I strongly support the amendments, although I feel that they do not go far enough. The question of danger to pedestrians is important, but recently I have been approached by many people who have been issued with a fixed penalty notice for driving at 35 miles an hour in what they believed to be a 40 miles-per-hour zone. I stress that I have no personal interest in this, as I am not one of those people.
That seems terribly wrong. These are people who intend to keep to whatever is the speed limit, but the signing is so bad that the sign indicating 30 mph is barely visible and, in some cases—particularly in my area of Oxfordshire; the Thames Valley police force seems to be the worst in this respect—the authorities seem determined deliberately to catch people by putting up 40 mph notices and following those with a rapid 30 mph limit. Drivers cannot reduce their speed from the higher to the lower one over the distance. I have tabled a Question on this for later in the week.
I know where the signs are near Lower Heyford. Therefore, I am aware in advance, and I take care. Why do we not have the sort of thing that they have in America, where signs say, ““Reduce speed ahead””? We sometimes see those signs on the motorway, but otherwise there are random signs saying ““30”” and ““40””, backwards and forwards. In the case that I am quoting, there is an extremely visible ““40”” sign and one saying ““30”” that is almost invisible, and people who would not dream of exceeding the speed limit have been receiving fixed penalty notices.
It is good that we have flexibility on the issue. However, as I understand it, the minimum will be two points on your licence, and the minute you have any points, your insurance premiums go way up, which is unfair to conscientious drivers.
I believe that the reason for it is simply to raise revenue. That is appalling. This is the Road Safety Bill, and that is what we should be interested in—road safety. My noble friend’s amendments would help to improve the safety element. The West Midlands Police said this week—I am saving up this comment to throw at the Minister on Wednesday—said that there was a danger in sudden braking. This is the Road Safety Bill. Why put up signs that mean, if you see them, that you have to brake so swiftly that you create danger for other vehicles?
Last night, someone phoned me to say that they had just come off the A40. The speed limit goes from 70 to 50, and you have to brake unbelievably hard to slow down in the distance given. Much more needs to be done on this.
My noble friend said that his greatest concern was what is beyond the power of the driver. That is my concern too. Everything should be done to help the driver comply with the law, and the amendment goes a long way towards that.
Road Safety Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 27 June 2005.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Road Safety Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
673 c43-4 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:43:44 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260192
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260192
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260192