a variety of issues but dog fouling in this area has been brought to out attention by nearly every household that we talked to and I would urge all residents of Exeter that are walking their dogs in this area to please clean up after their dogs or risk a potential fine of £1000."
EXPRESS & ECHO Community News | Sylvan Heights Play Areas
Thursday 05 December 2013
The public consultation at Sylvan Heights regarding play areas was very well attended and Cllrs Morris and Bull have said they were very pleased that so many residents attended in order to voice their opinion on the three possible designs.
They were also very pleased that residents shared their concerns regarding the size of the proposed play areas.
Cllr Morris said: "Unfortunately for a variety of reasons, not all residents prior to moving into the development were aware that there would be a play area within the development and this has brought with it many problems.
"Because of this, Cllr Bull ad I have attended several public meetings to discuss the play area, ensuring that council officers were available to hear residents' concerns and answer any questions, and we have also ensured that a thorough consultation has taken place.
"Cllr Bull and I would like to reassure residents that we are continuing to listen to them and will be discussing further with Exeter City Council the concerns raised by residents with regards to the size of the play areass."
Cllr Morris added that several residents living in neighbouring roads, such as Barley Lane, also attended with their young children to view the plans and were very positive about a small play area being available for them to use.
Wednesday 4 December 2013
WOWpetition Briefing on the Need for a Backbench Business Committee Debate of e-petition 43154.
On Saturday 30th November 2013 Government e-petition 43154, also known as the WOWpetition, was signed for the 100,000 time and qualifies to be considered for a debate by the Back Bench Business Committee.
John McDonnell MP has agreed to make representations to the Backbench Business Committee in support of a debate of the WOWpetition.
The WOWpetition calls for
1. A Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA) of all cuts and changes affecting sick & disabled people, their families and carers, and a free vote on repeal of the Welfare Reform Act.
The response received from the DWP upon the WOWpetition reaching 10,000 signatures, stated that the Government had not done a Cumulative Impact Assessment of the effects of the Welfare Reform Bill 2012 because “it is very difficult to do accurately and external organisations have not produced this either.” However, since posting this response, 2 external agencies, “DEMOS” and the “Centre for Welfare Reform” have separately produced relevant CIA’s.
DEMOS’s analysis showed a cumulative loss of income for disabled people of £28.3 billion over the 5 years to 2018. Referring to this analysis, Richard Hawkes, Chief Executive of disability charity Scope said: “At the moment there’s no place for disabled people in the Chancellor’s aspiration nation. In 2013 disabled people are already struggling to pay the bills. Living costs are spiralling. Income is flat-lining. We know many are getting in debt, just to pay for essentials. What’s the Government’s response? The same group of disabled people face not just one or two cuts to their support, but in some cases three, four, five or even six cuts. It paints a frightening picture of the financial struggles affecting disabled people in 2013. On top of this the Government is suggesting capping the welfare bill in the June spending review – having already slashed billions.”
Dr Simon Duffy of the Centre for Welfare Reform, on behalf of the Campaign for a Fair Society, produced analysis that suggested the cuts to benefits and services fell disproportionately on minority groups. The extreme unfairness of this policy is demonstrated if we compare the burden of cuts born annually by most citizens (£467 per person) to the burden on people in poverty (£2,195: 5 x rest of population), the burden on disabled people (£4,410: 9 x rest of population) and the Burden on people with severest disabilities (£8,832: 19 x rest of population).
We believe that the Government either needs to demonstrate that the CIA’s produced are not accurate and produce its own CIA or explain why the austerity measures have been targeted at people, who WOWpetition believe, the Government thought would not fight back.
2. An immediate end to the Work Capability Assessment, as voted for by the British Medical Association. Consultation between the Depts of Health & Education to improve support into work for sick & disabled people, and an end to forced work under threat of sanctions for people on disability benefits.
The Work Capability Assessment judges the Capability for work or work related activity of Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) claimants. We believe the current test is totally discredited, with the Prime Minister saying in October 2013 that its provider, Atos, had "to improve the quality of decision-making" in the face of sustained criticism of both the efficacy and effectiveness of what, WOWpetition believe, is not a tool meant to enable disabled people and help them to achieve what they feel capable of but instead a blunt instrument to reduce the social security bill. We do not believe it is right that in the 21st Century an experimental process has been imposed on sick and disabled people with in some cases fatal consequences. Over 10,000 people have died within 6 weeks of being compelled to submit to what has been described as a “dehumanizing, brutal and aggressive quasi-medical assessment”.
WOWpetition believes that any method for assessing the financial support given, and the life opportunities presented to sick and disabled people needs to be based upon 3 questions: “What do you want to do?” “What stops you from doing that?” “What adjustments can be made to enable you?” Any process that seeks to enable disabled people and give them equality of opportunity, needs to address not just the “supply side” issues of “what can you do” but also needs to address “demand side” prejudices and ensure society provides the opportunities to people facing significant barriers to mainstream employment opportunities, in a fair way that gives people with impairments equality of opportunity. Additionally, any individual trying to enhance their experience should not be penalised/ restricted, as they already face difficulty with employment.
More than anything, WOWpetition wants a system based upon trust. The evidence clearly shows that at approximately 0.7%, Benefit fraud is non-systemic and the overwhelming feeling of grassroots Disabled Peoples Organisation’s, expressed at a summit organised by WOWpetition in London on the 25th October 2013, was that sick and disabled people are sick of being treated as guilty until proven innocent and that the system needs to embody trust, not persecution.
Irrespective of their ability to work, sick & disabled people should be able to rely upon financial support from society that would allow them to experience a good standard of living.
3. An Independent, Committee-Based Inquiry into Welfare Reform, covering but not limited to: (1) Care home admission rises, Daycare Centre’s, access to education for people with learning difficulties, universal mental health treatments, Remploy closures; (2) DWP media links, the ATOS contract, IT implementation of Universal Credit; (3) Human rights abuses against disabled people, excess claimant deaths & the disregard of medical evidence in decision making by ATOS, DWP & the Tribunal Service.
WOWpetition cannot understand how in the Worlds 6th richest country (by GDP – IMF 2012) the situation can have been allowed to occur where, despite the UK ratifying the UN Convention of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in 2009, what is arguably “retrogressive legislation” has been introduced, without being effectively challenged pre-implementation.
At its AGM on April 14 2013, Amnesty International UK passed a resolution on the Human Rights of sick and disabled people in the UK. The resolution (A5) read:
“This AGM calls for urgent action to halt the abrogation of the human rights of sick and disabled people by the ruling Coalition government and its associated corporate contractors.”
It is WOWpetition’s belief that The WRA 2012 was “rushed” through Parliament with the House of Commons using the procedural tool of “financial privilege” to curtail debate and over-turn the amendments tabled by the House of Lords. We believe The House of Lords had taken very relevant advice from the Equality and Human Rights Commission, with the effect that the Human Rights and Equality issues pertinent to the WRA 2012 have been largely ignored. Some overlooked amendments have since been the subject of successful legal challenges, and the Minister for Disabled People has been criticized in open court for failing to consider the effect her policies have on equality of opportunity.
WOWpetition call for the UK to comply with the spirit of its Treaty Obligations and, in line with “Article 4 – General Obligations” of the UNCRPD, strive to achieve full realization of the rights so included in that document without prejudice. As an example of what we would argue is the non-compliance of the UK with this Treaty, we are dismayed that an apparent working definition of “Equality of Opportunity” appears to be, that employers may choose to favour a disabled candidate over a non-disabled candidate. This, we believe, is not what was intended by “Article 3 – General Principles” of the UNCRPD.
In order for lessons to be learnt and safeguards put in place to ensure persons with disabilities are never again to face what we believe is a coordinated onslaught on our human rights and right to life, we call for an independent Committee based enquiry into Welfare Reform.
Most worrying are the comments attributed to the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson on Nov 28th 2013, in which he says “It is surely relevant to a conversation about equality that as many as 16% of our species have an IQ below 85, while about 2% have an IQ above 130.”
Is a person’s worth or right of equality to be linked to his measured IQ? Is economic potential the accepted measure of somebody’s value and equality? This comment is not acceptable.
Conclusion
WOWpetition suggests that sick and disabled people are the target of a sustained attack on their human rights and standard of living as it is believed they will not fight back. We agree with Richard Hawkes of Scope who said “At the moment there’s no place for disabled people in the Chancellor’s aspiration nation.” WOWpetition seeks a society where disabled people (through birth, trauma or illness) are given true equality of opportunity and valued appropriately, based upon their intrinsic humanity.
On the 10th July 2013 an Opposition Day Debate on “Disabled people” called for a Cumulative Impact Assessment of the changes made by Government that affect disabled people. We argue that the debate called for by the WOWpetition is significantly different to this debate, based on:
· Following this debate, two independent organisations have done what is “very difficult to do accurately” and produced Cumulative Impact Assessments. These demonstrate how this government’s austerity measures have unfairly targeted sick and disabled people. The House needs to debate why disabled people are seen as easy targets by this government or the DWP needs to challenge the findings.
· It is widely reported that both the new Universal Credit Payment (UC) and the Personal Independence Payments (PIP) are in trouble. WOWpetition believe the UK government should take the time to carefully consider the effect the transition to these potentially flawed procedures would have on sick and disabled people and if it is prepared to inflict more excess deaths on these communities.
· Paul Maynard MP, who referred to WOWpetition as “extremists” using the protection of Parliamentary Privilege, made reference in this Opposition Day Debate to the DWP publication “Fulfilling Potential – The Next Steps” and implied it was a remedy for the exclusion and barriers to society facing disabled people. WOWPetition believes this document is flawed and based upon Esther McVey’s inability to distinguish between the Social Model of Disability and the Bio-psychosocial Model of Disability which, we believe, she seems to think are the same thing. This document should be debated in conjunction with relevant meaningful published statistics to identify whether it really is a tool in leading to meaningful Equality of Opportunity for sick and disabled people and how long it is to be before sick and disabled are given this meaningful Equality of Opportunity, defined appropriately. This is a requirement under “Article 3 – The General Principles” of the “UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities“.
As outlined earlier, WOWpetition calls for much more than a Cumulative Impact Assessment and to refuse a debate dismisses and trivializes the other very real concerns of the Sick and Disabled Community.
WOWpetition therefore ask you to support a Main Hall Backbench Business Committee debate of the important issues contained in their e-petition 43154 and engage with our plea for a New Deal for Sick and Disabled People based upon their needs, abilities and ambitions.
Thursday 14 November 2013
EXPRESS & ECHO Community News | P Bus Survey
Thursday 14 November 2013
Local councillors are still trying to convince Stagecoach SW that there is sufficient demand from Cowick residents for a direct bus sevice to take them to the only doctors' surgery in the neighbourhood.
Ward councillor Paul Bull said: "Over the coming weeks, we are going to talk to the residents of Cowick on the doorstep, on the phone, at the bus stops, on the buses and at the doctors' surgery to show Stagecoach that there is a critical mass of potential passengers who would use this route."
The P bus service stopped running from the top of Dunsford Road directly to the doctors' surgery in Cowick Street some years ago, to the unhappiness of many residents
Monday 11 November 2013
Sunday 3 November 2013
Speed Limits
Over the last few months there have been a series of letters in First, the membership magazine of the Local Government Association.
Limiting Speed2 May 2013
As I look out of my window I see three little girls riding their bikes along my street. It is a common occurrence here where people are aware of children playing and are careful, but in other streets it is unusual.
In the past, most children liked to play out close to home but are now more likely to be kept indoors because of the danger of speeding traffic.
Across the country, 44 councils have decided to implement 20 mph speed limits using signs only (rather than chicanes and road humps). The usual justification for this is to make our residential roads safer.
The Transport Research Laboratory found that approximately 98 per cent of pedestrians will survive a 20 mph collision. Their chances drop to around 93 per cent at 30 mph and 69 per cent at 40 mph.
However, putting in 20 mph speed limits in residential streets means more than just making streets safer. It is the beginning of a culture change where people on foot and on bikes, and children playing, take precedence over passing motor vehicles. It's about giving control of streets back to the people who live in them.
Councils can do ‘signs only' blanket coverage for a fraction of the cost of 20 mph zones, where there are physical measures such as speed tables to prevent drivers from breaking the law. With restraints, 20 mph zones still have their place but with reducing funds less of them can be implemented by councils.
Critics say that ‘signs only' 20 mph speed limits cannot be enforced, but then enforcement of any speed limit is difficult given reducing police resources.
If councils achieve a small reduction in speed it has a big effect on safety. ‘Signs only' 20 mph should be self-enforcing by drivers, by becoming the default speed limit, and exceeding it should become as rare as the non-wearing of seat belts.
Government advice now encourages traffic authorities to consider 20 mph restrictions not just in residential areas, but also on busier roads where the numbers of pedestrians and cyclists are – or could be – significant. A sure sign of a growing move to 20 mph.
Cllr Roger Symonds (Lib Dem) is Cabinet Member for Transport at Bath and North East Somerset Council
Cutting Speed Limit Costs
2 May 2013
Star letter – Set limits on 20 mph30 May 2013
While canvassing for the county council elections last month, a car drove up and stopped adjacent to me. The driver said he would never vote for any party again that introduced a 20 mph speed limit. This resident was utterly frustrated by the extent to which these limits are being applied.
Both through roads in my ward have very extensive 20 mph limits. If these were just by our village school or central green, nobody would have minded and the lower speed would have been obeyed. But clumsy, ill thought out application has caused the 20 mph limit to stretch for miles.
Purely residential roads and possibly areas by schools are one thing but extensive application on through roads is another. It doesn't make roads safer, it just makes most drivers crosser!
The Government's own independent survey concluded that the 20 mph limit made no discernable difference to road safety. Why then are we spending millions to introduce it? Accidents may be more severe at 30 mph as opposed to 20 mph, but better by far is not to have the accident at all.
What's the main cause of accidents? It's not speed. Try catching people who make hand-held phone calls while driving: this is infinitely more dangerous. Stop this and you won't lose any voters, and you'll improve road safety.
Councillor Frank Andrews (Con) Fylde Borough Council
Limiting Speed Limits
27 June 2013
I agree with Cllr Frank Andrews (first 545) on 20 mph speed limits. In my ward, this stupid idea will be rolled out soon.
After looking into the guidelines, it is clear that any roads that have an average speed of 24 mph or more should not be reduced to 20 mph. So this exercise is for roads with an average speed of below 24mph. What a waste of money!
Cllr Gareth Fairhurst (Ind) Wigan Council
Speed causes accidents
We put these limits in place, not for you and I, but for others, older or younger, without our skills and incredible reaction times.
We need to make speed limits appropriate, and to ensure they are obeyed. But we do need them for better road safety.
11 July 2013
I agree with Cllr Frank Andrews about 20 mph speed limits and his views on the other reasons which cause accidents (first 545).
However, I cannot accept his premise that speed is not a main cause of accidents. The very reason for low limits is that, at 20 mph, it is unlikely that a pedestrian will be severely injured in an accident. So putting them in places where vulnerable adults and children congregate is a sensible move.We put these limits in place, not for you and I, but for others, older or younger, without our skills and incredible reaction times.
We need to make speed limits appropriate, and to ensure they are obeyed. But we do need them for better road safety.
Cllr Peter Burgess (Con) Horsham District Council
Reaching a limit
5 September 2013
As someone who has been campaigning to get Devon County Council, as the local highways authority, to ensure that their 20 mph zones in Exeter are compliant and thus can be enforced by Devon and Cornwall Police, I would like to add my thoughts to the debate.
There are many causes of road traffic collisions: some related to speeding, others not. What cannot be denied is that the outcomes are speed-related.
When a pedestrian is hit at 20 mph, one in 10 accidents result in serious injury or death but at 40 mph the figure becomes nine in 10.
There is a 20 mph area in my ward where I often get comments about speeding. Yet it is a closed network of streets with only one way in and out. The majority of motorists driving around live there. Why are they speeding?
I haven't found the answer to that one, but it leads me to pose my own question: why aren't all residential roads 20 mph by default?
Cllr Paul Bull (Lab) Exeter City Council
Speed Limits31 October 2013
Cllr Paul Bull (first 550) has missed the point. While any accident is likely to be more severe if the impact speed is greater, the best solution is to avoid the accident altogether.
How do we achieve this? We need to raise the standard of driving, not produce ever more signage. We need fewer speed limits not more. We have 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 and 70 mph, and this is totally over the top.
Cllr Bull says the worst offenders in his 20 mph area are local residents. There is evidence to suggest this is so in my ward too. Many people are resistant to the 20 mph limit because they don't see the need. It is local residents who elect us so we ought to start listening to them.
It is well known that the Government's own independent survey of 20 mph speed limits found they made no discernible difference to road safety. Why then are we spending millions of pounds on this vote loser?
Cllr Frank Andrews (Con), Fylde Council
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)