£7 billion to tackle congestion
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3053031.stm

Its a lost cause. No matter how many roads we try and build we'll always fall short of demand. Congestion can be sorted in one simple and easy way. Re-test drivers. There are so many people on our roads that are a danger to themselves and others. Get rid of them and at the same time make a real dent in congestion.

Every 5 years re-test people. Make the test more rigourous as their level of experience increases. The test as it stands at the moment is still far too easy. I passed my test 1st time and although I was reasonably competent at doing the manouvres I had no idea how to really drive and survive on the road, There are people on our roads who have been driving for 50 years without any check on their standards.

Now the downsides to re-testing. Well it will increase the workload for the examiners and instructors. But with measures put in place well in advance this downside can be turned into a positive by creating a helluva lot of jobs.

Another downside is less cars will be sold, less insurance will be sold, less road tax, less fuel. So those of us who do drive could be paying abit more because we'll not get as much economy of scale as we do now. Cars shouldn't really cost much more really though since demand for them across europe won't change a whole lot. Having less dangerous drivers on the road would you'd think reduce insurance premiums and if the roads are recieving less traffic you'd think road tax wouldn't neccessarily rise by a massive amount.

The upsides ? Well less dangerous drivers on our roads, massive employment for driving schools, less congestion, less accidents and the knowledge that those who have the privilege of driving on our roads have that privilege because of their ability to drive safely.

I think people in rural areas wouldn't be too happy...

Why though ? all you're doing is re-testing people every 5 years to make sure they are still competent enough to drive. If they fail they shouldn't be driving in the first place and can have no complaint. You'd have to say give people 6 months to resit the test if they failed it before you took their license off them.

You aren't denying anyone the right to drive, you are just making it harder for people who are unsafe on the roads to get away with being a danger to themselves and others. Surely you couldn't argue, okay I'm a terible driver and a real danger to the public but I live in the country where there are no buses so you have to exempt me.

Yes,

but the goverment already gets £38 billion from us car drivers every year anyway. It they'd been keeping the roads upto date in the first place we wouldn't be in this mess now!

No, I guess not, but I do think it would cost a lot of money to people who are good drivers, and you may deprive people of their car who may not be very good drivers, but only drive on quiet roads to get their shopping occasionally when there is hardly any traffic about.

How about retesting people that have been involved in accidents?

People who speed and end up crashing always seem to say they were driving on quiet roads with hardly any other traffic around - they still kill people though :shrug:

Yep sounds good to me. The main thing is to reduce congestion. The current thinking is by making us all pay tolls to enter cities. That will probably work, something which is fine for rich people but will impact on the poorer. Some could argue thats fine. Personally I would rather poor safe drivers on the road than rich crap ones. I think the best way to decide who should be on the road is by their ability to actually drive, not by how much money they have.

Building more roads will never work either, because you can't build more roads in cities where all the traffic is heading. By building bigger motorways you are just moving the trafic jam closer to the city. They need to stop people using their cars, thats the bottom line. What the government want us to do is still buy the car, still insure it, still pay tax, but then never use it. My proposition is that we reduce the number of people who use cars by removing those who are a danger to others and the side affect will be a reduction of accidents on our roads.

Let's give some people the benefit of the doubt. And if you were to retest people involved in accidents, you might get some of these loonies off the road.

I like that thought...

Thought folk might have more views on this really, maybe I just posted it at a bad time. ie when folk aren't at work and looking for an excuse to skive :)

If I get a bit lazy, the bin in my kitchen gets a bit full. Going on this new idea, the way to tackle the problem is to use a bigger bin.....which I will then fill up when I'm feeling lazy....

Hell yeah lets widen the M25, make the 80mph carpark/traffic jam even bigger.

I did also notice that they mentioned widening the A19 in teesside, Now even at the busiest times this road runs perfectly smoothly until some idiot stuffs their car in the ar*e end of the one in front. Then the idiotic rubberneckers balls everything up on the opposite carraigeway.
I dont really see the need to widen the roads, what should be done is finnish ALL roadworks, and only allow work to be carried out at night on the motorways.

How about restricting heavy goods vehicles to night time road use only, That would cut a lot of the peak traffic down.

Educate people on proper motorway driving so that they don't hog the middle lane and thereby cut a 3 lane road down to 2 lane road- that would effectively add another lane to all our motorways-without widening them!

Strictly enforce peak time speed limits (lower ones) to lessen erratic driving (which causes sudden breaking) and hence make traffic flow more smoothly.

My strategy for dealing with the M1 when it's heavy going...

Get in Lane 1 (it's not the slow lane!!), go at 60-65mph and stay there. You can usually undertake a couple of dozen lane-hogging idiots in lanes 2 and 3 before coming up behind a lorry, at which point you slip into lane 2 and then straight back to lane 1.

As long as you're going under 70, and the traffic is very heavy, by my reading of the Highway Code you are 'moving in queues' and therefore not breaking any rules by passing cars on the inside.

Works for me anyway!

To answer someone else's suggestion earlier, I think rotten lane discipline is one of the biggest arguments in favour of re-testing people, or at least introducing a second-stage test, involving m-way driving, before allowing people to drive on the m-ways.

Thats what I do but I think it is illegal:( unless you are passing a 'convoy'. It would be interesting to see it argued in court (I'm not volunteering:D )

Congestion results when the weight of traffic exceeds the capability of the roads to handle it.

Ideally, traffic should flow freely as vehicles enter, use and leave major roads and motorways.

In reality this does not happen because the weight of traffic forces those who wish to get on to the roads to wait on side roads or sliproads building up congestion there.

On the roads or motorways, the weight of traffic forces drivers to drive more slowly or indeed to come to a standstill.

Leaving a major road or a motorway is difficult because the subsidiary roads to which they are linked are not able to cope with the sudden deluge of traffic exiting onto them.

On major roads, congestion is caused by traffic lights and their settings, pedestrian crossings, drivers turning right in narrow roads, on street parking and lack of easily accessible parking space, buses stopping at bus stops blocking through traffic i.e no layby, cyclists unable to keep up with the flow of traffic, bad driving or journey planning, poor traffic management systems etc.

On motorways, congestion is caused mainly by entering and leaving the motorway as congestion on slip roads causes drivers to force their way into the motorway flow which slows to accommodate them. Similarly, there are points where the rate at which traffic exits the motorway is so slow that traffic backs up causing on-motorway congestion.

This too is further complicated by accidents, roadworks and poor road design and is worsened by the fact that often there is not an alternative route for traffic to use to bypass the offending obstacle.

In coming up with solutions to the congestion problems, planners need to take all these factors into consideration and need to plan accordingly.

We need to control not only the amount and pace of traffic on major roads and motorways but also the type of traffic and the conditions under which it is moving. Motorists also need to plan their journeys more carefully so as not to worsen congestion.

Widening motorways, as the government proposes, will concentrate more traffic in the same place and make the congestion worse and allowing traffic to use the hard shoulder will cut off the emergency services access when an accident occurs, making their task impossible and allowing congestion to continue.

I thought they were going to do varible speed limits to slow people down futher up the motorway? This way it kept the traffic moving more freely.:)

As far as I know they can do that now with the overhead speed indicators and by adjusting the settings on traffic lights controlling motorway slip roads to allow only a limited amount of traffic onto the sliproad. Why they need to spend £7 Billion pounds astounds me.

Thats what I thought, I remember they did a test somewere to see if it worked and it showed that if everyone was slowed down to 50Mph people actually got where they were going quicker!! Sounds silly but when people swap lanes at higher speeds other drivers tend to brake causing other drivers to hit the break making a chain reaction of delay. They found this didn't happen and delays eased.

I suppose things never work out as they plan with the great british public.;)

Yes, it works quite successfully on that stretch of the M25 that is already the most congested road in the UK. The caveat of course is that people have to stick to the variable speed limit. There are speed cameras hidden behind some of the overhead gantries on this stretch of motorway, and it is in these specific applications that I think sophisticated speed detection is completely justified. There should be actively used speed cameras on every gantry within a variable speed limit zone, because if people stick to the limits they really do work.

Looks like our discussion has just saved the UK £7 Billion. Do you think we'll qualify for a commission? ;)

I could do with a cut of it, that's for sure ...

There isn't nothing that can't be solved with a good discussion.:) Hmmm why don't they talk things through I wonder? As for speed cameras yes plenty keeps people to the speed limit and below.:) Trouble is odd ones round town tend to get people hit the breaks heavy then the moment they are passed back up to top speed.:(

Perhaps we are more likely to see speed limiters fitted to cars?

I just think all this investment will be like ****ing against the wind. Demand will always exceed supply eventually. It needs something radical. As radical as charging for every mile you drive, but a radical scheme that actually sorts the route cause, re-testing drivers to reduce the amount on our roads and ensure those that do drive are the safer ones, not the richer ones.

Surely though restesting drivers would cost a small fortune and put a huge strain on the Testing Centres? For that matter the majority of those tested may well pass, making it not worth while. If I took my driving test now I'm sure I would pass, how many other peeps would be the same? Taking another test would be just a formality and not cut down the loads of cars needed to make a difference. Fair enough it would weed out the dangerous drivers but I think they could be weeded out by other means.

I read an article ages ago that said most accidents where caused by people who had just past there test and under 25.

What I said in post #13 would buy us a few more years, we need to make better, more intelligent, use of our existing resources.
.....and stop letting in so many more people onto this already crowded island.

you must remember that a lot of this money will be taken up with everyone lining their pockets...by the time they have sold the contracts, then those at the top get their cut, and so it goes on...

Those measures are more realistic.:) Lets face it we need to sort out all this congestion.:) The biggest problem is people use the car to make up time, instead of setting off sooner. Everyone is so agressive on the roads Friday being the worst.

I know someone who goes out at 4-5pm when its mad busy in the car to get a paper.:) We need to change peoples thinking, but alas its all me me me.:(

I don't think it would be a formality. I think essentially what you'd be doing is still costing people money to drive, but costing those who are worst and would take longest to pass their test again more. So you are charging people based on their ability to drive safely on roads. You'd find so many people just found it such an expensive option that they would use public transport of their own accord.

I also think if people knew you'd be constantly re-tested as a driver over the years they may think twice about taking it up in the first place. I would also like to see the test increased in difficulty. It shouldn't be 1 single test. The difficulty of the test should be determind by how long you've been driving. So although its very strict for a first time driver, when that person hits 5 years and sits the re-test the new test should take account of the experience hes had in 5 years and reflect that. Of course it would become complicated as you could have a licence and not drive very much.

I don't really have all the answers considering its a radical approach. But surely restricting the number of cars on the roads on the basis of ability to drive safely is a better way to do it than on the ability to simply pay.

Don't worry, if such a thing ever happened I'm sure the Government would set the fees to ensure the exchequer wasn't left out of pocket.

And as for being sure you would pass ... I watched one of the old Top Gear presenters (can't remember his name - tall, balding, not Jeremy Clarkson) re-sit his test just to see what happened. He failed. I think you might be surprised how many bad habits you have picked up, or techniques you perform so well that you've forgotten they're an automatic fail on a test.

I wonder what the success rate would be if everyone did there test again? LOL I'm sure I would pass again, no doubt I have picked up some bad habits. BUT you go for a drive with my dad and then tell me I would fail. He points out mistakes he's like a bloody examiner.

My instructor when I was learning (12 years ago) told me 2 things which are definitely valid...

1> You learn to pass your test and THEN you learn to drive

2> Never be surprised by ANYTHING you see on the road.

I drive a reasonable amount. A couple of pet hates I have on the road are these

drivers who feel it imperative that they pull out in front of you even though there isn't really enough room, especially when there is nothing behind you for a mile or so, just so they can turn off at the nect junction. This they do in a turning circle which would make a truck driver embarassed even though they drive a fiesta.

Drivers who havent had an eye test since thatcher was prime minister and now have to peer over the steering wheel to see the end of the bonnet

Drivers who, when joining a dual carriageway with hardly any traffic on it, instead of matching speed and filtering in from the sliproad STOP at the end and wait for at least a 1/2 mile gap so they can join.

There is no real need for any of the above, if people were retested then we would end up with more competence on the roads, which would lead to less congestion.

Yep I agree people should have there eyesite tested, that could be a very realistic option popping down the optician or doctors with something they could sign to say yep your still able to see a car.:)

Educating people of there driving faults also works, some people just don't realise how dangerous they are driving.

I have been behind people on slip roads and thought what the hell are you waiting for and then the other extreme of people just driving into the road without making sure the road is clear. Mad habits!!Educated peeps would lead to less road rage and more calmer peeps on the road.