Euro Nanny has decreed that all new cars sold in the UK and Europe are to be fitted with devices
to automatically stop drivers from exceeding the speed limit under
sweeping changes to vehicle safety rules provisionally agreed by the EU.
Although Britain may no longer be part of the EU when the rules come
into effect, the UK regulator, the Vehicle Certification Agency, has
said it will mirror safety standards for vehicles in the UK. Remind me again, why did we want to leave the EU?
Let us trust and assume that there are no software glitches/hacks that cause "unforeseen" problems!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Oh dear it seems that Nanny's fetish for reducing road speeds (for our own protection) has made the roads more dangerous.
Bath and North East Somerset Council spent £871,000 bringing in the 13 new speed zones just 12 months ago.
One year on, a report has found that the rate of people killed or seriously injured has gone up in seven out of the 13 new 20mph zones.
The review of the traffic control measures warns that this is a
problem nationally. As per The Telegraph:
"There is no simple explanation for this
adverse trend but it could be that local people perceive the area to be
safer due to the presence of the 20mph restrictions and thus are less
diligent when walking and crossing roads, cycling or otherwise
travelling."
–– ADVERTISEMENT ––
Despite the council's own report concluding that there is "little in
the way of persuasive argument for continuing the programme in the
future", deputy leader Patrick Anketell-Jones has admitted there simply
isn't the money available to reverse the 20mph zones.
"It has cost over £800,000 to roll
out the 20mph zone and it would probably cost the same to reverse them.
We just haven't got the money. I'm pretty sure the 20mph zones will stay in place for the foreseeable future."
Money wasted on a scheme that in fact harms Nanny's citizens!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
The BBC reports that today speeding fines have gone up.
Under new guidelines,
fines for drivers caught doing 51mph in a 30mph zone or 101mph on a
motorway will start from 150% of weekly income, rather than the previous
level of 100%.
The Sentencing Council said it wanted a "clear increase in penalty" as the seriousness of offending increases.
The
new Band C fines will allow the worst offenders to face fines of
between 125 and 175% of their weekly income - with the starting point
for magistrates in most cases set at 150%.
The maximum fine,
however, remains the same, meaning a speeding driver cannot be fined
more than £1,000 unless the offence takes place on a motorway, where the
limit is £2,500.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Kudos to The Institute of Economic Affairs, for stating that four in five sets of UK traffic lights should
be torn down to reduce travel delays and boost the economy.
Additionally the Institute doesn't think much of speed bumps and bus lanes either.
In its view the
proliferation of traffic lights, speed bumps and bus lanes seen in
Britain in recent decades is “damaging to the economy”. It estimates that a two-minute delay to every car journey ends up costing the UK economy about £16 billion every year.
Ironically these "safety" measures make the roads more unsafe. The IEA is quoted by the Telegraph:
“Not only is a majority of traffic regulation damaging to the economy,
it also has a detrimental effect on road safety and the environment.
Road-users rely on third-hand instructions rather than first-hand
judgement about how to adapt to the conditions and proceed safely."
The number of traffic lights
in England increased by a quarter since 2000 and some 60,000 speed humps
have been installed since they were first introduced in the 1980s, the
report says.
These "safety" measures also negatively impact Nanny's totem of the environment, “as drivers brake and accelerate,
increasing emissions, noise pollution and harmful health effects”.
Traffic controls are in fact detrimental to road
safety because it “subverts our social nature and removes individual
responsibility”.
I assume Nanny will ignore the findings of the IEA.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Last Friday I wrote that police have more than doubled the amount they
collect from running speed awareness courses since 2010.
It also appears that police are so keen to sell these courses, that they are conning motorists by failing to make clear how drivers could
inadvertently leave themselves uninsured by taking part in them.
The Telegraph reports that insurers have admitted they treat speed awareness courses the same as penalty points, and it is now feared that failing to declare taking part in course could invalidate drivers' policies.
The courses, which cost between £80 and £150, allow drivers to avoid penalty points on their licences. However, campaigners claim that this lulls many motorists into a false sense of
security that they do not have to declare the course to insurers, in the
hope their premiums will not rocket for a speeding-related offence.
However, insurers usually operate a “catch all” clause in their
policies about keeping them informed about factors which may affect your
driving, and failing to declare a course could lead them to cancel
cover in the event of an accident, experts said.
Ian Belchamber, a campaigner who runs an anti-speed camera campaign in
Dorset, said:
“The police’s actions are potentially resulting in people
driving uninsured because they haven’t told motorists to tell their
insurers about the speed awareness course.
I would make sure
your insurer knows you’ve been on a course regardless of whether they
specifically ask for that information.
If you are involved in
an accident and the insurer looks into your history and sees you’ve been
on a speeding course they could say ‘You didn’t tell us about this,
you’re not covered’.
The police don’t want people to know this because they make a lot of money out of the courses.”
The Telegraph
can confirm that two companies set up with close links to the
now-defunct Association of Chief Police Officers are now entwined with
the organisation’s successor, the National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC).
An NPCC spokesman said Suzette Davenport, the chief constable
of Gloucestershire Police, sits on the board of the National Driver
Offender Retraining Scheme (NDORS), which registered a £44 million
turnover last year for providing safety awareness courses.
A director of NDORS is Meredydd Hughes, the former chief constable of
South Yorkshire, who was responsible for road policing at Acpo until he
was caught speeding at 90mph in a 60mph zone in 2007, and stepped down
from the role.
He is also a director of another company in the sector, Road Safety Support.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Following on from yesterday's article about Bedfordshire's Police and Crime Commissioner (Olly Martins) wanting all drivers who travel at more than 70 miles per hourto be fined in order to raise money for the police, the Telegraph reports that police have more than doubled the amount they
collect from running speed awareness courses since 2010, despite a
warning from ministers to stop raising revenue from speeding offences.
While the money collected from speeding fines goes to the Treasury, police forces are able to keep what they charge for running speed awareness courses, around £100 a time.
The vast majority of motorists prefer this option over a fine, because
they avoid having points added to their licence and thereby keep their
insurance premiums down.
In recent years, there has
been a huge increase in the number of people attending such courses, as
forces across the country recognise the financial benefits. In
2010 the number of people attending National Speed Awareness courses was
447,724, but by last year that figure had more than doubled to 1.19
million.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
As loyal readers know, Nanny and her chums love to use fines as means of raising revenues.
Hence it should come as no surprise at all to learn that Nanny's chum, in the form of Bedfordshire's Police and Crime Commissioner (Olly Martins), wants all drivers who travel at more than 70 miles per hourto be fined.
Olly proposes turning on speed cameras permanently across stretches of the M1
motorway network, catching everyone who exceeded the limit.
Motorists would then be forced to pay a £100 fine as well as having points added to their licence,or could opt instead to attend a speed awareness course, costing £90.
Is this concern about speeding driven (pardon the pun) by a desire to improve road safety?
Is it fark!
It is in fact being used as a means of raising millions of pounds in revenue for the police.
“If motorists do not like it then they can always
stick to the speed limit.”
The catch all phrase of those who are blind to reality, and who use the law to drive their own personal agendas.
Olly claims that he had been forced into
suggesting the scheme, because his force was at financial breaking point
and fining speeding drivers could help Bedfordshire retain 25 officers
it would otherwise be forced to lose.
It will raise £1M!
When the police, council or government use fines as a means of raising revenue to pay for themselves the concept of impartial law enforcement, innocent until proven guilty and commonsense fairness is thrown out of the window.
The police will now be incentivised to use other means of raising revenue, and for new laws to to be passed that people can break and be fined for!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Oh dear I see another example of "pillockery" and "prattery" has emanated from Brighton council or rather, to be more precise, from a Brighton councillor.
Step forward Green councillor Ben Duncan who has suggested that Brighton council “boycott” a city
taxi firm (City Cabs).
For why?
City Cabs has had the "temerity" to publicly criticise (via two adverts) council proposals for a city wide 20mph speed limit, calling the limit a "declaration of war on motorists".
“Driving
around Brighton and Hove is tough enough. We don’t want it to become any
harder.”
On Twitter Duncan said:
“Wondering if we’ll have to start urging official
BHCC boycott of City Cars (sic) after they declare war on council 20mph
speed limits.”
Some delegates at the Green Party Conference were quick to support the
idea, with one tweeting: Duncan now says that said he “strongly disagreed”
with a boycott implying that City Cabs were of "subnormal intelligence"!:
“I think a boycott at this point would be disproportionate – and it’s important that we know all the facts first.
I can see why a child or someone with subnormal intelligence might
assume I was calling for a boycott now but they’d be wrong.
The problem is that this ad was based on untruths. It suggested that
the 20mph limit was a war on motorists, when in fact it is about
enforced peace.”
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
On the subject of speeding, if only Huhne had been aware of this gemusing debacle by Nanny he might have not had to lie his arse off.
My funny bone was severely tickled by the announcement by the Crown Prosecution Service that speed signs on sections of the M42 had been breaking Nanny's rules about speed signs for the last six years.
It seems that the font was wrong and that the signs (erected - can I say "erected" before the watershed? - by Nanny's Highways Agency) showed mph numbers taller and
narrower than they should have been, failing to comply with Nanny's own traffic
regulations.
Needless to say lawyers now want any penalties which were handed
out over the course of the six years the signs were in place to be quashed,
arguing they are not legally enforceable.
Police have stopped using the signs as a means of
enforcement and dropped prosecutions it was intending to pursue on the
stretches of road affected. However, before they stopped prosecuting speeders (or rather "alleged" speeders) at least 11,000 motorists had already received fines and
convictions since the first of the signs went into operation in
2006.
Funnily enough Nanny's Highways Agency said it was first made aware of concerns about three years
ago but believed they did conform to the regulations; ie Nanny ignored the fact that she was breaking Nanny's own rules!
Why would that be?
Ker Farking Ching!
Anyhoo, if anyone is reading this in Huhne's cell block please pass him a copy of this article.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
I am gemused to see the all too predictable reaction from the anti speed lobby, to government plans to increase the speed limit on motorways from 70mph to 80mph.
Seemingly, if the anti speed lobby is to be believed, when this happens we will enter a nightmare world of carnage, death and mutilation on Britain's motorways.
OK, here in simple terms is why the anti speed lobby are wrong:
1 It's not speed per se that kills, it's bad driving.
2 People die and are injured in accidents on the road, even when the car is travelling at under 30mph.
3 So long as there is good visibility, a safe road surface, a safe distance between cars, alert drivers, roadworthy cars etc then the speed of the car is pretty well immaterial to its ability to stop safely in the event of an oncoming visible hazard.
It's not speed that kills, it's bad driving!
So enough of this nonsense, and let people drive on the motorways unfettered by speed restrictions (in times of clement weather and good visibility).
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
The latest wheeze from Euro Nanny is a proposal to enforce a
mandatory 20mph speed limit in residential zones, and to replace the Highway
Code with European law.
All very well, if we had signed up to an EU superstate and had voluntarily given up our right to self governance. However, as I recall, the referendum on the EU in the 1970's was for joining a "Common Market" not a European superstate.
Coming soon, all cars will have to be preceded by a man walking carrying a red flag!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Ooh err missus, it has been a wee while since I have awarded my prestigious and internationally renowned Prats of The Week Award.
Time therefore to get awarding!
This week it goes to Warwickshire Police.
For why?
Well my old muckers, they recently had an "initiative" to bring in some extra manpower to help them run speed traps.
Who did they bring in?
Why, Boy Scouts of course!
Yes, you did read that correctly, the police used the services of 1st Shipston Scout pack (aged 10-14) to help them catch speeding motorists.
The Scouts spent a day in January using a laser speed gun with three police officers and three police community support officers, on duty at the traps at Shipston-on-Stour Warwickshire.
The 24 motorists caught by the Scouts were offered the choice of accepting a verbal and written warning about their actions, both delivered by the Scouts, or the standard punishment of a £60 fixed penalty and three points on their licence.
Is it me, or is there something decidedly creepy and unpleasant about granting a child the right to admonish an adult in this manner (shades of 1984 and "thought crime" accusations leveled by children against their parents spring to mind)?
The most "amusing" part of this whole scheme was the response by a spokesman for Warwickshire Police to media enquiries.
For reasons that only Nanny can explain, the key issue as viewed from the perspective of the police seems to be the fact that those who took part wore "high viz" jackets (over to you on that one Tonk:)).
The spokesman said that all those involved wore high-visibility jackets, and the speed checks took place on roads offering 'clear visibility' to drivers and those taking part.
So that's OK then!
Well, I suppose as the Scouts already have their own uniforms it is (in Nanny's eyes at least) just one simple step to drafting them into the police.
Warwickshire Police, well deserving Prats of The Week!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Goodness me, the week is almost over and I have yet to award one of my prestigious and internationally renowned "Prats of The Week" Awards.
This week it goes (somewhat belatedly, as the story is a tad past its prime) to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
For why?
Ask Michael Thompson, who was recently prosecuted at the behest of the CPS.
What did he do?
Way back in July 2010 he was driving through a police speed trap in the Grimsby area, and flashed his headlights to warn fellow knights of the road about a mobile police speed gun.
The police flagged him down and charged him, peding CPS approval.
Note, he wasn't prosecuted by the CPS for speeding but for warning other motorists.
Nanny's chums at Grimsby Magistrates' Court have fined Mr Thompson £175 plus £250 costs plus a £15 "victim" surcharge ("victim"? what "victim"??), on the basis that he was wilfully obstructing a police officer in the course of her duties.
Mr Thompson is of the view that it was his civic duty to warn others.
Here's my view, the CPS and police are fooling no one with this prosecution. The theoretical purpose of speed traps etc is to ensure that motorists adhere to the speed limit.
Therefore if motorists know that there is a speed trap they will slow down, thus ensuring they keep to the speed limit and satisfying the alleged purpose of the speed trap.
However, the reality is that speed cameras and traps are a nice little earner for the state and local police forces (cameras have raised £100M in fines since they were introduced in the 90's). The reason for the prosecution was that Nanny was furious that one of her ways of making money out of us was thwarted.
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
I see that a new speed camera, amusingly called Asset (advanced safety and driver support for essential road transport), may be deployed in the UK.
Asset, aside from being able to spot speeding drivers, will also spot those who are not wearing seatbelts and measure distances between moving cars to identify tailgating.
The development of Asset is being funded by the European commission, and is currently being tested in Finland.
Deployment across all of Europe (including our "island haven") is expected to be complete by 2013.
The question is, will Nanny and her "beloved" local authorities be able to resist using this camera as a means to fill her much depleted coffers?
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
Oh dear oh dear, it seems that some of Nanny's police officers have suffered a sense of humour failure; as Miranda Skillings, of Brancaster, found to her cost recently.
Brancaster recently held a fete, the tradition of the village being that people put up "humorous" scarecrows around the village in "amusing" places and poses.
Mrs Skillings made 7ft scarecrow that resembled a policeman with a speed gun, she put him up next to roadside post.
Can you guess what happened next children?
Yes, that's right, a policeman arrested the scarecrow for impersonating a police officer and took him to the police station.
Oddly enough the village had received permission from the police to create such an effigy.
Therefore you will be relieved to hear that Mrs Skillings was allowed to take her scarecrow home. However, she has been told to remove the radar gun.
Inspector Dave Buckley of Norfolk Police said:
"Speed radars are used to prevent casualties on our roads. They should not be recreated by the roadside in jest."
I guess there is not much crime in the Norfolk area then?
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
I see that Nanny is about to cut the national speed limit from 60mph to 50mph, in her view this will reduce the number of deaths on the roads.
As her Roads Minister, Jim Fitzpatrick, said:
"..we are killing 3,000 people a year on our roads, it would be irresponsible not to do something about it...."
Well I wonder precisely who the "we" are that he refers to?
Doesn't he get the point that "responsibility" comes from the individual, and should not be imposed by the state?
Anyhoo, as to whether these 3,000 corpses a year are as a result of someone doing 60 on clear sunny day on an open road, or some prat doing 50 on a fog bound lane 1 metre away from someone's exhaust pipe remains a mystery that Nanny will not enlighten us about.
I am sure that by cutting the speed limit to 50, the 3,000 deaths per annum will magically stop!
That aside, here is rather an interesting factoid about Nanny's plans. Nanny will change the speed limit, but will not change the signs (a white circle with a black stripe).
Why would this be a problem?
Well, you see, local councils can if they wish apply to keep the speed limit at 60. Thus leaving the motorist a tad confused.
The good news for Nanny though is she will use this change to erect (can I say erect at this time of day?) more speed cameras, with a view to catching all who flout her new rules. Those who are caught will of course, kerrching!!, have to pay a fine.
A nice little earner by anyone's standards!
By the way, in case any of you are thinking that I am griping over this because it means I can't drive my sports cars at 60 down country lanes anymore, fear not.
I haven't driven since 1996, and do not own a car!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
The Health and Safety Gestapo are at it again, pass the sick bag!
This time they have decreed that anyone on Nanny's payroll who intends to mount (can I say mount?) a ladder, needs approved ladder training.
Fair enough I suppose, if we are talking high ladders. However, the Gestapo have decreed that you need training even when the ladder is a mere 3 feet (or is it foot?) off the ground.
Failure to comply with this edict results in a fine of £5K.
There is a small irony here though, what sort of ladder only goes up 3 feet? The ladder used to install roadside speed indicators....
Lancashire County Council made an attempt to improve road safety, by installing electronic speed indicators which shame drivers into slowing down.
Thirty of the devices lie waiting to be put up on their roadside poles, but the council has found that it does not have enough staff qualified to go up ladders to install them.
Health and Safety Executive’s Working at Height Regulations 2005 (amended 2007) have been used by Nanny to stop Nanny putting up more speed indicators. Last year about 350 road deaths were ascribed to speeding. In the same period 14 people died after falling off ladders.
Lancashire used to have three roadside speed indicators, which were erected (can I say erected?) and maintained by the police. Policemen are qualified to go up ladders, but they are not qualified to teach other people how to do so. Now the police have decided that they are too busy to look after them.
