Rural speed limits a real issue

REARVIEW:SLOWER TRAFFIC means fewer road deaths. That's the core argument from Dublin City Council for the introduction of a 30km/h speed limit. Yet they have singularly failed to demonstrate that city centre crashes contribute significantly to road fatalities compared to suburban and rural roads where limits are wrongly applied. Is this really the most pressing issue for councillors?

The new limit is very useful in one respect: it highlights the fact that control of speed limits rests with local councillors and the blame for the ludicrous and sometimes dangerous limits on non-national roads lies with them.

Yet again it seems that the burden of responsibility for road safety will lie with the motorist. Jaywalking in the city centre seems to go unpunished and drivers regularly have to zig-zag through pedestrians who wander out on the roads. Similarly, motorists must be alert to cyclists who take little or no heed of traffic lights or one-way systems. On Morning Irelandthis week, a council official pointed out that in areas like Temple Bar, the new limit may mean fewer injuries to pedestrians who often have a little too much to drink and who may stray onto the road. Do they not bear any responsibility for their own wellbeing?

Is this really the most important change to our speed limits at a time when limits on many of the nation’s roads are wildly out of line with the reality of their surroundings? Some roads – little more than boreens – have limits of 80km/h, or even 100km/h in some places. For those not familiar with the roads, many consider target speeds to be accurate indicators of the road ahead.

With so few incidents of road deaths in the city centre, it’s going to be easy for councillors to claim the new limit a success. It’s worth remembering that these are the same elected officials responsible for the other limits as well.