Possibly doing the Valleys properly, plus Cardiff-Swansea , the Vale of Glamorgan, the Ebbw Vale, Maesteg, Penarth and Barry Island branches. We could then have had EMUs for the locals and bi-modes for the Manchesters. But that would have meant the two Governments working together.
The previous poster suggested the money would be better spent on public transport and cycle infrastructure. I was just pointing that a similar sum is being so spent, trains and step-free access being useful to cyclists.
We're getting off-topic for this thread though.
Although if you cancel Heads of Valleys and use the money in YET MORE schemes for the South Wales commuter belt (who already have decent public transport links) then what you do is to further disadvantage all the communities not served by the Valleys Lines or South Wales Mine Line. That's a lot of people. If there's an insistance of non-road then reinstatement of a lot of railway is required, and it would be a lot more than a billion.
The difficulty with cycling infrastructure is 2-fold. (1) Wales is very wet and hilly and (2) journeys are frequently quite long as the employment centres are in the SWML/M4 corridor and that is typically a 25-mile plus trip for many communities.
All fine and dandy. Unfortunately there are some circumstances where driving is essential. The alternative is a return to pre-industrial days where people rarely, if ever, strayed from the locality where they were born and all their needs and requirements were met in that locality. Where some people live there isn't even a doctor's surgery or a dentist within striking distance. Life's not like that any more.
I don't drive very much. I have good public transport where I live and I use it whenever I can. But there are a few journeys I make where driving is essential. Tomorrow, for example, I am attending a funeral and it simply is not possible to get from where I live to the crematorium by public transport. Well that's not quite true. It might be, but it would take the best part of half a day and finish with a taxi ride - and it's less than 40 miles away. From the Crem to the Wake would require a taxi as neither are on any bus routes or near to railway stations and they are just five miles apart. So what do I do - tell the grieving widow whom I have known, along with her late husband, for virtually all their adult lives, that I can't come because I want to help save the planet? 'Fraid not.
The plain fact is that a huge number of people in the UK rely on their cars to get them about. They need them to get to work, to conduct a business, for their leisure and social activities and the little luxuries such as shopping and to attend medical appointments (and funerals). For many there is no practical alternative to driving. I'm not sure if, within your wish to reduce the number of motorists, you include trade people who have to cart tools and materials around. You know, the people who might come and unblock your drains or fit a new kitchen for you.
If you don't have to drive to conduct your life you're lucky (or perhaps not, depending how full your life is). But to simply dismiss motorists as a nuisance shows an amazingly spectacular lack of empathy for the way many people have to conduct their lives.
Yes, I think a lot of greenies quietly hanker for pre-industrial days; this is not unusual, this trend in society has been present for at least 150 years and started as a response to the industrial revolution, especially the building of railways (and the supporting steel and coal industries). See the works of William Morris and Tolkien. (They were the more acceptable faces of the trend; in the early 1900's-1930's there also the eugenicists- many in USA- and not dissimilar to the current "transhumanist" movement in many ways, and authoritarianism has long historical links with greenism so we shouldn't be surprised at any of what we see with these schemes).
Facts of real life are that it's currently very difficult to be carless outside a major city as the infrastructure has for the past 50+ years assumed car use. Even now, services such as local bank branches are being closed. Any solution to reducing car use needs to be rather more sophisticated than merely punishing people for using cars. (It's also surprising how often the, ahem, "car free" brigade rely on those of us with cars for little favours........).
Whilst a William Morris "Road to Nowhere" type community (or indeed Tolkien's Shire) is a very attractive utopia- and if I wished to be transported to a mythical society then that described in "Road to Nowhere" would certainly be near the top of the list- that's what it is, a utopia; and whilst we could learn much from it, equally achieving anything like it would require a LOT of investment and a multi-generational commitment (and probably a significant population reduction too).
Tradespeople: just remember, if there's a ULEZ or parking fee where you live, they just stick it on the bill, so you're paying, not them.
I'm fortunate enough to mainly work remotely and my hobbies involve staying home as I hate travelling. Work trips I bill the customer for the mileage (encourages fewer trips) so a ULEZ won't bother me personally, I'll just put it on the itemised bill with the usual descriptor for the charge line so the customer knows what they are paying for. But as a small business owner I'm conscious of the wider impact- including how much rail organisations rely on car transport!.
I think that some drivers have trouble staying at 20 mph because they are used to a higher gear in urban areas. 20 zones are more comfortable if you train yourself to stick in a lower gear. Not sure how drivers of automatics should adapt their driving technique though…
Depends on the vehicle, as I said upthread, my van will do 20 in 3rd but my car is between 20 and 30 depending on gradient (both diesel).
Its not this type of road or main roads outside of schools that have caused the anger. It 20mph on "main roads". This People in this thread are acting like the average settlement in Wales is a little village with welcome signs where the 20mph section is 300m. In reality most of the 20mph sections on main roads are long and in towns and suburbs. I give examples in posts #141 and #152. It will be even worse in Cardiff, Swansea and Newport. Its a classic example of a top down policy imposed with good intentions and implemented very badly.
Indeed, good summary.
Wonder how many commenters about this are basing comments on the very sanitised BBC coverage, on driving in Cardiff/on M4 only, or on driving around Wales more widely.
There's a lot of positive elements to the 20mph concept, but as I said before, it needed much more intellligent implementation and less authoritarianism.
In countries where there is less car use per head, in general that is achieved by providing good alternatives rather than punishing car use (carrot rather than stick). History warns us about the authoritarianist streak in part of the green movement, due to the badly implemented "green" schemes such as the ULEZ extension and the Wales 20mph limit, there's a much higher chance of a backlash.
TPO
