THE statistics cited by Mr Kay from the 20’s Plenty campaign group are dubious at best and are therefore extremely misleading. I do not dispute the figures provided, just their interpretation.
Firstly, the statistics compare residential roads with main roads and not the same roads pre and post 20mph restrictions which is a plain case of apples and pears. Secondly, they are not factored for the change in traffic use.
There is a decrease in use of residential roads whilst main road use increases.
Further, his use of statistics give the impression that a 20mph limit is solely responsible for the drop in accidents ignoring the national decline. In the last 10 years the number of killed and seriously injured casualties in West Sussex has decreased by 28 per cent overall and for children by 40 per cent.
He quotes Portsmouth as being an example of the benefits of a city-wide 20mph zoning scheme.
The Department of Transport commissioned report on the outcome of Portsmouth’s 20mph limit states that “based on the available data for two years after scheme implementation, casualty benefits greater than the national trend have not been demonstrated”.