Proposed 40Mph Rural Speed Limits

IF the government allow local authorities to cut  speed limits to 40Mph, transport in rural areas will be put back to 1930s  standards. Pre 1974 local councils spent an absolute fortune improving and  widening many miles of road between rural communities to make them safe for the  then national limit of 70 Mph. If cuts in speed limits go through, the  investment of our far sighted forefathers will be completely wasted. Cutting  speed limits will also increase fuel consumption for rural drivers. It would  appear that today’s politicians have had their brains washed by well organized  anti speed campaigners and greens, who’s main aim appears to be to bring back  the Red Flag Act and turn the UK into a third world country when it comes to  transport.


If road safety campaigners were serious about actually reducing  accidents they would all propose annual eyesight tests. However, as they get  most of their funding from the transport industry it would appear that they  would prefer more accidents at lower speeds.

I expect that most rural  accidents are caused by tourists going relatively slow watching the scenery not  the road ahead. Reducing rural speed limits to 40 Mph will not cut accidents as  most rural accidents occur in locations where the safe speed may be as low as 30  or even less than 20 Mph. Cutting the current allowed maximum of 60 Mph will  actually encourage some drivers to go faster where road conditions do not allow  higher speed.
Many rural road accidents are caused by drivers foolishly  swerving to avoid small animals like rabbits and pheasants. Killing something  like a sheep is surely preferable to risking you life, running over things like  rabbits and pheasants wont even damage your vehicle. Similarly parking in  potentially dangerous locations like in blind bends and over the brow of a hill  can be easily avoided. Pedestrians should not always follow the highway code to  the letter, crossing over to the side of the bend where you can easily be seen  from a reasonable distance is advisable

Keeping rural speed limits at the  current 60Mph is more important now the prospect of spy in the sky satellite  tracking and road pricing looms on the horizon. It would appear that there are  plans to put lower limits on every road except the more expensive trunk roads.  This will restrict choice to avoid the routes with the highest rates and still  get to your destination in a reasonable time. It could be said that rural speed  limits are almost impractical or impossible to police, but with spy in the sky  tracking, they can get you anywhere between two fixed points. Any average driver  is faced with the prospect of becoming a criminal he is skilful enough to  complete his rural journey at an average over 40Mph. I seem to remember of  something in New Labour’s “clause 4 ” about allowing people to attain their full  potential, not much sign of it in policy when it comes to driving.

It is  interesting to note that both the current opposers are potential eco-fascists.  It is pretty obvious that those leading the call for lower rural speed limits  are almost exclusively townies who are probably not good drivers themselves.  This country is being wrecked by narrow minded people who because they can’t do  something safely themselves think that nobody else is capable of doing it  either. Like the Foxhunting Ban, policy is all about trying to destroy the rural  economy so that ten bob fat cat city dwellers can ” Escape to the Country ” and  take the homes currently occupied by indigenous rural people. Like the road fuel  tax escalator, its all part of a general trend for ethnic cleansing by  stealth.