Nuxx:3c3942b0-dcd7-45a2-bf1a-6c31bcd044f2@f31g2000pri.googlegroups.com

Path: num2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!num1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!number.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!f31g2000pri.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3c3942b0-dcd7-45a2-bf1a-6c31bcd044f2@f31g2000pri.googlegroups.com> From: Nuxx Bar  Newsgroups: uk.rec.cycling,uk.rec.driving Subject: Re: Government Could Raise Speed Limit Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:56:48 -0700 (PDT) References: <1a7ccd90-8c19-4ae0-8dd2-b558e0e59f69@e8g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>   Lines: 23 Organization: http://groups.google.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.71.49.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1300122525 14850 127.0.0.1 (14 Mar 2011 17:08:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 17:08:45 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: f31g2000pri.googlegroups.com; posting-host=82.71.49.124; posting-account=7_6kYAkAAABD6HrjM0VxehwvZOKMxm4g User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Firefox/3.6.15,gzip(gfe) Bytes: 2543 Xref: perfectly-safe.chapmancentral.co.uk uk.rec.cycling:802351

On Mar 14, 4:50=A0pm, Clive George  wrote: > On 14/03/2011 16:44, Jethro wrote: > > >> Transport secretary Philip Hammond is considering raising the motorway > >> speed limit to 80mph in order to shorten journey times and boost the > >> economy. > > > Is it just me, or is this gesture politics of the cynical kind ? > > Not just you. Nice easy way for the minister to get some positive > coverage, and he doesn't have to actually do anything - I rather doubt > he'll go ahead and do it.

You may be right, but why specifically would he not want to go ahead and do it? The majority want it, as you presumably agree by saying "positive coverage". It would indeed boost the economy. So surely it's a "no-brainer"? Yes, he'd have to run the gauntlet of the screeching, dishonest, emotive car-haters pretending it was going to be a safety disaster, but they are not (and never have been) remotely representative of the will of the public. Once it had gone through, it would help the Conservatives, I'm sure. It would also strike a blow for common sense and show the car-haters' true agenda when (surprise surprise) accidents didn't go up as a result.