LIKE so many recent ideas from this beleaguered Government, the plan to reduce many of the nation’s speed limits seems, superficially, seems like a good idea. Speeds kills, so the television advertisements, tell us. Speed uses more fuel, the environmentalist tells. Ergo, less speed must be a good thing.

Well, yes it may be, on certain roads in certain circumstances, but it cannot be appropriate to impose 20mph limits on all urban roads and 50mph limits on all rural roads.

Speeds of 30mph and 60mph are perfectly safe in many town and country areas, depending on the landscape and/or environment.

Local authorities, with the help and advice of local police authorities, have the power to introduce lower speed limits where they see fit. That is surely sufficient power to introduce selective variations to the nationally-set limits.

The danger of the universal lowering of speed limits is increasing the credibility gap between what motorists believe they can get away with and the law. The only way to close that gap is the introduction of more speed cameras and we don’t think anyone would advocate that.

The changes suggested by the Government would also have a disproportionate effect on rural communities. Given the congestion in many of our towns and cities, reductions to the speed limit will not make a great difference to journey times. In country areas, because of the distances involved and the lack of traffic, they will significantly increase the duration of journeys. That is a burden rural areas could do without.