- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Cross country mountain bikes
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
20mph sign (Albert Bridge / CC BY-SA 2.0)20mph speed limit “single most significant change we’ve ever seen,” says Cycling UK as data reveals 100 fewer people killed or seriously injured on Welsh roads since change – but Conservatives slam “confusion and frustration for drivers”
The news that around 100 fewer people killed or seriously injured on 20 and 30mph roads in Wales in the first full year since the Welsh government’s introduction of widespread 20mph speed limits has been branded “proof that slower speeds on our roads save lives” by Cycling UK.
The national cycling charity also called on the rest of the country to implement similar lower urban speed limits, describing the Welsh government’s policy as the “single most significant and positive change we’ve ever seen in any nation in the UK”, while the former transport minister behind the initiative argued that it “represents the most successful road safety intervention in modern times”.
However, despite the promising figures, the speed limit reduction continues to be criticised by the Labour government’s political opponents, as the Conservative’s shadow transport secretary in Wales claimed the drop in casualties on Welsh roads doesn’t “tell the whole story”, and that the scheme continues to “frustrate and confuse” motorists.
In September 2023, amid widespread political debate and acrimony, the Welsh government introduced a default 20mph speed limit on urban and residential roads (where most, though not all, dropped from 30mph), increasing the approximately 870km of 20mph roads in Wales to 13,000km.
Earlier this week, new road casualty figures were published for the third quarter of 2024, from July to September, allowing for analysis of the statistics of the first full year of the 20mph scheme.
During that three-month period, there were 410 road casualties from road collisions on 20 and 30mph roads, three of which resulted in fatalities, 90 serious injuries, and 317 “slight” casualties.
This marked a 35 per cent drop in road casualties compared to the same quarter in 2023, and represents the lowest casualty figures for a three-month period since records began in 1979.
Meanwhile, during the 12-month period from October 2023 to September 2024, the total number of collisions was 26 per cent lower than the same period the previous year, before the 20mph limit was introduced. The number of people injured also dropped by 28 per cent, while ten fewer people were killed on Welsh roads.
Responding to the figures, Cycling UK’s Wales lead, Gwenda Owen, said in a statement: “Having looked at road safety stats for over 10 years, I can confidently say this is the single most significant and positive change we've ever seen in any nation in the UK.
“It’s proof that slower speeds on our roads save lives. It also means more people having the freedom to make their journey by foot or by bike, because it’s safer to do it, which in turn can lead to a healthier, and more sustainable Wales.
“The Welsh Government’s determination to get 20mph as a default over the line should be a beacon for the rest of the UK as it clearly demonstrates how we can save lives and make our roads safer.
“Whilst 20mph is an essential part of the mix, we also need to continue to build high quality infrastructure so that cycling can be an easy an obvious option for everyday travel – particularly for women, children, and less confident riders.”
This stance was echoed by Labour MS Lee Waters, the transport secretary at the time of the scheme’s introduction, who urged the reduced limit’s political opponents, even from within his own party, against undermining “this excellent progress”.
“We can now say with confidence that in its first year the speed limit reduction represents the most successful road safety intervention in modern times,” Waters said.
“As we said in advance, a little bit slower but a whole lot better. We need to make sure we now don’t undermine this excellent progress.”
“These stats show how 20mph is saving lives, leading to fewer collisions, deaths, and serious injuries,” First Minister Eluned Morgan said.
“We must get the right speeds on the right roads, but to see these figures falling is positive.”
However, despite the promising road safety figures, question marks continue to hang over the future of Wales’ default 20mph speed limit on residential roads, as several councils currently consider whether more roads could be switched back to 30mph.
Meanwhile, the Welsh government has also commissioned a five-year review of the policy, which will include a cost and benefit assessment of the impact of the speed limit on the Welsh economy.
As we reported last year, when road safety stats were issued for the first quarter of 2021, the government urged some caution about interpreting the data over a short time period, noting quarterly figures “can be volatile” and that “the number of quarterly road collisions in Wales has generally been declining steadily over the last decade”.
Nevertheless, current transport secretary Ken Skates said this week: “We know there is a way to go and we’ve always said it will take a number of years to see the full impact of the policy but to see the figures for this quarter at their lowest level is positive.”
However, the Conservative shadow secretary for transport, Peter Fox, claimed that – despite causality numbers dropping – the party still held concerns about the policy, and argued that a “more sensible” approach should be adopted.
“While we welcome any decrease in road casualties, these figures don’t tell the whole story. Our concern remains the way the 20mph speed limit has been implemented,” Fox said.
“The Welsh Labour government’s default approach has created confusion and frustration for drivers and their current review must address these implementation issues and ensure a more sensible and effective approach.”
After obtaining a PhD, lecturing, and hosting a history podcast at Queen’s University Belfast, Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.
Latest Comments
- Hirsute 4 hours 30 min ago
This can work - might need longer bolts. https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/lighting-spares/madison-universal-light-moun...
- Bungle_52 7 hours 8 min ago
This was a failure to give way at a roundabout so although it was relatively straightforward to anticipate and avoid there is traffic law to...
- chrisonabike 7 hours 15 min ago
Ah - I have now read Wikipedia on loons, and perhaps I can understand their objections:...
- wtjs 8 hours 28 min ago
she questioned what Police Scotland is doing to "deter dangerous driving and protect cyclists"...
- wtjs 8 hours 38 min ago
I've got a few reports coming up to one year where I've been told that they will take action but I don't know what action yet. I'll let you know...
- chrisonabike 8 hours 50 min ago
I feel Flintshire Lad's response - "A LABOUR councillor (candidate)!"...
- Sredlums 10 hours 30 min ago
Haha, that my pet peeve....
- stonojnr 11 hours 10 min ago
I'm not sure the UCI worlds are on the protected sports list, as surely CX & MTB would be shown too, the Beeb probably just acquire it as part...
- bikeman01 11 hours 50 min ago
Re-deployed on Twitter duty?
Add new comment
35 comments
If people really want 30 mph limits back then sure, let them have it, but on the grounds that every car is fitted with a black box so every time they go over the speed limit it's a fine and points on their license.
I would go further. If a local authority wants 30mph limits back let them have it, but on the grounds that they have liability (corporate manslaughter) the first time a coroner says that a victim would have survived if the limit was 20mph.
I think they're probably more happy with the 20mph limits and then just driving as fast as they like, as they do currently.
You can prove anything with statistics, even the truth
Looking at Social Media you really don't need to quote any statistics to argue against the policy (apparently). Plenty of neanderthals claiming that the stats are manipulated and/or misleading. Clearly they aren't going to let the truth get in the way of their opinions.
“The Welsh Labour government’s default approach has created confusion and frustration for drivers"
For any competent driver who has passed their driving test there should be nothing confusing about a blanket 20mph speed limit where previously a 30mph speed limit applied. On the other hand the approach in the rest of the UK is confusing where 20mph is implemented piecemeal, and going on the Welsh evidence, lives are being lost unnecessarily.
What is confusing and frustrating is how any humane motorist could possibly object to the blanket 20mph policy now it is clear that the policy is saving so many lives.
It's impatience, pure and simple. I've been close passed on my motorbike by drivers who object to me sticking to the 20mph limit on roads in South London. I inevitably catch up with them at the next junction.
We should make it as simple as possible for drivers to do the right things (well, all road users - but drivers are overwhelmingly the ones killing others and themselves). Sustainable Safety for the win.
The UK is particularly bad at having a really confusing mix of road types and speed restrictions. That's partly "history" but other places also have history - so really it's a choice that "the motor vehicle must get through, all other considerations are secondary".
Other places have realised it is a very good idea to try to keep this as simple and logical as possible and have policies in place for this (see "functionality of roads" here).
On the other hand - I remember in my driving lessons they told me that there were different speed limits in different places! And not just that but it was my responsibility to know what it is at any given time - which I should do not just by "feel" but by looking out for signs. And failing to do this might lead to dangerous driving - and importantly not passing my test!
“While we welcome any decrease in road casualties, these figures don’t tell the whole story. Our concern remains the way the 20mph speed limit has been implemented,” Fox said.
“The Welsh Labour government’s default approach has created confusion and frustration for drivers and their current review must address these implementation issues and ensure a more sensible and effective approach.”
waffle, waffle politician - nothing - speak.
Well, precisely. What is their "more sensible approach" and can they show it would be as effective?
(The following are more national Conservatives than Wales per se):
Instructing local authorities to investigate whether they are unfairly using traffic enforcement penalties to milk drivers for money?
Removing speed cameras because they make people brake suddenly and are a "war on the motorist" (Conservatives were calling for this in 2009 IIRC, and the last Conservative Mayoral candidate wanted lots of this stuff - the ULEZ ones and LTNs - removed)? (To be fair this Conservative MP wanted more local control for where these go - and did want more.)
Removing "unnecessary" speed humps and other traffic calming measures because "unintended consequences"?
Removing "hare-brained" road calming schemes (one from the very top - failed to save the party though).
BUT reminding drivers they should "share the road"?
These kind of things are not limited to the Conservatives by any means *! But they do seem to come up more often and in more "extreme" versions (or is it just they flag up on our collective radar?)
* Especially at local level - using cycling / active travel bashing or carrots for drivers for political points is absolutely an equal-opportunity sport!
I think people can always be critical of implementation, especially with the benefit of hindsite, however, it's done now so let's celebrate the outcomes and the rest of the UK can learn the lessons around implementation.
Actually I think the mistakes around the way it was implemented are largely down to the local authorities, some of which were Conservative run. It's easy to criticise without any specifics on how it should have been done....oh, that's right they don't want it done full stop.
Gwenda Owen talks about increasing numbers of people travelling by foot and by bike as a consequence of these changes, but isn't that just a (hopeful) presumption? Has anyone actually measured the numbers, checked how many people have actually changed their mode of transport and whether that's due to 'the roads feeling safer'?
Technically she only spoke of more people having the "freedom" to choose active travel. I would be (pleasantly) surprised if there has been a noticeable uptick in active travel since 20mph came in - it'll be a slower burn than that.
The trouble is that policies such as this, or LTNs, or the phasing-in of electric cars, are never presented as what they are: the world bending over backwards to provide motorists with a compromise that allows them to carry on fundamentally as they have been, just with a few minor tweaks. The logical response to thousands of people being killed on the roads, and to the significant contribution that internal combustion engines make to catastrophic climate change, would be to ban cars. That's what a benevolent dictatorship would do: a complete and total ban, ruthlessly enforced. But instead, because we live in a democracy, local politicians have laboriously built coalitions to hammer out reasonable restrictions, and countless boffins have spent decades developing electric cars, so that people can still drive anywhere they wish, in luxury and convenience. They just have to do it a bit slower, maybe take the long way round, and in a vehicle that doesn't go "vroom-vroom". One of the most pampered group of people in the history of mankind - the motorist - is allowed to continue killing people, and the planet, just at a slightly reduced rate, and yet they moan and moan and moan about it. "Oh no, it'll take an extra five minutes to get to supermarket, that's unacceptable", they whine. "Electric cars are only equivalent to (or better than) petrol cars for 99% of the journeys I make, so I'm going to vote for a fascist at the next election", they exclaim. Because they've had things pretty much exclusively their way for about 75 years, so cannot now accept the least compromise.
If the likes of Clarkson and Farage and their billionaire backers get their way, and all safety and environmental measures are rescinded, eventually public opinion will turn. The majority may be wedded to their cars now, but a return to the death rates per mile of the 1970s, but with road usage at 2020s levels, would seriously put a dent in that. And when climate change makes vast swathes of homes uninsurable, and causes mass migration that nobody can stop, and resources become so depleted that cars once again become luxuries, they will be banned outright.
Hmm... I think that our ancestors' luxuries did in fact become necessities, and the Roman empire did indeed decline and fall before it changed direction! (Although I don't have the classical scholarship for all the many details on this).
I don't think we can quit mass motoring, any more than cheap mass-produced clothes or coffee (neither very sustainable really).
What we may be able to do is "tame the car" a bit. Even this is is still a massive ask, in the UK, working against massive corporations, politics, the current built environment, cultural norms etc.
(Of course this really means "tame the *drivers*: reduce short distance driving / through traffic")
It can be done because it has been done. It may be possible even from where the UK is now (Seville an example of this).
My prediction is probably we'll muddle on, we may slow the increase in driving a little, we'll have some more problems (and people will find some workarounds for some of those) but it's very unlikely people can work together to all agree to consume less, to have a bit less prepackaged convenience sold to us.
No real idea where the world goes but looking at the past it's either some catastrophe or "something else happens" which makes the current situation irrelevant (but comes with a different set of problems further down a new path)?
If I understand it, Andrew RT Davies has been extremely vocal against saving these lives. Tories, huh?
As someone who lives in Wales, the collective Gammon meltdown on social media over this has been unbelievable.
Fewer casualties, fewer collisions, lower insurance premiums, quieter and safer residential streets. Seriously, what's not to like?
I'm not a huge fan of the Welsh Labour government - they've clearly fallen short on delivering good education and health outcomes - but this is the very definition of good policy.
“The Welsh Labour government’s default approach has created confusion and frustration for drivers...."
I can understand that. It's so confusing: there must be many crashes caused by drivers trying to work out what a 20mph sign means. And so frustrating that you have to slow down to save someone's life: the nerve of the people demanding that!
This is a testament to the utter inability of the tories to learn and to work out why they keep losing vote share when the general public want safer roads, not faster ones. Keep up the good work chaps, at this rate we'll be rid of you completely in a few years.
Ever since the 20 mph limit was first mentioned there have been huge numbers of people providing a range of reasons why the 20 mph limit shouldn't be applied. However, the truth for the vast majority of them is that they simply don't want to slow down while driving.
There were (and still are) a lot of people didn't respect the 30 mph limit either, and not just in Wales. We have our share of selfish, dangerous drivers in Shropshire who think that the 30, 40 mph and other limits don't apply to them.
Hopefully the body of evidence showing the effectiveness of a 20 mph limit will increase and eventually it will be widely recognised that it is a sensible speed to be driving in urban areas around where people walk and cycle, scoot, ride mobility aids etc. If more drivers also cycled or walked from A to B they might begin to understand what it's like to use the roads when you're not in a 2 tonne mobile metal box.
In one sense (the most important one) evidence is irrelevant.
Fundamentally it's "my 'right' to get somewhere a few seconds faster trumps the (small but real) threat to your life and health".
And that is in part there because very very powerful corporations have been applying pressure to consumers and politicians for generations. And culture has internalised it.
Of course the need to speed (never mind displaying one's status or power or contempt for current mores...) has existed since people discovered running, and doubly so when they found mounts to ride on!
Plenty of evidence, people don't care, because it's a choice and people want what they think is "good" now or better (more of it, faster, cheaper etc. )
(For oddballs like us who want to hear more on why lower speeds in urban areas are good, but for almost nobody else because others either don't care or are actively opposed to any messing with their lives (driving habits): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JRbnBc-97Ps )
"They simply don't want to slow down while driving " - my village in England has a 20mph speed limit, and there's no reason for anyone to drive through unless they live here, are visiting or have other business here. The vast majority of road users here live in the village so have skin in the game (as I think the expression goes).
And yet *every single time* I've driven my car in the village since the speed limit came in, driving a couple of mph either side of the limit, I've been able to watch other motorists come up behind me at speed and then follow me through the village less than a car's length behind me.
If you really want to see how much drivers care about speed limits ... when there's temporary roadworks on a motorway and a 50mph limit without cameras ... slow down to the limit and watch the stream of traffic passing you.
It can be chuffing scary as hell.
Your phrasing suggests you/we don't already do this which makes us part of the problem!
What I find amazing is the number of people who steam along and then brake for the average speed cameras. Maybe I'm the one who's misunderstood how they work...
I do ... and often what feels to be at great risk to myself.
If you read my comment as a dig against you... well, that's up to you.
Not everyone on the website is a Saint.
Wasn't taking it as a dig. Just thought that the formulation "if you slow down to the speed limit you'll notice how many people are speeding" really underlines the problem - it not always just "them".
So ... drifting off topic a bit, but the flip side of that is that where there *are* average speed cameras (which it seems now almost all drivers understand) I find the roads less stressful to drive on ... even the M6 is tolerable. Sure, there's always someone sitting on the cruise control at 5mph over the limit and/or tailgating but by and large the flow is steadier with less concertina, less lane-changing (no reason to) and fewer dangerous incidents when people are joining the carriageway.
Other than spineless politicians I don't see why there aren't average speed cameras set to 70mph on most of the motorway network? Can't be that expensive to install nowadays if they're on pre-existing infrastructure with power supply like road bridges?
Agree it's generally much less stressful. With one exception - tailgating HGV drivers who are insistent on doing 56mph. I don't know if they think their speedo is more accurate or if they're just optimising fuel or what (would be genuinely interested to hear a different perspective if there's any drivers here), but if I'm doing an indicated 50mph, I'm not going to speed up just because you're tailgating me.
The better half was driving us down the M3 as it was becoming a "smart" motorway, 50mph average enforcement, everyone at the same speed, no lane changing, calmest bit of motorway I'd ever been on.
Pages