Matters of moment, October 1983

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Current page

91

Current page

92

Current page

93

Current page

94

Current page

95

Current page

96

Current page

97

Current page

98

Current page

99

Current page

100

Current page

101

Current page

102

Current page

103

Current page

104

Current page

105

Current page

106

Current page

107

Current page

108

Current page

109

Current page

110

Current page

111

Current page

112

Current page

113

Current page

114

Current page

115

Current page

116

Current page

117

Current page

118

Current page

119

Current page

120

Current page

121

Current page

122

Current page

123

Current page

124

Current page

125

Current page

126

Current page

127

Current page

128

Current page

129

Current page

130

Current page

131

Current page

132

Current page

133

Current page

134

Current page

135

Current page

136

Current page

137

Current page

138

Current page

139

Current page

140

Current page

141

Current page

142

Current page

143

Current page

144

Current page

145

Current page

146

Current page

147

Current page

148

Current page

149

Current page

150

Up the limits

The vexed subject of speed-limits is in the news again, as last month’s Editorial emphasised. The leading motoring organisations are rightly pressing hard for the raising or abolition of unnecessarily low limits. The Daily Express has been backing them. RoSPA is opposed to a higher Motorway speed-limit in Britain that would bring us into line with most other EEC countries — with a title like “Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents” this is, perhaps, not unexpected, although one might have hoped this dedicated body would have by now abandoned the futile idea that “speed kills”, without qualification. We agree that it is high time the limit on our Motorways was raised or, better, abolished. Before the permanent 70-limit was imposed Motor Sport had a go at attempting to get comrnonsense to prevail. We organised a massive Petition against this 70 mph speed-limit, which had been introduced purely as a panic measure in 1965, signed by 280,000 readers. It was presented to the Transport Ministry by Earl Howe and the Editor in the presence of leading racing drivers, headed by Graham Hill. Alas, unless an Election is pending, making a Government Department listen to public opinion is more difficult than persuading an elephant to ride in a Mini. No doubt our stacks of paper were soon fed to the Transport House boilers, preventing the civil-servants from feeling any draughts. However, that Motor Sport Petition may well have prevented those who decided our motoring destiny from reducing the limit to 60 mph. . . (Which is why we consider another such Petition, as announced last month by the Managing Editor, to be worthwhile in 1983.)

Since 1965 cars have become safer, traffic density has increased, and the accidents which the 70-limit on our M1 and subsequent Motorways was intended to reduce, but didn’t, are induced by the bunching, the nose-to-tail driving, that an unrealistic Motorway speed-limit must always incur. So it is high time speed-limits were revised, and Britain’s brought into line with those of other EEC countries. Did you know that ours are lower than the restrictions in Austria, Belgium, France, Luxembourg, Spain, Portugal, and Switzerland, with West Germany eschewing Motorway limits, and Italy’s generally higher than ours?

The motor-car has always been the butt of ridiculous catch phrases, such as “lethal weapon” or “speed kills”, by unthinking or biased people. From the earliest times it was obliged, legally, to be driven very slowly. Things improved a bit, with enlightenment the overall speed limit eventually going to 20 mph, enforced by zealous constables using cheap stop-watches and waving hankies, until such stupidity was universally ignored, as some of you may remember, or have heard about. Clearly a bad Law, which was replaced in the 1930s with freedom from speed-limits on the “open” road, but a 30 mph limit imposed in “built-up” areas. That was a relief to those who saw speed as one of civilisation’s benefits. One had only to keep an eye in the rear-view mirror for black (Police) Ford V8s to escape a fine for “speeding”, an odd term applied to modern cars doing close to 30 mph. Even this advance rather strained the important good relations between the Police and the public.

All that was ages ago. Since then we have had additional 40, 50, 60 and 70 mph limits, to confuse and irritate. (To which can be added an unofficial injunction to proceed at 5 mph, over a stretch of Welsh road after the notorious “gritting” process, and where else but in Powys could you set notices proclaiming “No carriageway markings”?).

It is time to think again, yet, God help us, the Transport Under Secretary, Lynda Chalker, is trying to use “sleeping policemen”, or artificial bumps, to enforce the 30-limit, regardless of their cost and the closing of roads while they are installed. Clearly an unenlightened lady, who believes naively that any speed is suicidal in a horseless carriage. . .

Is Britain to remain backward in not coming forward with raised or abolished speed-limits for the 1980s, to speed up essential transport and particularly to reduce dangerous bunching on our Motorways? If anyone in authority thinks permitting overtaking on the near-side offers a motorway solution, St Christopher help us all. — William Boddy.