- 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
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
20 mph sign (CC BY-ND 2.0 licensed by Tony Hall:Flickr)Scottish government tells campaigners it won't back default 20mph speed limit
Campaigners have criticised the Scottish Government for failing to back a national default 20mph speed limit, they say could tackle the nation’s “feral” roads.
In a letter sent to Sustrans Scotland, seen by road.cc, the Scottish transport minister, Michael Matheson, said he will not back a blanket reduction of the national speed limit as part of the 20mph Restricted Roads Bill, saying that drivers may not comply with changes.
Campaigners say a default 20mph in built up areas would improve road safety for the most vulnerable road users, and without a national standard, and a simplification of the “labyrinthine” process to reduce speeds, there will be a "postcode lottery" of safety on Scotland’s streets.
Replying to an open letter sent by campaigners to First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, supporting the Bill, Matheson writes: “There is clear evidence that lower speeds reduce the number of casualties and there is specific evidence of casualty reduction in 20mph speed limit zones... particularly for disadvantaged areas”. However, he adds, “Changing a speed limit does not indeed guarantee that actual speed limits will change”.
“The guidance on setting all speed limits is clear that they should be reasonable and consistent if they are to be credible to road users and obeyed as a result.”
Matheson says he wants more evidence before making a decision.
John Lauder, Sustrans Scotland’s National Director, called reduced speeds “fundamental” to road safety.
“That is the most economical, efficient way to create a better balance on the streets in terms of speed and vehicle movement that we know badly affects pedestrians and older and younger people,” he told road.cc.
“We know speed, and the acceleration and deceleration required to get to 30mph, creates a feral atmosphere on our streets.”
He said without government leadership, “there could be a postcode lottery” on safety.
Edinburgh adopted a default 20mph on residential roads and the city centre, in 2018, and last week the Welsh Government announced default 20mph speed limits for residential areas. Last year a global study called for default 20mph limits in built-up areas, after finding a strong relationship between slower speeds and reduced crashes and casualties.
If the Bill is successful neighbourhoods will be able to apply for 30mph speed limits, but it will be the exception for built up areas, not the norm.
Campaigners would like the process of implementing 20mph speed limits simplified; at the moment, Lauder says, the Traffic Regulation Orders required are “labyrinthine”, and “one objector can hold up the whole process”.
Professor Chris Oliver, a retired orthopaedic trauma surgeon turned cycle campaigner, told the Scotsman: “It’s ironic that the Scottish Government have both declared a climate emergency and scrapped the reduction of air travel levy, but are wavering on implementing the 20mph bill".
“We know it’s well established that 20mph makes cities much more liveable, enable more active travel to occur in 20mph areas, more equality of access to transport, better air quality, better health and significantly fewer casualties.”
The Scottish government is currently gathering evidence on whether 20mph speed limits are beneficial and whether a blanket approach is the best way of improving road safety.
Matheson fears the Bill could divert resources away from existing road safety activity, “evidenced to be more effective at reducing casualties’" and further consideration needs to be given to the "impact and consequences of a nationwide 20mph limit”.
Lauder adds: “The decision isn’t made as far as I’m concerned. I respect what Mr Matheson has said, in that he’s not sure about the government taking a blanket approach. I would rather he reviewed his position, respectfully.”
“We are now actively delivering some good quality infrastructure in Scotland. We are doing a lot carrot; there’s a need now to talk about further change and that inevitably means stick, that means 20 mph, and workplace parking levies, and as difficult and inconvenient as that seems people will learn to accept it, just as the smoking ban or the wearing of seat belts."
Laura Laker is a freelance journalist with more than a decade’s experience covering cycling, walking and wheeling (and other means of transport). Beginning her career with road.cc, Laura has also written for national and specialist titles of all stripes. One part of the popular Streets Ahead podcast, she sometimes appears as a talking head on TV and radio, and in real life at conferences and festivals. She is also the author of Potholes and Pavements: a Bumpy Ride on Britain’s National Cycle Network.
Latest Comments
- Destroyer666 2 sec ago
Ok, thanks for this. Indeed the operation is extremely cumbersome if it indeed is how you described it. I thought the little black thingy on the...
- SimoninSpalding 26 min 55 sec ago
I joined BC years back to get the insurance, and because at the time they had the like of Chris Boardman strongly advocating for road safety and...
- David9694 28 min 35 sec ago
"Do you want me to wash it for you?" "can you do me a blowout?"* * Yeah ok I looked that one up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hairstyles
- Rendel Harris 29 min 46 sec ago
Of course not! I will be chasing up after Christmas, no point in doing so now as they will just point to "hopefully" and "in December".
- wtjs 40 min 6 sec ago
YOU DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE, A RED LIGHT MEANS STOP...
- HKR 41 min 27 sec ago
Yes it's all very expensive. However, the article seems to suggest you get the saddle. a fit with Phil Burt, and possibly a check later - which if...
- David9694 42 min 41 sec ago
Another one for "great time saver you've got there":...
- hawkinspeter 10 hours 25 min ago
They most certainly do "separate like that"....
- Secret_squirrel 16 hours 11 min ago
Thanks Neil!
- slc 16 hours 17 min ago
All arguments I am hopeful to see validated, especially (a) and (b) combined....
Add new comment
21 comments
I believe Munge was attempting to be witty, and doing quite a good job, though the language was perhaps a tad extreme.
Is it reasonable to ask people to either comment respectfully or not at all? For the staff on this site you should know that I often skip road.cc altogether when looking at cycling websites due to the aggressive and bullying tone from a few keyboard warriors. If your advert income is based on clicks then they are costing you money.
Did a long ride yesterday so I tattooed this on my face
I'll get around to the cunt one in a bit. Not sure where to put it as you won't see it if I'm on my motorbike.
It's falsely pandering to the supposed motoring vote, forgetting that everyone has to live on these streets as well.
Folk get all argumentative about whether driving at 20mph rather than 30mph reduces fuel consumption. Funny thing, it's an easy experiment to try yourself but no one seems to bother. I gave it a try and found I got a rough 10-12% reduction in fuel consumption. Rather than argue, give it a go. https://www.google.co.uk/url?q=https://www.gobike.org/wp-content/uploads...
“Changing a speed limit does not indeed guarantee that actual speed limits will change”.
Ummmmm. Yes. It. Will.
I thought all the idiots were in Westminster, but I see you have them north of the border too. Perhaps English is his second language.
Somebody has misquoted him as scotsman.com has him down as saying "Changing a speed limit does not guarantee that actual vehicle speeds will change. The guidance on setting all speed limits is clear that they should be reasonable and consistent if they are to be credible to road users and obeyed as a result."
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/public-yet-to-be-convin...
Thank you, that explains it. Apologies to all.
“We are now actively delivering some good quality infrastructure in Scotland.”
This comment can only refer to the motorways which have been built and upgraded in Scotland because there certainly hasn’t been any good quality cycle infrastructure.
20mph = better air quality. Ok, I'll take that one with a pinch of salt.
The evidence seems to be mixed. This is from a briefing by TfL in June 2018 (page 23 of 33 at http://content.tfl.gov.uk/speed-emissions-and-health.pdf) which concludes that 20mph limits have no net difference on exhaust, but do reduce particulate emissions:
"Modelled exhaust emissions based on measured speeds suggested 20mph zones had a mixed impact on emissions depending on the pollutant and the type of car (see table). Overall there was no net negative impact on exhaust emissions.
In 20 mph zones vehicles moved more smoothly, with fewer accelerations and decelerations, than in 30mph zones. This smoother driving style reduces particulate emissions from tyre- and brake-wear. "
And from the following page – lower speed limits means a shift to more walking and cycling, so fewer car journeys (and presumably better air quality):
"Physical activity: lower vehicle speeds in urban areas support a shift to walking and cycling.
The resulting health benefits dwarf the other health impacts of transport.
An evaluation of 20mph zones in Edinburgh found the proportion of primary school children:
► walking to school rose from 58% to 74%;
► cycling to school rose from 3% to 22%; and
► taking the car to school fell from 21% to 13%"
I live in a city with widespread 20mph limits and I'm all for them. Even though they aren't always followed, when they are it makes for a much more pleasant environment.
You might need a pinch of salt, but it is generally accepted that lower speed limits reduce exhaust emissions, certainly by the RAC. Acceleration uses more fuel than cruising and causes more pollution. If you spend less time accelerating by only going to 20mph rather than 30mph, all else being equal, pollution will be reduced.
Where I live, if there were blank 20mph limits and everyone were to abide by it (although in reality, only the driver in front has to choose to drive at the lower limit), then there would be little impact on average vehicle speeds but a lot less breaking and accelerating, which in turn would result in better air quality.
Because the default is 30 and it has, historically, been difficult to get 20 limits, we have the ridiculous situation where some main roads have a 20 limit and the residential roads still have a 30 limit.
By and large, people don't like driving at 20 mph - heck most won't obey a 30 limit if they have a choice. I find that most people like to drive at about 34 - if i'm driving at 30 in a 30 limit, and someone overtakes me and then the limit changes to 40, i'll then be stuck behind them, at 34. I think default 20 limits make a great deal of sense for a lot of reasons - but I can't imagine that it will ever be a vote winner.
I always thought the average driver liked to do about 40-45 mph. Inappropriately fast for any built-up area and inappropriately slow for the open road. Obviously, when you attempt a perfectly safe overtake on a NSL single carriageway, they'll either floor it as you pull out, or drive up your arse for the next two miles, frothing at the mouth.
Funny what driving a car can do to a person's psychology.
People will drive at whatever speed feels safe to them, which is why we have speed limits, as the speed a driver feels safe at is dangerous for everyone else. Most drivers rate themselves as above average, which is clearly impossible, but because they think that, they will drive faster, because they're good drivers aren't they?
We need electronic speed control, so that drivers cannot exceed the speed limit.
I have worked on urban air quality for a few years. It is not a straightforward question. On average, emissions are higher at 20mph than at 30. However, it is all about driving style. Road infrastructure that encourages people to drive smoothly at 20 will reduce emissions.
Well, round here, speed bumps/cushions/tables don't. Not sure occasional chicanes do either. A constantly sinuous road might, but I don't know of any like that. What does encourage people to drive smoothly at 20?
Electric motorvehicles most efficient speed is 18-20mph. Go bother to look it up. if you're driving in 20mph roads often then you're a selfish cunt unless you have/are so disabled you can't use a cycle/e-assist cycle.
I live on a 20mph road, so how does that work then, do I park somewhere else and ride my bike to my car?
Have the words "selfish cunt" tattooed across your forhead, or loose a limb. Your choice.
Well you could _walk_ to your car? As it happens this notion that everyone has a divine right to park their car right outside their house is baffling to me. It's why narrow roads near me have no pavement left becuase of all the cars (legally) parked on them, because there isn't room in the road, and of course residents _have_ to have their car right outside their house.
I'd say, either walk to your car, or just don't own one. There isn't really room for them all, certainly not for them all to be parked outside their owners' front doors.
(Edit) Even though the sense-of-entitlement of so many drivers gets on my nerves, I admit it's not really fair to make it an individual-behaviour issue, it's a social and organisational problem. People need to be offerered viable alternatives, as well as being made to pay the real cost of motoring. Somehow those two things need to happen simulaneously.