I noticed a report in the Guardian this week that suggested that insurance companies providing policies for drivers in Wales have noted that the cost of car repairs in that country have fallen by 20 per cent since the introduction of a mandatory 20 mph speed limit in urban areas.
I am aware that there are petrol-heads who are deeply opposed to this speed limit. I know this from my own, local experience, where such a limit has been introduced after a local consultation which almost everybody in the local community ignored, except for those who seemed to wish for such a limit, me included.
What I hope is that three further pieces of data might now be provided.
The first would relate to the quality of urban air in Wales. We know that this has risen in London, which may be because many of its roads have 20 mph limits.
I would also be keen to see figures for the number of accident and emergency admissions as a result of road accidents. I very strongly suspect that these will have fallen. If cars are suffering reduced damage as a result of urban road accidents, I have little doubt that people are as well.
Finally, I would be interested in the road fatality data. If this policy can be shown to have saved lives, and I strongly suspect that it will have done, then I defy those who decry it to keep up their opposition.
One of the jobs of government is to counter the failure of markets. The externalities that are created by motoring are amongst the market failures that cars create. If a saving in car repair costs can be passed on to drivers by way of reduced insurance premiums in Wales this would be a very tangible indication that these failures can be addressed. However, that is the least important of the gains. The others I note would be even more significant.
The signs are good. Governments can do good things by changing speed limits, and I hope that this policy becomes universal throughout the UK.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I too would like to see data regarding accidents and casualties. It must be the case that lives have been saved particularly children’s lives.
Enforcement is the issue with many motoring laws. For example we have to tolerate ridiculously noisy cars and motorcycles.
Our local police opoosed the 20mph speed limit in Ely. As a result many people ignore it knowing the risk of prosecution is near zero. I wish the council took over the enforcement role.
More than that, I’d like a police force he enfroced the law without prejudice.
I just wish my cruise control would work at 20mph.
Me too..
My car (2019 vintage) has a speed limiter…. perfect for driving in 20 or 30 areas where constant alterations to speed are required. It also adjusts to the prevailing limit.
It’s fantastic….. as long as you switch it on.
Mine is too old…2012 vintage
I live in rural Wales whilst I agree with the 20mph speed limits there is one in our village, it is notable that many motorists find it frustrating and ignore it regularly passing our house at over 40mph and overtaking me whilst I comply with the limits in dangerous places. I have also noticed a lack of enforcement with what were regular speed traps no longer being visible. In our local community facebook page there are regular complaints of cars and even farm machinery exceeding local speed limits. I can only conclude that the decline in accidents mainly occurs in an urban environment where there are long stretches of 20mph zones coupled with traffic calming measures.
I share your frustration
Speed caneras pay for themselves. Why isn’t this law being enforced?
Two point about enforcement.
A) I wish all laws requiring us to do or not do something included in them how it will be enforced everywhere and budgeted for.
Putting up signs is not enough!
B) on road speeds the benefits using average speed cameras is much greater than spot speed cameras. Personally, I’d like to see them used universally rather than gasto devices, as I think is the case in NI.
As a side effect they reduce prosecutions so reduce magistrates courts work load too….
The last is a very good point
Having driven occasionally in Wales over the last year, 20mph seems initially frustrating but actually makes very little difference to journey times in towns and villages and induces a gentle calm (for most!). The only down side is you have time to notice interesting architecture etc which detracts from concentration on the road. The contrast with the road outside our local primary near Lichfield, which has a request 20mph at school time, is salutary. Many drivers, especially of premium vehicles, seem to be hell bent on ignoring it.
Agreed
Hi Richard,
I did an specialist driving course many years ago, one part of which involved steering with ABS activated (drive towards a set of cones at 30mph, slam on the brakes and steer around the cones). As I watched others doing it, I was surprised by how quickly a car moving at 30mph appears to a pedestrian. It felt painfully slow in the car, until you had to brake, then the car could not stop fast enough requiring the steering around the cones. The stopping distance was also an eye-opener, even with ABS. I fully support the move to 20mph in as many areas as required, and wish those opposed to it would f*** **f (apologies for the language)
Regards
Two cars – one at 30mph, one at 20mph. Child steps into the road and the 20mph car just manages to come to a halt without hitting the child. Clearly, the 30mph car will not stop in time…. but at what speed will it hit the child??
Answer: Over 20mph
This tends to surprise people…. those 10mph make a massive difference.
Agreed
The stats on speed awareness courses are that, hit a child at 30mph and there is an 80% chance it will die. Hit the child doing 20mph and an 80% chance it will live.
That is exactly why I support this
One of mine was hit at 20 and surviuved, badly brusied
I do not want to think about then alaternatives
The accident was on a level crossing – he had the right of way. The driver just did not have the stopping dustance at the speed he was going
Something doesn’t feel right about this statistic: it comes from Rob Clark, Head of Motor at esure who had been in post less than a year before the change came in. It seems like he means 20% fewer claims, and not the same number of claims but for 20% less value.
The article says speed had reduced by 4mph on the roads where the change has been implemented. This change in damage claims when the vast majority of miles are done on 30mph+ roads and motorways is not one you’d expect.
I was going to say that we await further data, but we actually await data as 20% is a suspiciously round number and clearly not one from a report but from a comment.
On air pollution we do have this Transport for Wales (TfW) has now published the 20mph phase 1 air quality monitoring report. The data show no material effect on local air quality to date.
I believe most calims come from urban driving though
I would have expected the cost of repairs caused by driving into potholes or over poorly maintained road surfaced at speed would also have declined, however, if insurance-related repais have decreased, then injury to people must also have decreased. Yet the Welsh government is, I understand, reviewing which roads should revert to 30mph. I wonder why?
Car company petrol-head pressure
My granddaughter, who has just passed her driving test, has a back box in the car monitoring her driving. If she drives sensibly she can stay on a lower insurance premium. If she transgresses her insurance premium goes up.
Is it not time that the insurance industry rolled this out to ALL cars and drivers.
They could then say to drivers who do not abide by speed limits that they will not insure them, thus driving the petrol heads off public roads, confining them to race tracks and making roads safer for the rest of us.
It might also encourage the motor industry to stop producing cars that can do ridiculously high speeds.
I agree re the black box idea…
It might also tell me one day when it is my time to quit. Those who do not are a danger.
I admit to being a petrol head. I also hold a RoSPA Advanced Driving Certificate to Gold standard, though now expired because you have to be retested every 3 years, which I have not been on the basis of having been there, done that, annd the fact that it does cost £60 these days.
The Association of British Drivers did publish figures many years ago on the first 20 mph blanket area in Bristol which showed that killed and seriously injured (KSI) collisons actually increased after its introduction. But I can’t attest to that as I no longer have access to them. It may be apocryphal. I do, however, think the data are available somewhere.
To me, better driver training and regular retesting is a better solution than 20 mph limits. As an advanced driver I adjust my speed according to the prevailing conditions, not the posted speed limit (which, however I never exceed). Sometimes I might well be doing 20 in a 30 limit. Sadly that ain’t going to happen whilst the government seriously restricts the money supply and hence its social responsibilities.
As a petrol head I regard good driving to be part of my passion, hence my taking of the Advanced test. As very few people do that and many were last tested years ago, I’m afraid 20 mph limits are with us to stay as a hammer to crack a nut.
Richard,
At the expense of straying away from enonomics.
When I get the call to The Palace on the 5th, there are IMHO three headline moves that would require little more than a working pen
1. End the two child rule in Social Security
2. Abolish the ‘Bedroom Tax’ and
3. Reduce the National Speed Limit to 60 mph on Motorways & Dual Carriageways and 50mph on other roads.
The latter would have a number of significant benefits, reducing traffic deaths and injury, carbon emissions, pollution, and congestion. It would make trains more attractive and probably ‘time out’ some journeys resulting in less traffic overall.
Interestingly the A77 in Scotland is heavily covered with Average Speed cameras which I gather have had a significant impact on casualties.
Also I looked at the styatistics a while ago and about 37% of car occupant deaths occur in collissions where there is no other road user is involved which is well worth bearing in mind when discussing lower road speeds
I have already confessed to being a petrol head and, as such, I do not support a 60 mph limit on motorways. I imagine I will be treated as a pariah by the majority of the contributors to this blog, by the sounds of the posts.
I saw a study some years ago which analysed police reports on car collisions and a large proportion were blamed on excess speed. But when the researcher quizzed some of the officers involved it was revealed that the data gathering is a tick box exercise and officers would tick the “speed” one on the basis that it must have been a contributory factor.
As I said before, better and ongoing driver training and testing is the only real solution.
Most accidents are, in my view, caused not by speed per se, but poor driver concetration and in particular tailgating and using the wrong lane. Plus of course the use of mobile phones, whether hands free or not which, again I never do. The police are now supposed to be cracking down on these practices, but I still regularly use motorways and see little evidence that drivers are heeding it, let alone the police stopping miscreants. I, again as I said, do not exceed posted or national speed limits, but when I drive at 70 on the motorway I am passed by many more cars than I pass. I am largely in the nearmost lane and plenty are in lane 3 with lane 2 empty.
If the government wants to reduce traffic volumes by encouraging people onto trains they would do better by properly funding the railways and their employees rather than introducing ridiculously low speed limits on roads. And, of course, funding the police properly so that they have sufficient numbers to catch law breakers.
Like John I aplogise for straying from economics, but as a one time professional driver and motoring enthusiast it is a matter about which I feel strongly. And the real answer can be found in economics.
I have come across many posts which state that accidents are not caused by speed per se but by poor driving and lack of concentration. While that may be true, the posters never seem to consider that those driving at excess speed for the conditions may also be poor drivers and or lacking in concentration.
I recall back in the 70’s when there was an oil/fuel crisis and all speed limits were reduced, I think to 50mph. The reduction in serious accidents and fatalities was marked.