Are 20mph limits really better for us?

Is 20 plenty? I heard on the radio recently that figures from Portsmouth and other towns where 20mph speed limits have been applied show that casualties are actually higher.

The report suggested people who might well have been killed outright are now receiving serious, painful and long-lasting injuries.

If this is true, why is it?

There could be several reasons.

First, pedestrians crossing the road do so when vehicles are much nearer in the belief that they have much more time.

Second, drivers may well adopt a more leisurely attitude and so not paying enough attention.

I am sure that attention when driving is proportional to speed.

So perhaps 10mph is safer!

By reductio ad absurdum, we stop all traffic. Bliss for pedestrians, frustration to motorists.

So, if you have not yet voted in the referendum, please think carefully.

Maybe with better attention on all sides, 30 will be enough!

Many years ago when I lived in the Croydon area, the council had a long-running poster campaign for road safety.

If these were instituted here, we might have, for instance, on the gyratory systems in Chichester, ‘Signal at all times, especially when leaving’.

There could be a suggestion scheme for people to put up posters at their favourite danger spots.

Such a scheme could be cheaper than the ‘20’s plenty’ scheme and because the message would change at regular intervals, more attention seeking.

Rev John Collins

Exeter Road, Chichester

PS: I couldn’t work my FPC into this one! It only does 4mph.