Safe Speed Forums

Thanks for the welcome.

That might be true, but (as you say) it is a different issue. Since you mention it, though, I was under the impression that (as long as one is not a UK resident) it is perfectly legal to drive an imported car for up to 6 months without registering it here, as long as it is legally registered and taxed in the country of origin (?). In which case it would be difficult tell just from looking whether it is being driven illegally...

You're right about there being a 6 month allowance but most of the ones round here have been here for years.

IMO if its being used here it should be taxed, insured, MOTd and registered here. The driver should also have to have a UK licence. (There's also no way of tracing back if it IS legal in its home country)

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

In my experience it is commonplace in public sector organisations but much rarer in the private sector, even where it could be reasonably operated, presumably because bosses fear a loss of control over their staff.

Also, while some people do make a choice to work 7-3 or 10-6, most tend to work something like normal office hours but aim to build up a surplus over time that they can take as flexi leave.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

I'm in favour of VED, insurance and registration, but there obviously needs to be some leeway here - for those who genuinely intend to be here for a short time, for people who aren't sure whether they'll need to register for the long term, and just to give new arrivals a chance to figure out the systems. After that I have no objection to prosecuting people for such things, whether they are immigrants or not (there are plenty of home-grown insurance-dodgers too).

But aren't we getting OT? The point was about congestion, and the fact that it is not caused by immigration.

It probably is to some extent, as if you increase the population without expanding the road network you will end up with more congestion. However I wouldn't say it was the main cause of current congestion, or even a significant cause.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

There's a good page on congestion on the ABD website at:

http://www.abd.org.uk/congestion.htm

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Only if the number of immigrants driving is statistically significant in comparison to the existing population. My suspicion is that so many people drive so much that this is unlikely to be the case.

Oh, and expansion of the road network increases car use, so probably does nothing for congestion.

Welcome to Safespeed.


What "over use" is that then?

Only because they haven't gone far enough with road building. A massive expansion is required to meet the needs of the 21st century.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.

As a blanket statement that is nonsense.

For example, many New Towns have good road networks and never suffer from congestion. Likewise very large numbers of bypasses have been built over the years which have relieved congestion in the bypassed town and are not congested themselves.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

screening from rubberneckers is a good idea, i've been saying it since the age of about 9, no-one listenend to me then either. A light, compact, folded plastic dustsheet with a mild self adhesion would be no bother to a police cruiser.

my rant: stop tesco/saisburys mini/local stores from parking a 40 tonner on the high street in the morning rush hour. there are several of these on my various ways to work and I've been noticing recently they're some of the worst offenders for really inconsiderate parking (thats, blocking the freakin' road for an hour at a busy time.)

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

I would say only half of it was nonsense. Building more roads will increase car use, especially commuting. For me, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, it is time not distance that is the deciding factor as to how far I am prepared to commute. If there are more roads, then I will be be prepared to drive further to work because I can achieve a greater distance in the same time frame.

Where the statement is nonsense is that "it does nothing for congestion". Clearly it does, and if you build enough roads there will be few hold-ups. But personally I only think new roads should be considered where there is congestion for most of the day, and not just at peak times.

_________________
In a former life I was Capri2.8

So when I want go for a drive around Europe I've got to tax and register my car in each country I visit?

But I don't want my beautiful country layered with roads.

I reckon if you magicked away all the cars driven by "immigrants" (take immigrant to mean whatever you want) in tomorrow mornings rush hour you wouldn't notice a blind bit of difference.

Nope, only in the civil service and similarly styled operations.

The problem is that businesses tend to congregate into certain areas (Bath in the case of my GF) and then insist that all employees arrive at 9AM. 9AM is the goal, but the start time is flexible, so traffic levels will rise sharply until 9, then drop suddenly. If you allow flexitime, you'll still have the same number of cars going to work but they will be spread across a greater period of time and thus not getting in each others way so much, therefore everyone can go at a more efficient speed and get to work quicker, which is better for both the environment and for the mental health of the nation. Plus I imagine people spend more money (good for the economy) when they aren't getting home completely exhausted and going straight to bed.

Yeah but what I'm getting as it's not getting rid of any traffic, it's just spreading it out, and possibly increasing it because there is even less scope for car sharing. Although it will reduce the journey times for those who are on the road around 8-8.30am, it will increase it for those around 9am-10.30am, when many light delivery drivers etc are going to be starting their rounds, and when people who don't work a traditional 9-5 venture out.

Flexitime will not solve congestion, it will just shift it around a bit, benefitting a few people but disrupting a few more. Homeworking is obviously much better, but I take the point that it's not always popular with employers and not always suitable.

_________________
In a former life I was Capri2.8

It doesn't have to though, that's my point.

There are solutions.

Well in my opinion we need to spread out the work more. There are too many businesses concentrated in London, and to a lesser extend Manchester and Sheffield and so on. They need to spread out more.

The problem is it's a catch 22 situation. For example if you work in the internet industry, you basically have to live in the London commuter belt because that's where all the work it (or you could live in Sheffield and go and work for PlusNet and hope you don't get made redundant because there'll be no work for you then)

If you're setting up an internet business, you have to set it up in London because that's where all the skilled workers are.


What we need is a greater spread of jobs across the country, which will allow for the skills to spread out too. Perhaps when this is acheived and we have a more even population density going on then people can take jobs closer to home, but in the meantime we need to see the government enabling long commutes to happen as quickly as possible, and providing incentives for companies that re-locate outside of the densest areas as well as subsidised relocation packages for the staff.

This is why I'm advocating flexitime, it makes the commuting more bearable, which in turn will make it easier for companies to relocate because the employees wont object quite so much.

However the other problem is that you can't spread out too much. Because job security is so laughably minimal these days, people are not going to move out to a remote area with only one potential employer. Actually we did that and this is why my GF now has a 90minute commute every sodding day since the job only lasted 2 months after we moved before she got made redundant.

The only other way of reducing congestion is by forcing people to work in the industries present in their area, so if you live in London then you're allowed to be a stockbroker or whatever, and where I live I'd be forced to be an unemployed ex-coal-miner. I couldn't actually be a coal miner of course because it's not green enough. Maybe I could stack shelves at Tesco?


Homeworking does have a significant part to play, but there are many jobs where this is inappropriate. Once again IT is a good example. You'd think it would be an ideal candidate for homeworking, but it isn't, because what happens when the office infrastructure breaks and all your homeworkers can't get into the system. Do you make them wait 90 minutes while the IT person (who also can't get in from home) drives into the office to fix the damn thing? No, you make them stay in the office, and probably end up working overtime to fix it, meanwhile the 3 people they are car sharing with are getting increasingly pissed off because they want to go home and their driver is still working, or someone else is driving and they just decide "sod it, he can get the train home" only there aren't any trains home after 11PM so you're stuck in the office overnight. You tend not to car share after this has happened once.


In short reducing congestion is going to require major social changes to this country and how businesses and industry operate. Simply refusing to build roads and increasing the cost of motoring isn't going to cut it. It's not even a band aid fix to a gaping infected wound, it's more like pouring salt onto it!

Sixy wasn't on about cars visiting another country temporarily, she's on about the very real (at least in her and my parts of the country) problem of people coming over from mainland Europe and bringing their cars with them, which they then drive around in for years without re-registering them, or of UK nationals going over to the mainland to buy a car, and then similarly forgetting to re-register it. When I worked in Slough, I saw the same Lithuanian registered 3-series parked up just down the road from the office every day for at least 2 years...

_________________
Chris

You're probably right! It would be a bit early for the benefit offices to be open...

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus