New coalition policy – change the law if enough people break it!

Lord Berkeley

The Government plans to increase the speed limit for HGVs on non-motorway roads from 40mph to 50mph. They say that this is because the current limit ‘is broken by about three quarters of HGV drivers’. They also say that the ‘current limit give rise to the untenable position where motorists’ expectation of relatively quick journeys on some rural roads are only being met because HGV drivers are routinely breaking the law’.

What wonderful reasons for ignoring the clear safety benefits of all traffic – motorists as well as HGV drivers – going more slowly! Woe betide those who restrict motorists’ expectations!

But there is also an interesting precedent here. ‘If enough people break the law, we will change the law to accommodate these peoples’ clearly expresses wishes’.

So, for example, if 75% of income tax payers decided to reduce their income tax payments by say 25%, do we assume that this government will immediately change the rates of income tax to accommodate their clearly expressed wishes?

There is an alternative option – enforce the law! If all drivers who exceeded the speed limit were prosecuted, speeds would soon come down and many lives would be saved! The technology is there; clearly the political will of this government is not!

Reference House of Lords Written Answers to Lord Berkeley July/August 2014 HL 1697, 1698 and 1699.

5 comments for “New coalition policy – change the law if enough people break it!

  1. Lord Blagger
    07/09/2014 at 6:30 pm

    So, for example, if 75% of income tax payers decided to reduce their income tax payments by say 25%, do we assume that this government will immediately change the rates of income tax to accommodate their clearly expressed wishes?

    ============

    Too right. It’s called democracy. 75% of tax payers say no, that’s a majority.
    Flippin’ dictators.

  2. maude elwes
    08/09/2014 at 8:27 am

    They, whoever they may be, as they hide very cleverly from us all, are, as usual, lying.

    This move is for big business to be able to ‘force’ their drivers, against their health and safety rights, to move at speeds they cannot ensure will be safe for either themselves or those, sadly, on the same roads with them.

    It’s that simple and all the pretense at it being ‘it’s because they won’t slow down’ is bull. They won’t, or rather can’t slow down, is because if they do they will lose their job as they didn’t reach their destination on time. And of course, in this hire and fire tradition we have adopted from the USA, that is how you get the cargo shipped cheaply so those at the top can have more, more and more.

    Any fool knows what is going on, how is it those in the top drawer here don’t appear to get it? Could it be because they are ‘all in it together,’ and the shareholders, who lurk surreptitiously inside both our Houses, want to see a good return on their investments at any cost?

    I think this article in the Guardian this morning sums it up nicely for me.

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/07/scotland-decides-union-tories

    I wish the English had the same option offered to the Scottish, a separation of the citizen from Westminster control referendum. That would leave these traitorous politicians standing on their own resources and not relying on the people to pay their highly inflated wages. Which, after the election, no matter who wins, will increase whilst ours drop. Just the same way these drivers have had their wage levels reduced to the ridiculous forcing them to make dangerous decisions the way they are.

    Please stop playing games and tell it like it is.

  3. Croft
    08/09/2014 at 2:51 pm

    Not sure this argument holds together. I can think of literally hundreds of laws that have been changed because people were to various degrees ignoring it. Not really new.

  4. MilesJSD
    09/09/2014 at 11:44 am

    The strategic essence that is missing, here and in almost all other avenues of Constitution, Legislation, Regulation and Lifestyling, is :-

    Sustainworthiness.

    How sustainworthy is this Thing,
    and of course therein how sustainworthy is each of its component things ?

    Potholes in the road, for one:
    an Australian study found that potholes are not caused by small vehicles, only aggravated including by pushbikes once started;
    potholes are started by the heavy-vehicles;

    among Australia’s many ‘dirt-roads’ you also see the effect of fast moving heavies at every intersection, where the braking has caused increasingly shuddery humps closely one after another right up to the intersection – and anywhere else along roads especially corners where braking has to be done.

    The faster the heavy, the more potholes and shudder-ripples it initiates.
    ==============
    Turn to Sustainworthiness instead.

  5. maude elwes
    14/09/2014 at 7:04 am

    Returning to the headline of this thread, ‘change the law if enough people break it.’

    Here is a nice little review of our policy makers on how this concept works. It all depends on who is breaking the law and whether they deserve to be shown lenience.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVECo285Q9A

Comments are closed.