Category Archives: Speed

Media misreports Sussex Police position on 20mph limit proposal

Political divisions in Brighton & Hove

No party has a majority on Brighton & Hove City Council. The Greens have 23 seats, the Conservatives have 18 seats and Labour has 13 seats. No other parties or independent candidates were elected to the City Council. The councillors from the Conservative and the Labour parties have agreed to allow the Green Party to exclusively manage the administration of the City.

Green Party proposed 20mph speed limit

In March 2011, the Brighton & Hove Green Party published its manifesto for the then forthcoming local elections. It was a detailed publication, which divided into 20 sections over 28 pages. The second section set out the local party’s 13 priorities for the following term. The 8th priority was:

Implement a 20mph speed limit for Brighton and Hove’s residential roads.

Political debate over 20mph speed limit

On 4th May the City Council will consider whether to impose the 8th priority in the list above, which proposes to impose a blanket 20mph speed limit on all residential roads inside the City’s boundaries. The Conservative Party opposes this measure on the basis that the measure is too extreme; it would prefer it to be applied in certain areas only. The Labour Party supports this measure in principle but questions its temporal merit on the basis that it is unenforceable. Those are legitimate political arguments.

Police priorities and politics

Policing is a complicated job. There has always been a need for the police to decide how to allocate its resources. Sometimes this becomes a matter of political debate. Usually the police manage this delicate issue with diplomacy. In other words, it is very rare for the police to announce that they won’t enforce a particular law. It is rare because such announcements put the police into the political frame and therefore in breach of the consitutional arrangements.

Sussex Police campaigns against speeders

Sussex Police regularly enforce the existing speed limits and, from time to time, engage in specific exercises to clamp down on people who break the speed limit on our local roads. One such campaign came to an end yesterday and resulted in over 3,000 drivers caught speeding. With a combination of cameras, officers experienced in this particular task and clearly signposted speed limits, this is particularly easy police work.

Media reports that Sussex Police will not enforce new limit

Despite the obvious need for the police to remain politically neutral and the fact that the proposed lower speed limit being politically contentious, local media has reported that the police has declared that it will not enforce the new limit, if it is brought into force. Here’s some of these local media reports:

Both these media organisations claim to be reputable. Yet both have inserted an unattributed claim into their reports that Sussex Police have declared the proposed limit will have to be self-enforcing. Neither the Argus nor the BBC have included any explanation of the rarity of such a claim, let along any commentary on the potential risk of it giving rise to the perception that the police have become political.

Fact checking

Scarcely able to believe what I was reading, I telephoned Sussex Police to check the facts. Sussex Police have confirmed to me that they are aware that traffic calming measures will be introduced to facilitate the enforcement of the new lower speed limit. Sussex Police have also confirmed to me that they will be enforcing the limit themselves, as they would do with any other speed limit. I’ve suggested that Sussex Police put out a public statement confirming that that they will enforce the new speed limit.

Whilst the Brighton Argus is famous for not bothering to check facts, the BBC’s reputation is considerably better. Both of these organisations have slurred the police by putting them in the political frame. At best, this is shabby journalism. At worst, it is an example of the media manipulating the local political debate.

Did Labour Party policy rest on false reportage of Sussex Police?

Since the Labour Party’s opposition to the new limit appeared to rest on the police position, as reported by the media, presumably they will now be in favour of the new speed limit?

Why speed is the biggest cause of road traffic accidents

When I practised as a barrister, I fought approximately 800 road traffic accident trials. Consequently, there’s not much I don’t know about these cases, which we call RTAs for short. It is tempting to say that the biggest cause of RTAs is the pure bloody minded selfishness of most drivers, who appear to believe that they have a God given right to drive where they want, when they want and in the manner that they want. However, one factor rises above all others, perhaps because it is the most misunderstood.

The Maximum Speed Not The Mandatory Speed!

Speed is the big problem. Far too many people believe that the official speed limit is the speed that they should be aiming to drive at. It is nothing of the kind. Usually it isn’t even the limit at all, not with our weather. It is simply the speed over which it is impermissible to drive, unless you are involved in some form of public service which has established rights to driver faster, e.g. the police and the ambulance service.

Virtually no-one seems to know their stopping distances. Time and time again, cross-examination in court goes went like this:

Me: What speed were you driving?
Driver: About 28mph
Me: What is your stopping distance at that speed?
Driver: Erm, …
Me: Perhaps you’ve temporarily forgotten the details of rule 126 of the Highway Code?
Driver: Erm, …
Me: Allow me to read it to you, “Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. …”. Please confirm what you said earlier, that the distance from you to the bend in the road was about five car lengths?
Driver: When?
Me: When you entered the road?
Driver: Erm, yes, that is what I said…
Me: Do you still say that?
Driver: Erm, yes, erm.
Me: Obviously, you couldn’t possibly have been travelling at 28mph when making the tight turn entering the road, could you?
Driver: No, obviously not [showing visible relief at being on firmer ground].
Me: Therefore, to reach 28mph before the bend, you must have accelerated between the bend and the corner?
Driver: Erm, yes [looking worried, realising that he has been caught out]
Me: And the distance between the junction where you entered the road and the bend was about five car lengths?
Driver: It was more like six.
Me: You can see from this chart [showing driver relevant page in Highway Code] that your stopping distance at 30mph would be about 23 metres. That’s 75 feet in old money or six car lengths. Can you see that?
Driver: Yes, I was driving slower than 30mph.
Me: At 28mph?
Driver: It was probably more like 25mph.
Me: Really? Why didn’t you say that earlier?
Driver: I was confused.
Me: Are you confused now?
Driver: No.
Me: Sure?
Driver: Yes?
Me: In your statement, it says it was raining slightly and that the road was wet. Are you confused about that?
Driver: Definitely not!
Me: That means that you should double your stopping distance, doesn’t it?
Driver: Does it?
Me: Sorry, I’m asking the questions and you’re answering them. Do you agree that in the wet your stopping distance is doubled?
Driver: [realising that he is banged to rights] I didn’t, erm, that is to say, I’m not sure.

This is an absolutely typical court room cross-examination. I’ve got notes on hundreds of trials which included a dialogue which runs exactly along these lines. Sometimes, people say that they can drive faster because they have ABS. ABS is an automatic braking system, which allows drivers to continue to turn the steering wheel when braking. It prevents the steering wheel from locking. It does not slow the car faster. I never saw a driver who claimed that in court go on to win his case. The fact is that people drive too fast. They are bombarded by advertising, television and cinema driving and a general culture that worships dangerous speed. Almost no-one knows the speed at which they should be driving. The answer is that they should drive at the speed appropriate for the circumstances. This means that if they cannot stop within the distance that they can physically see, they are driving too fast. Selfish wankers.