Mischievous eye

One imagines that, in her letter from the punningly named ‘Sloe Close’, Ms Stewart-Newell was writing with something of a mischievous eye to stirring up a lively response. So let’s try to oblige.

All the arguments in the letter about putting the 20s Plenty campaign on hold until cyclists get a license and pay insurance apply just as much to pedestrians.

So, taking the logic to its conclusion, pedestrians have no rights to consideration on our roads until they get a walking licence and pay a ‘shoe tax’?

I don’t think so. Yes, the poor car driver (and that includes me) may feel overtaxed. Yes, some cyclists are inconsiderate. Maybe, even if I can’t see it, there’s some sense in licensing bicycles.

But none of the above is any reason not to buckle down right now to set a more appropriate speed limit on streets which are daily shared by cars, cyclists and pedestrians, not to mention wheelchairs and mobility scooters.

I’m glad to see Ms Stewart-Newell is of the same mind and that she too ‘can see sense in cars slowing down’. So let’s get on with it.

Bill Sharp

Whyke Lane,