Wed, 22nd July Cardiff 21°
Nation.Cymru wordmark
Advertisement

Opinion

Has the government really rolled out a 'blanket' 20mph speed limit in Wales?

By Emily Price
20mph speed limit sign. Photo Dominic Lipinski PA Images

Emily Price

In the run up to the 20mph default speed limit coming into force in Wales, the Welsh Conservatives have been relentless in their claims that the new road regulation is a 'blanket' limit.

Given the record breaking support of an anti-20mph Senedd petition which has now sky rocketed to over 420,000 signatures, it's clear that opposing the policy could be a vote winner for the Tories.

When referring to the new default speed limit, Welsh Conservative Leader, Andrew RT Davies always characterises it as "blanket 20mph" and even uses the hashtag "blanket" in social media posts.

https://twitter.com/AndrewRTDavies/status/1705286148078141710

Messaging

But is the Tory messaging surrounding the new default speed limit accurate and is the term 'blanket' appropriate? - The short answer is no.

It can be fairly argued that when the Welsh Government trialled a 20mph default speed limit in Buckley between 2021 and 2022, it was most definitely a "blanket" approach.

But during the pilot, the Welsh Government found that changing all 30mph roads to 20mph frankly wouldn't work.

As a result, guidance was strengthened by the Welsh Government when it came to allowing local authorities the flexibility to keep some roads at 30mph where appropriate.

But how do local authorities do this? The key thing to point out here is that legally, local highway authorities are responsible for local roads - the Welsh Government is not.

The Welsh Government can however, change the guidance and this is how the 30mph default speed limit was shifted to 20mph in Wales.

In theory, if a local council wanted to revert every 20mph road back to 30mph, they could and there would be nothing to stop them from doing that in law.

In the past, if a local authority wanted to reduce a speed limit on a road from 30mph to 20mph, they would have to pass a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) which would cost around £15,000 - £20,000 a pop.

[mid-content-banner]

Costly

But changing multiple roads to 20mph by passing lots of separate TRO's would be a really costly and inefficient way to approach road safety.

As a result, the recommendation by the taskforce behind the new default was that this way of doing things needed to be turned on its head whilst allowing councils to effectively "opt out" roads where a 20mph just doesn't make sense.

The issue that local highway authorities have faced during the roll out of the new limit is that some simply haven't consulted properly due to department resources being overstretched.

But there's no time limit in place as to when local authorities can change certain 20mph roads back to 30mph.

There does seem to be different risk appetites for each separate local authority when it comes to deciding which roads should remain at 30mph.

Some councils have chosen to rigidly stick to the exact wording of the Welsh Government guidance - even though there is wiggle room to exempt roads from the default.

A fear has emerged among some councils that if a road were to be changed back to 30mph and there is a death on that road - a council could be legally liable.

However, if there is genuinely a risk of someone being killed on a road - then the speed limit probably shouldn't be 30mph.

Some councils have been fairly bullish with their approach to road exceptions and have chosen to keep all main roads at 30mph.

With the new road regulation still brand new, 20mph guidance is in the early days of being tested by local authorities and changes to 20mph roads will continue for some time during the settling in period.

The Welsh Government has said that in a year, the guidance for local authorities will be reviewed to decide whether the current flexibility is enough for councils.

Roads in Wales at varying stages of exception orders.

Road map

There is already a handy colour coded data map available for the public to check which roads have remained at 30mph.

The map is being constantly updated and also offers information on what stage any given TRO is at.

Stage one of a TRO involves a highway authority preparing draft regulation orders. Stage two is when the length of the proposed speed limit has been finalised and the highway authority has advertised the draft. The public can review these proposals and even leave a comment.

It's worth remembering though that if a local authority decides to revert a 20mph road back to 30mph, this can also be objected to by the public and a council must then decide which speed limit is appropriate.

Stage three of implementing an exception road is when a road consultation has closed and any relevant procedures to deal with objections and sealing the TRO are being undertaken.

The data map shows that so far there are already hundreds of roads in Wales which have remained at 30mph - blowing the Tory argument that the all 30mph roads became 20mph out of the water.

So how is it decided which roads would suit remaining at 30mph?

Exception roads are decided based on how likely it is that pedestrians would cross that road.

This is decided based on the following questions:

  • Is the road within 100 metres of a school or other educational establishment?
  • Is the road within 100 metres of a community centre?
  • Is the road within 100 metres of a hospital?
  • Do residential or retail properties front the road, and exceed 20 properties per kilometre of road (i.e. 5 or more properties every 250 metres of road)?

When it comes to road safety, the Welsh Conservatives have called for "targeted measures" rather than what they describe as a "blanket" approach.

However, with local authorities having the power to keep roads at 30mph where it makes sense, the policy is demonstrably already "targeted".

Attitudes as to how separate Tory Party members decide to describe the new speed limit may be shifting with some MSs recently opting to describe it as a "default" rather than a "blanket" limit.

Could it be that some within the Tory ranks have chosen to no longer take a "blanket" approach when parroting the party lines of their leader?

For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.

Get more trusted Welsh news

Choose Nation.Cymru as a preferred source in Google News to see more of our journalism.

Choose Nation.Cymru as a preferred source in Google News

28 comments

Y Cymro

No they have not. What I can gather is the 20mph default speed limit is in built-up & residential areas throughout Wales. As usual the Welsh Tories are lying. They want to whip up hysteria. In reality this shouldn't be party political as any reduction has been done to save lives, but seeing the Tories favour attacking the most vulnerable in society even our children are not safe thanks to these rightwing loons who are busy going nowhere.

Reply
Fi yn unig

Excellent article spelling out clearly and comprehensively the truth about the 20mph speed limit in Wales. So to the 400,000 (I still don’t believe the figure and smell a Tory rat) who (supposedly) signed the petition, you’ve all been had by a massive misinformation con OR, to frame it in a more kindly fashion to make such gullible souls feel better, you signed a petition to stop a ‘blanket’ speed limit in Wales and you got your way. There is no ‘blanket’ speed limit in Wales (and with the exception of the trial in Bwcle, there never was). This meaningless, null and void petition can now be shredded. The victim signatories who fell for yet another Tory whopper should turn their anger on the RT mob at the next opportunity in the 2026 Senedd election but if that is too long to wait, maybe a petition calling for RT to go would be a better idea given that HE has personally put all our lives at risk by creating confusion on our roads and inciting violent hatred online.

Reply
Tracy lewis

Victim signatories!! Really how small minded. The many thousands of people who have signed this petition are doing so because they to have a valid opinion. That this opinion does not chime with yours makes it no less valid.

Reply
karl

No, but it tells you alot of people are very easily led and probably shouldn't have a license.

Reply
Jeff

Wonder if you can FOI all the back channel chat on this to see how the Cons have tried to use it as a wedge issue, should make interesting reading.

Reply
Annibendod

The ostriches have come out to downvote again. So be it. I won't enjoy saying "told you so" when the time comes.

Reply
Erisian

Tory's trying to play culture wars. They have no more deliverable policies - so it's all just hogwash and dog whistles from now on.

Reply
Hogyn y Gogledd

The only culture the tories know is in a petri dish.

Reply
Steve Woods

And that's because they're feeding (and breeding) off its culture medium.

Reply
Fi yn unig

I don’t get your little dig at me there. What I wrote had nothing to do with voting for parties. It was about RT with his thumbs up next to a petition heading which contained the word ‘blanket’ and hundreds of thousands of people have signed for a lie. If we are expected to take seriously a petition based on fiction, all debate and democracy is dead. I have reflected.

Reply
CapM

The largest % of a constituency who've signed the petition have given a Delyn postcode with nearly 20%. If that's true it's one in five of every adult and child, regardless of age or personal circumstance and whether they can access the online petition or not. Not sure if Rob Roberts the once Tory now Independent MP for Delyn ( he lost the whip when an independent panel found that he had acted inappropriately towards a member of his staff) will reap the reward from those voters worked up about 20mph limits. Maybe if those voters (those who have a right to vote in Delyn) maintain their. worked up state through to next year's? general election.

Reply
Steve A Duggan

Misinformation is what the Tories are good at, they did it with Brexit now here. In Westminster there is apparently a bill making its way through that will make it an offence for a politician to lie - the Senedd needs something similar. These are elected people who should be forced to tell the truth, enough of the lies.

Reply
Windy

Whoever Bill is he’ll have a hell of a job making his way through pestminster with all the crony party in his way

Reply
Steve A Duggan

I didn't say it'll succeed....

Reply
North Wales Yorkie

Get a grip. It's a 10 mph speed reduction in residential areas, not a threat to life. A sense of proportion,

Reply
Max Wallis

The Vale of Glam were worse in declaring not 'main roads' but all A and B roads should be 30mph. A Labour Council trying to sabotage the 20mph law. We've battled against their exceptions because they didn't assess them against the WG criteria, while lying about it. The WG fault is no mechanism for local people to call to account these pompous officials.

Reply
Llyn

From the start it was demonstrably not a "blanket" speed limit. This is clear to all now. But sadly a lie like this that would have been the end of a political career not too long ago, is accepted as normal. This "blanket" nonsense is what Joseph Goebbels would have called a "big lie". Repeat a lie enough and people will believe the liar and not the truth.

Reply
Annibendod

My comments deleted once more. I see. If I say anything against the prevailing narrative, I will be censored. My opinion of this publication to which I have contributed in more ways than one has fallen greatly. How sad that debate and respectful disagreement cannot be sustained here. I shall leave you all to your bubble. I despair of your poor politics. It impacts us all. Misguided, tribal and blinkered. Remember that those whom you insult are voters. Just remember that one fact and there might be hope for you ...

Reply
The Mayor of Mynachlog Ddu

Absolutely agree, very well put and my experiences exactly. This is not the forum for the expressing of fair minded opinions, if they are at odds with the 'group think' here.

Reply
Philip Davies

Slogans like 'Twenty's Plenty' and the ongoing removal from the affected roads of all '30 mph' signs along with the non-erection of any replacement signs to indicate the new speed restriction, on the basis that 20 mph is now to be assumed to generally apply in all built-up areas, certainly qualifies as a 'blanket' application of a 20 mph speed limit. Furthermore, any exceptions are 'opt-out' and not 'opt in', the presumption being for an all-inclusive measure. Typically, our Socialist hegemons in the Senedd are indulging in niggling semantics instead of engaging in honest and open dialogue with their critics.

Reply
CapM

"Furthermore, any exceptions are ‘opt-out’ and not ‘opt in’, " Well yes that's what a default system is and by drawing attention to that it indicates that you must understand that it is not a blanket approach. "presumption being for an all-inclusive measure" I don't think that opinion can be backed up by the facts. The way the system works means that there is a mechanism which local authorities can, by using a legal framework exempt lengths of road they consider should not default to 20mph. And local authorities have used this to make hundreds of such exemptions. That's sensible as it's local authorities and not the Welsh government that have the local knowledge needed to do this. "niggling semantics" is a weak fall back argument being used to defend deliberately misinforming the public. It is an indication of how opponents of a default 20mph limit have so little at their disposal to counter the 20mph default system. .

Reply
Philip Davies

It is of course a good and democratic provision if it is possible for local authorities to address circumstances and requirements in their own constituencies.  Unfortunately. this element of choice is somewhat vitiated by concerns that claims might be made based on the possible legal argument that the lower speed limit could be adduced to impute liability for accidents at the retained higher speed limit. It is this opt-out - which is not pre-emptive - that a Court might find to be presumptive of an intended all-inclusive measure, hence the nervousness of some local Authority lawyers in advising retention of Senedd Authority, which would in this view deflect claims of responsibility from the Authority and on to the Senedd. Authorities in some cases will be unwilling or unable to provide the resources for independent research that could provide evidence in full support and justification of any such unilateral action.  I think these considerations clearly indicate the preferred result of this - effectively - limited choice, which the Senedd intends should generally be made in favour of their blanket (yes) replacement of the previous standard 30 mph provisions by a global change to 20 mph. ('Global' in the context of 30 mph provisions, of course). This opt-out choice offered by a default (yes) system which is neither straightforwardly pre-emptive, nor purely voluntary, in no way demonstrates that the Senedd's hope and expectation has been to make these sweeping traffic-management innovations anything but global - in the context, as noted, of former existing 30 mph provisions - or, in other words, to create the nearest scheme to a blanket provision for a new default speed restriction which they possibly can.  'Hundreds of exemptions' as the Government map shows and that you cite as proof against my claim that this is a global change in the standard lower limit, amount to very little for most of Wales, whereas on the far busier infrastructure of South Wales many exceptions are being sought. One would have thought that more exceptions with reversion to 30 mph would be sensible in rural Wales, whereas the traffic density of the South should universally justify the safety argument for a reduction to 20 mph! That the reverse appears to be the case seems indicative of the dishonest and opaque way in which sweeping change is being forced through.  This is no 'fall-back' argument. I have previously outlined elsewhere in NT a number of the now well-rehearsed counter-arguments which convince me of the known objections to this measure. This present argument specifically addresses my unease at the specious 'politicking' which the Senedd and it's supporters on this measure are now indulging in to attempt to disguise an illiberal and authoritarian measure as a widely popular and welcomed one. They are still trying to dismiss a vociferous and growing chorus of informed and serious objectors, whom the Left - as it always does - has sought to portray and traduce as ignorant and malign persons who are actuated solely by the very worst of motives. But all we get is hostility or deflection or lofty and contemptuous dismissal. Never does the motoring public get a fair hearing. I might claim as justly as you, mutatis mutandis, that the niggling semantics of the defenders of this measure is a weak fall-back argument being used to defend deliberately misinforming the public and that it is an indication of how proponents of a blanket default 20mph limit have so little at their disposal to support that blanket 20mph default system. I will categorically say that the entire exercise is an excessively expensive piece of virtue-signalling, the modelling projections for which are dubious, for the following reasons: The reliability of projections decreases over time, and projections tend to be less reliable in periods of rapid change. Projections for areas with small populations also tend to be less reliable than those for areas with large populations. The last limitation is of particular application here in Wales. This is one Welsh sheep who is not having the wool pulled over his eyes.

Reply

In reply to Philip Davies

CapM

Whatever advice real legal professionals might offer or virtual legal enthusiasts might opine the reality is that every local authority has already made exceptions to the 20mph limit in total numbering many hundreds. If there is an inclination as you say for local authorities not to make more exceptions because they feel they face a risk if something untoward happens then that is an example of them using the 'precautionary principle'. Not something new or unique but an approach that is used in very many real life applications. It looks like your personal preference has fallen foul of it on this particular occasion. . In the end the statistics for collisions in 20mph limits will be determined by physics and biology. Newton's laws of motion and the material composition of vehicles and humans rather than opinion; legal, political, ovine or otherwise.

Reply

In reply to CapM

Philip Davies

I've already said the possibility of exceptions are welcome; I've also said 'hundreds' of them is not so remarkable when we consider that nearly 8000 miles of road is involved (35% of all the roads in Wales), which tends more to indicate the inhibiting factors built into a measure intended to be as sweeping as possible, than any urge towards liberalising an authoritarian approach. Furthermore, the administration of the roll-out has created an unintended imbalance between the needs of rural Wales and those of the South Wales conurbation which has much denser traffic volumes on a more complex road system: Authorities in the busy South where dangers are increased have opted-out a greater number of roads than have Authorities responsible for the vastly more quiet rural conditions across much of the rest of Wales. This is a peculiar application of the precautionary principle in the alleged context of 'safety'. Yet the legal uncertainties are such that some other, less wealthy and more rural Authorities do appear unwilling to challenge ill-considered legal ambiguities, concerning liability, by acting as unilaterally as they might well wish to do. Indeed, it is the case that sweeping measures do tend to be notoriously short on the detail - 'granularity' is the technical term, I believe. I also adduced the likely inadequacy of models in projecting this hugely expensive and problematic scheme. Altogether, and notwithstanding some previous trials that were at best ambiguous in their conclusions, this looks like a giant experiment. The ongoing muddle about signage and any clear way of defining the full extent of 20 mph restriction in the ongoing removal of all signage is further confirmation of this. The whole mess is being more or less made up as we go along! And yet the Senedd has simply doubled-down on a policy they are unwilling to reconsider in any constructive way. You choose to dismiss my considered views airily as merely a 'personal preference', by which I think you mean to say my views are merely based upon an unfounded bias. I have already noted, during this exchange, that I dismiss this typical Leftist tactic of assuming an authority they are incapable of defending otherwise, whereby they simply resort to belittling, ad hominem, the person holding the view they are unable to argue against. How my own view of this issue conflicts with my own argument, is a logical flaw you have yet to demonstrate. Your final attempt at a rejoinder is, frankly, just a pompous absurdity: Simply stating that collisions - presumably involving cars - are dangerous, is a truism that can in no way disqualify the consideration of reasoned opinion on that general truth as it applies in particular cases! It is only the obvious bigotry of your own 'personal preference' which, in your own mind, can possibly justify such a sweeping dismissal of any other possible view of the matter. In this you are of the same ideological mind-set as the Senedd. This collective bubble insulates itself from all criticism and refuses to observe the principles of statecraft, which would actually value the opinions of those who must live in the real world! Your haughty dismissiveness is the very thing that brings you down, fatally exposing once again the overweening arrogance of unchecked Leftist authoritarianism.

Reply

In reply to Philip Davies

CapM

My experience over the past few days is that a large majority of drivers are already complying with the "overweening arrogance of unchecked Leftist authoritarianism".

Reply

In reply to CapM

Philip Davies

How does this alleged compliance of drivers with an unpopular and poorly-thought-through law in any way disprove my contention that it is the product of an “overweening arrogance of unchecked Leftist authoritarianism”? You are mistaking compliance with the law for a widespread and willing adoption of an authoritarian imposition. Protests and a petition belie the smug assumption that everyone shares your support for this radical interference in people's lives. And in any case I defy you to meaningfully categorise or quantify even the insignificant personal sample of motorists you have casually observed: All you have witnessed is that people are still driving, most likely for the simple reason that, however discouraging the Senedd in it's wisdom makes the experience, people in Wales mostly have no adequate transport alternatives to allow them to give up their cars, since Drakeford is presiding over a continuing reduction in the bus services he says he wants us to rely on instead! Oh, I don't give a fig for your experience!

Reply
David C

Stop talking good sense ! You will confuse the simple folk! (Super article, clear, grown up, explanatory and factual. All the things that RT and his crew of plebs don't want for the Welsh people)

Reply
Captain Cat

Own Goal by Welsh Labour, a kind of Karma, note that those it adversely affects most are its voters, Welsh Labour - the Party of Cardiff and the Valleys. It may not be the end, but it may well be the begining of the end, thankfully. The basis of our government being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to kept that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have government without newspapers, or newspapers without government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. — Thomas Jefferson

Reply

Leave a reply

Replying to Steve Woods Cancel

And that's because they're feeding (and breeding) off its culture medium.

Comments are reviewed before they appear.