closedownarrowlogo-verticalmenu-barsearch Skip to main content

Energy price freeze strikes chord with Tories

Several senior members of the Conservative party feel Ed Miliband’s energy pricing message has touched on an important issue

Ed Miliband’s pledge to freeze prices has caused cross-party debate

Prime Minister David Cameron is believed to be under pressure from members of the Conservative party to address rising energy bills and the dominance of the big six suppliers.

Tim Yeo, MP for South Suffolk and Chairman of the Energy Committee, said Miliband’s pledge to freeze prices had raised a key issue which had clearly resonated with members of the public.

‘Strong focus on how energy bills can be kept down’

“Miliband’s policy certainly does address an area of public concern, though it does it in a way that is counter-productive. I do think it’s quite clearly welcome that there will now be a very strong focus on how energy bills can be kept down,” he said.

“We need to look at the Ofgem regulatory regime and transparency about prices and making energy efficiency a priority.

“There’s a suspicion that the energy companies’ margins have sometimes got wider. I know they will refute that but I don’t think they’ve convinced the public yet about it.”

‘Behaviour of big six hasn’t been entirely admirable’

Speaking on the BBC’s Question Time, Education Secretary Michael Gove, said Labour leader Ed Miliband had done well to raise the point of high prices and suggested energy company’s claims that price freezes would lead to black outs should be taken “with a pinch of salt”.

“He is also I think right to draw attention to the fact that the behaviour of the six power companies hasn’t been entirely admirable ever since they’ve had a chance to be able to play the market in the way they have,” he added.

Labour divided over 2017 price freeze

Former Labour Business Secretary Lord Mandelson has spoken out against Miliband’s proposed price freeze and suggested people might view the move as a step backwards in terms of industrial policy.

“At the business department I tried to move on from the conventional choice in industrial policy between state control and laissez-faire,” he said.

“The industrial activism I developed showed that intervention in the economy – government doing some of the pump-priming of important markets, sectors and technologies – was a sensible approach.”

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg also criticized the pledge saying it could “lead to the lights going out”.

Read more

Labour leader would freeze energy prices for 20 months

 

  • Peter Proctor

    How come these energy companies that are Foreign owned lets their own countries consumers have the same energy at far cheaper prices.. More proof that we are getting ripped off again. What pity they were ever de-nationlised in the first place.. If they made profits then they went back to the consumers.

  • morgantindale

    The Tories and New Labour state that nationalized industries are useless and inefficient and are better served by private enterprise. They seem to forget that some our power is supplied by EDF and others, all state owned by foreign governments, some of our railways and bus services, e.g. Tyne and Wear Metro and Arriva Bus services are operated by Deutschebahn, State owned by Germany. This means that £billions of profits and taxes are disappearing from this country to foreign governments, while we are suffering the Tories austerity programme.

  • Mark Phillips

    Agree with Maxadolf, cap protects high earners with high powered cars. Will like to see how ordinary folk stump up a whole week’s wages in one go. Probably worthwhile not paying and spending a short while at Her Majesty’s Pleasure!

    • Bill Quinlan

      But you will then have a criminal record, I believe. :-(

      • Mark Phillips

        True, but I have one of those anyway (not for anything serious, I might add!!)

  • Darren Bradstock

    Blaming sat navs is a feeble excuse for speeding. You should know the speed limit for the different roads by repeater signs or by the type of road, if not read the Highway Code. This is more a case of the culture in our country of ignoring speed limits and then coming up with some poor excuse when caught.

    • Chris Davison

      Britain should get rid of all non-urban speed limits
      they are unnecessary.

      • Darren Bradstock

        Except most fatal accidents happen on non rural roads. Speed limits are about safety and nothing else.

        • Antique Riced

          Britain should get rid of ALL speed limits. A simple offence of driving inappropriately to the prevailing conditions is all that is necessary, as conditions vary constantly on any stretch of road.

          • Max

            That would be total suicide! There would be a dramatic rise in deaths on the roads! A free reign to travel at speeds of 100mph unchecked on motorways, is the authority’s​ worst nightmare! Would be carnage on the roads! Speed kills! Most People don’t think my friend!!!!

          • peerlessgt

            max, no it wouldn’t this country, despite the apparent craziness on our roads has the second lowest human fatality rate in europe, so I read today. . motorway traffic regularly travels at 80 – 90 mph, with very few incidents.. what makes it all dangerous, is Phones (witness the polish truch driver a few weeks ago) and ‘In Car ‘ distractions. also ,, and this is I think underestimated, boredom. I speak of the ubiquitous roadworks on motorways that go on for years with a 50 limit (camera enforced) to ensure the safety of non-existant ‘workers’ . Having lived in Canada where all non motorway limits are 80 KLIKS, (50 MPH) no restriction has ever been better thought up to induce catatonic boredom. 50 is a stultifying speed. . 60 is better. no the speed limits need to be raised, 85 on dry motorways, 70 in the rain, some stretches up to 90 even. school areas 25 , urban roads 35 to 40 . .and the overhead system of posting temporary limits need to be put into the hands of someone who isn’t a practical joker.
            all these limits were dreamed up in the ’60’s and 70’s when cars had drum brakes , weighed a ton, still had narrow crossply tyres, poor lights and wipers. . modern cars are far more capable than cars of 30 years ago. and the roads system needs to be reconfigured to suit. while we’re at it ban, all car ‘fog lights’ front and rear,(cos people have no clue how to use them) and make instructors teach proper roadcraft, including proper roundabout procedure ( you do realise that you are not expected to stop at roundabouts,? and proper motorway training. do away with prat – navs, and big dash displays that require attention. I could go on, but I won’t …..

          • Max

            Hi driving at 80/90 on the motorways is over the speed limit of 70! The limits are there for good drivers to stick to and there for a reason. There are lunatics who risk driving at 100, they are fools who endanger lives! If you have been at an accident scene as i have (ambulance driver) it’s not great peeling someone off the tarmac!

          • Chris Davison

            The 70 mph speed limit was only imposed after Tabloid Hysteria when AC Cars were observed testing their Le Mans designs on the then new parts of the M1.

            Yet another “knee-jerk” reaction to the “something must be done” brigade (who hsould be totally ignored at all times)

          • Max

            Not surprised Chris, i can give you examples like that, plus a Tornado jet landed on M55 in Lancashire before it was opened! Hysteria reined then! Ha-ha. You have to have limits otherwise people will drive extremely fast, for eg doing 70 in a 30 limit, kids walking home from school, you can guess the next bit! I’m an ex ambulance driver & it’s no fun i can assure you!!

          • ronthedog

            Many excellent points there. The poor use of roundabouts and mis-use of foglights are two of my bugbears. People using foglights in clear conditions or driving at night with sidelights and foglights, which shine as brightly as main beams but don’t dip, instead of switching on the proper headlights which do dip. And as you say, stopping or waiting unnecessarily at roundabouts, as though they believe something has to pass before they’re allowed to move on.

            Well said too about the temporary gantry limits, which are so frequently incorrectly applied that it leads to a “boy who cried wolf” reaction from drivers at times when they are genuinely needed.

          • Richard Lowndes

            This is the most sensible comment I have read on this thread, in every respect.

          • George Smith

            As much as I like to nip on when it is safe to do so, even I would not like to see a carte blanche approach to motorway speed limits. I am however a fan of the variable speed limit concept. But even if the posted allowed speed limit was 100mph on a motorway some balmy summer evening, I would still be sticking to a slower speed that I am much more comfortable driving at. However for a variable system to work it would have to be heavily monitored and the punishments would need to be heavy. For me it should either be penalty points or cash fines, not both. You either take the driver off the road or you hurt him in the pocket. But if they went the way of fines only, it would be seen as just another obvious tax grab on the cash cow that is already the UK motorist. We are too quick to use the words ‘Speed Kills’, of course it does, it’s the nature of the beast when you are in a heavy moving object. There should be more emphasis placed on careless & dangerous driving, and that should include drivers who are totally incapable of driving faster than 40mph on a clear main road. Our roads are already too congested to create mini mobile traffic jams behind drivers who think they are saving the planet by driving ‘oh so cautiously’. Well they’re not, they are just as much a hazard as the speeding driver, because of their inability to look into their rear-view mirror on occasion, and pull over to let the queue of traffic behind them disperse.

          • Max

            100mph you kidding me George, the margins for errors would be very small & everyone would have to keep extra distance, which most people haven’t the foggiest, especially on motorways! One yard per mph, safe following distance, 100 yards away from another driver at 100mph, no-one sticks to that! I trained to be a Driving Instructor so im aware of things! Next time yr on the motorway check out the distances!

          • George Smith

            Hi Max, did you miss my reference to ‘variable’ speed limit? If you thought I meant a constant 100mph speed limit, you totally misinterpreted what I said. My theoretical 100mph maximum speed limit would only be applicable if traffic was very light, and weather & road conditions were excellent. So we are talking about summertime and late evening & early morning motorway driving. This would never apply during busy rush hour periods, or if other factors made it dangerous to do so. That speed limit would intelligently reduce as traffic load increased, and further so if the weather deteriorated. I don’t need to have trained as a Driving Instructor to know that doing 70mph in busy traffic & thick fog, is borderline suicidal. And lets not get onto the subject of ‘safe distances’, because the more distance I leave in front of me, the more cars just to cut in front of me. And that also doesn’t help with the plague of tailgaters, who you have no control over! Everyone is quick to rush in and defend our current speed limits & start quoting the Highway Code, but the traffic police are more than happy to allow traffic to exceed the 70mph speed limit on almost major motorway. Why is that? Every single driver is breaking the law!

          • Max

            Hi George, yes i did read the message variable speed! There are mistakes the authority’s​ make, like leaving 40 limit lights on a motorway up til 2am, & the roads are almost deserted! On the whole they get a lot right! So it’s difficult sometimes, i totally agree there are far too many drivers who break the law or just drive badly tailgaters etc! As an ex ambulance driver i could tell you plenty! Many a time my colleagues have said Can’t you see the BIG sign that says AMBULANCE!!!!

          • ronthedog

            You’re totally correct. Speed should not be the determining factor as to whether an offence was committed. There must be some form of careless or reckless driving to constitute an offence, because basing it on an arbitrary speed limit takes no account of the conditions at the time as relating to traffic volume, weather, road layout and many more variables.

        • peerlessgt

          by ‘non rural’ you mean urban or suburban? I was under the impression that most fatalaties happened out of town..

          • Darren Bradstock

            I meant rural roads, B roads with national speed limit. More chance of dying on those than any other.

        • fof9l

          “Speed limits are about safety and nothing else.”

          Sorry, Darren, but they are not. True concern about safety would produce limits that change with road conditions, time of day, presence or otherwise of schoolchildren, whether it’s raining or sunny – I could go on, but it would get boring. Speed limits as now enforced in this country are principally about revenue raising, and nothing else. You know as well as I do that driving at 39mph in a 40 limit can be stupidly dangerously quick in some circumstances, and too slow in others.

          • Darren Bradstock

            Speed limits vary depending on how many pedestrians are around. They are generally 20 around schools, purely for safety reasons.

          • fof9l

            I have no problem with a limit of 20 around schools during school hours; where I do have a problem, however, is that a driver in a school zone and doing 30mph during the evening in the summer holidays is still leaving himself open to a massive fine and points, for no reason that has anything to do with safety.

        • Chris Davison

          As I said, Darren; NO Limits on NON-URBAN roads
          The Urban roads where the majority of accidents occur would retain a limit and should be actively policed rather than rely on Cameras.

    • Max

      Very true, but i was caught out once, on a dual carriageway 40 limit, but this occasion a camera did me 30 & no signs to warn you of reduced speed, Birmingham A34 heading south into center! Caught loads out! Regards rural roads they are accidents waiting to happen, as stats prove! Drive to the conditions & use your common sense, both of which some drivers are oblivious too!

      • Darren Bradstock

        If there is regular street lights the limit is 30 mph. I expect this was the case. This is why it pays to have good knowledge of the Highway Code.

        • Max

          No Darren it wasn’t, it was on a fast rd, dual carriageway, as i said earlier! Just a trick to catch people, since they have put a sign up 30 limit! You are right regard the street lighting, certain distance apart 30mph! I ought to know i trained as a driving instructor! :)

          • Darren Bradstock

            Im sure you could have contested it if there wasn’t a sign. It’s amazing how many people don’t know speed limits especially national speed limits for different vehicles. I always have to giggle when I see these guys in their custom VW vans unwittingly doing themselves out of 10 mph on the speed limit in these zones.

          • George Hymers

            I’m afraid it isn’t the case about not being any signs. As it stands you are expected to “know” speed limits without signs depending on whether there are street lamps, what vehicle you are driving and what type of road you are on. If there isn’t a sign you should assume it’s 30, if it isn’t 30 I can guarantee that there will be a sign telling you otherwise. I drive for a living and i can honestly say I have not yet come across a road where I wasn’t totally sure of the speed limit.
            If you have street lamps and it’s 40 there will be a sign, if it’s 20 you can be absolutely sure there will be a sign and usually(but not always) a huge 20 painted on the road at the start of the limit, it will be 20 until you are told otherwise, this is actually a common place to slip up because you can miss the 30 sign as they are sometimes quite small. So when you are in a 20 zone you should raise your awareness for the limit change signs, knowing the limits is normally as simple as being aware of what type of road you are on.

          • Darren Bradstock

            I agree with everything you have just said. It goes back to my original point that blaming sat navs for speeding is a poor excuse for bad driving. I drive every day in a car and on a motorcycle and consider myself a good driver as I know the limits without needing to be told plus have full no claims and zero points.

          • George Hymers

            The distance between street lamps showing you the road speed is now old information. The situation as it now stands is… if you can see “regular” street lamps then the limit is 30 unless there is a sign telling you otherwise.

          • Max

            That’s what I said, I know the highway code, some people on here trying to re-invent the wheel excuse the pun! Regards (not you) traveling at 90 on a motorway, & saying that is acceptable, is plain ignorant of the law & dangerous! Most people haven’t got the skills for high speed driving IE safe distances​ in particular!

        • Vincent Dawn

          Except in Milton Keynes, where people drive 30 on 60 (that have constant street lights) roads cause they don’t pay attention to signs.

    • Mark

      Repeater signs?? not all roads have them and some roads change speed limits without warning. Get in the real world and stop acting like you are perfect!

      • Darren Bradstock

        I am perfect. Get a motorcycle license and you will also be perfect.

      • Lee

        If you don’t see a speed sign post, there are other signs that give you an indication of what the speed limits are.

        If you don’t know these, i suggest you go re-read the highway code.

        However, it can be a tricky issue when there is a particular speed limit induced, but an offence on the council part if the sign is covered an motorists are unable to read those signs, but still worth checking your highway code for the other indicators.

  • Carl

    I think it is stupid they are inflicting fines for sat nav usage and rendering them dangerous, the reason for this is they are bringing sat nav usage into standard vehicle driving tests later this year, so what then, this would then make learner drivers targets for the police for a quick on the spot fine. Not only this but if you are being taught and tested on sat nav driving then you are basically being blackmailed into another coffers scheme. shouldn’t the fines be more lenient than a weeks wages tho, ok yes speeding kills but is money really the answer.

    • Max

      You are right Carl! Personally I’d love to see the back of sat navs, we coped before them! It’s called a map & street signs, simple! Huge distraction sat navs & send you down 1 way streets! There would still be mobiles that a friend can use to navigate!!

  • ezrapitt

    This A Hugh money making machine for the government in the name of safety. The government can reduce the speed limited in many ways it they wanted to. like the speeding vehicle registration number flashing across the motor way, closing lanes using cameras to stop speeding vehicles in there tracks and many more ideas. But more fines, prisons, out of work, children into care etc.

  • John Grey

    I get the point about the capping protecting the rich in their high powered super cars but I don’t understand how a government that puts speed limits on roads but allows manufacturers to put stupidly fast cars in the road that are obviously going to break the speed limit. Oh yes Mr Porsche owner I am sure you will always drive according to the speed limit that’s why I bought a Porsche a CLK and Evo. Just goes to show the whole thing is money making con in the name of safety

  • peerlessgt

    What’s the fine if you’re unemployed or retired?

    • Lydia Bloodymarvellous Ivey

      I imagine it will be the same….benefits and pensions are still regarded as incomes x

  • George Smith

    I would consider it perfectly safe to drive at 80 – 90mph on a motorway, when all prevailing factors & conditions allow it. However I would never dream in saying the same about towns & built-up areas.
    We treat a lot of our major road speed limits like we are still driving about in cars made in the 1950’s. And howzabout punishing the huge number of drivers that constantly drive at 40mph in a 60mph zone, etc? They cause long tailbacks and cause other drivers to become frustrated, ultimately forcing them into an ill-thought overtaking manoeuvre. And whilst on the subject of overtaking, I can’t help but notice a large section of the motoring public, just can’t or just won’t overtake that slow driver out in front, who is just holding everyone up!
    So lets see ‘Fines’ & ‘Penalty Points’ for ‘Slowing’ offences.

    • Lee

      60mph is a maximum not a requirement. Just like 30mph is a maximum not a requirement and those that constantly think you need to be driving at these speeds because they think that is the speed you need to be driving at just because it says so on the Speed Sign, or for that matter, when there are no signs, do you even know the speed limits without looking it up in a Highway Code Book.
      As for tailbacks, have you ever seen the caterpillar effect where drivers have no clue how to use there brake pedal and accelerator pedal effectively in a way that doesn’t cause bumper to bumper driving. If there is far too much traffic in a queue behind you then that must mean everyone is driving too fast and too close to each other, which is even worse.
      With regards to overtaking, are you aware of the conditions around you that could involve a dangerous manoeuvre as there are multiple situations that can be the cause of this. Just because someone isn’t driving to the speed limit doesn’t mean they are wrong, it could just be everyone else is driving too fast.

      • George Smith

        Lee, with all respect, you appear to have entirely missed my point! Why would I not want to drive at the posted speed limit? I’m not breaking any laws by doing so, especially when the traffic and weather conditions permit it. But if you are content to spend the majority of your journey stuck behind a slow moving convoy of cars, that are all being held up all because one driver at the front, has decided to drive at 40mph in 60mph zone, then I take my hat off to you. It would be most decent of them, to pull over once in a while, in the same way that other slow moving vehicles are obliged to pull over, to let other drivers get on with their journey at a safe speed they are comfortable with.
        I like to drive at the speed limit, or ‘target’ as you out it, whenever the driving conditions permit, and I am more than happy to follow any other driver, at a safe distance, that is of a similar mind. I am not breaking the law driving in this fashion, and I consider myself much less of a hazard than the driver at the front queue, who is dictating to everyone behind him, the speed at which they should drive at. I also can’t dispute a single word you say, because you are correct in every regard. I would never dream of driving to any ‘speed limit’ when inclement weather or traffic congestion dictated otherwise, I am not a fool! I am merely criticising those who drive significantly below a posted speed limit, when there is no credible reason to do so, other than their own lack of skill or confidence, and by doing so, they deliberately cause a mobile traffic jam. Surely to the heavens, you can’t consider that situation safer than a well spaced out convoy of free flowing traffic, also without the need for anyone performing banzai overtaking manoeuvres?

      • ronthedog

        Your argument is drivel. Obviously if somebody drives twenty miles per hour below the limit there will be many others catching up with them, perfectly legally and safely. And while they have the right the to drive at that speed if they wish, they do not have the right to obstruct others who wish to drive more quickly within the requirements of the law, which many slower drivers do, deliberately and spitefully.

        • Lee

          People sit up my bumper and I’m driving at the limit. I slow down excessively until they get the point and back off. Not to be deliberate or spiteful but because they are driving like complete dicks and need a lesson on safe driving.

          Most people on the road have just about learnt how to manoeuvre a car with no idea of how to actually drive, they just think because they passed there test they know how to drive.

          A few years back me and my partner were witness to a severe accident on the back roads near to where we live. Everyone thought the Subaru Imprezza driver was responsible from what we heard people saying and we corrected them.
          It was actually the White Van man who sped through a Cross Roads at 30mph in a 30 zone and the drivers were trying to blame a ghost driver who never existed. They never realised we were witness to the case.

          The Subaru driver was having a leisurely drive and BAM, Airlift Helicopter, Police, Fire Fighters and Paramedics. The guy was in a bad way in the car, Hemmed in big time by crushed body work and needed to be cut out delicately because of how bad it was.

          Thankfully the guy survived when we found out the results of the court case, but no, driving at the speed limit on todays roads is not acceptable and some serious change needs to occur.

          And that means people need some serious education behind the wheel of there cars as there is a severe lack of driver knowledge and a lack of ability to read the roads in front of there bonnet let alone 50-100 meters up the road.

          So no, not drivel at all.

  • richpig

    MR Smith, have you seen drivers sitting only a few feet from the car in front. Tailgating is an offence. At 30 MPH you should be 6 car lengths from the car in front and 40 MPH you should be 9. As for 90 MPH on motorways people already go faster than this, even in road works when you are instructed to be at 50MPH. I had one only this Sunday (23 Apl 2017) on the A64 speed 70 MPH and he was almost touching my car maybe 2 feet from my rear. as we came to a single track road from a dual carriageway. My grandson was sitting only 8 feet from his car. Until drivers learn to drive correctly it is safer to go slow.

    • Lee

      Don’t forget that it’s even longer when the conditions are wet leading to at least 9 car lengths when at 30 or more if it’s a heavy downpour.

      Tailgaters should be penalised as this is far more dangerous than just speeding alone.

    • James Rennie

      I find sitting im the slow lane on a motorway dangerous. People hogging the middle lane refusing to move into the fast lane while somebody is trying to pull out. 90 in the fast lane is much safer..

      • deltaboy

        We are not mind readers I find indicating tells the guy coming up behind your going to pull out and normally they move into the overtaking lane James Rennie thaere is no such thing as the fast lane

      • Max

        70 is the limit James, you are allowed 10% ie 77. 90 is too fast for our congested roads! How would you explain that to the motorway police?

  • mayday

    Unfortunately I’ll be in the few who agree with the speed limits. Although I do think that more attention should be paid to the dangerous drivers, the ones that cut you up, the ones that tailgate not leaving enough stopping distance dangerous overtaking causing others to break hard, the capability is there and I would bet my bottom dollar this type of driving causes more accidents on the motorways than the speeders on an almost empty motorway
    .

    • James Rennie

      Not to mention old people and women

      • deltaboy

        Funny how my insurance is dropping as I get older I have one speeding fine in 50 years behind the wheel, I had a accident in 1969 not had one since, i find that the motor way is safer, untill you get the moron riding at 90 mph lights flashing for you to get out the way as you are overtaking a slower cars then you get the BMW, Audi, Merc driver who thinks he owns the third lane and dlows the traffic down, strange thing is it is the young drivers, the middle aged drivers who are sat on their phone whislt driving, the main problem is that the police patrols are not as they used to be, no copper stood at side of road with a hand held speed gun and I know more woman that are better drivers than most men.

      • David Waller

        Please continue to do 90 in the fast lane. Hopefully other road users will soon be rid of you!

      • David Heaton

        And young people who think they are invincible.

  • Keith Hampson

    What a load of baloney . The road signs and the highway code and the driving test covers all that is needed to know about speed limits . If you can read GET OFF THE ROAD . Blaming satnavs to me sounds like the daftest idea imaginable . Reciprical licenses are a FARCE is this where these figures come from ? OR is this another ploy to get us to all use the same big brother sat nav . To tell us how to operate on the road. Like driverless cars etc etc etc . They can’t control or stop mobile phone use while driving what bloody hope have they got. Just another TAX ..
    AS to diesel cars . Not so long back the government’s encouraged us to go diesel, BEFORE the tax us of the road the Government and London’s Mayor MUST GET RID of ALL diesel taxis , buses, Trains, and lorries . ONLY the would it be tight to stop out right to drive diesel.
    I bet this doesnt get printed
    R

    • Chris Davison

      And all diesel powered trains, especially those that are left idling for hours at a time in depots.

  • B TJ

    I travel approx 40 miles per day on the M1 during peak times as a vehicle passenger & can fully appreciate just why the motorway sees so many accidents & delays. I frequently see drivers using their mobile phones to talk or text. I have no doubt that many are using Twitter & Facebook too. The in-cab film of a lorry driver using his phone to select music moments before ploughing into the back of a stationary car on the A34 last year killing 4 people is horrendous. I also take great exception to the drivers who complete their entire journey sitting in the middle lane of a motorway. This causes traffic tailbacks as well as anger & frustration.

  • Martin

    The speed limits that are in force have been there since well before the 1940s,

    Please place a 1940s sports car and I dunno a 2010 Dacia and record the stopping distances, YES thinking distance is still an issue, but I’m pretty sure that modern cars stop better than those when the speed limits were put into play

    • Chris Davison

      The only speed limit from “well before the 1940’s” is the 30 mph in “built up areas” introduced in 1930.
      The 70mph limit was not introduced until 1965
      Other speed limits were introduced during the 1973 so-called “Oil crisis” and have been reinterpreted later
      The 20 mph in towns were not generally introduced until after 2008

  • ronthedog

    It’s got nothing to do with protecting high earners, it’s because charging any more for a speeding offence would be grossly unjust, regardless of the wealth of the driver involved.

  • Maxadolf

    The maximum capped fine of, say, a professional footballer earning 100 times more a week, has an insignificant effect on him complying with speed limits in contrast to a driver earning £250 per week having to pay a fine of 1.5 weeks of earnings. In theory it’s all about discouraging speeding. Your argument fails to appreciate this!

  • ronthedog

    That’s what the points/disqualification system is designed to achieve. The notion that there is any sense, or any justice, in fining a footballer, or similarly high earner, perhaps as much as half a million pounds for doing ninety-one miles per hour on a motorway is laughably pathetic and stinks of an envious mindset.

  • Maxadolf

    You keep missing the point! One week’s loss of income provides a common quantum of pain. It has nothing to do with envy. In theory it’s all about providing an equal level of punishment which the capping totally undermines in favour of high earners. Now do you understand? Somehow, I doubt it!

  • ronthedog

    I didn’t miss your point, I contradicted it because it’s stupid.

  • Maxadolf

    Ignorance is bliss!

Categories