20mph online petition

[Tuerto]

So that's a no from you then?

It's a both. I son't know how Devolved Government budgets work, maybe you do, Bit i would be very surprised if money could be taken from one thing to another (From Health to infrastructure) I would have thought that spending is set out and it has to be used on the things it is allocated towards. Unless someone can tell me different.

[xsnaggle]

People stopped walking their dogs during covid (not bullying, genuinely laughing)

If true that must be one weird place, and not like the rest of the UK.

When they first locked down in Northern Italy there was a report that as one of the only reasons they would let people leave to exercise their dog a dog in an apartment block nearly did from exhaustion because it was the only one in the block and all the residents were'borrowing' it to get some fresh air. The poor dog was being walked about 12 hours day.

[Hilts]

The area of Swansea im in is a nightmare.

Signs unclear.

Signs covered in paint.

They need to sort it out.

With the traffic at 20mph definitely finding it easier at junctions pulling out mind.

[JamesWales]

It's a both. I son't know how Devolved Government budgets work, maybe you do, Bit i would be very surprised if money could be taken from one thing to another (From Health to infrastructure) I would have thought that spending is set out and it has to be used on the things it is allocated towards. Unless someone can tell me different.

They can essentially allocate things as they see fit. There are statutory obligations that govts (mainly through councils) have to provide, such as waste collection, education etc so you couldn't cut all funding but within reasonable parameters the Welsh Govt is fit to allocate resources as they see fit.

That's why when the UK govt announces extra funding on some specific health initiative for example, they give a chunk of money to the devolved govts but it doesn't have to be spent on the same thing.

[goats]

They can essentially allocate things as they see fit. There are statutory obligations that govts (mainly through councils) have to provide, such as waste collection, education etc so you couldn't cut all funding but within reasonable parameters the Welsh Govt is fit to allocate resources as they see fit.

That's why when the UK govt announces extra funding on some specific health initiative for example, they give a chunk of money to the devolved govts but it doesn't have to be spent on the same thing.

What was that story a few months ago the WAG had to give Westminster back 180 million or something as they hadn’t managed to spend it in the allotted time given…..you really wonder what goes on behind those doors eh?

[jon1959]

They can essentially allocate things as they see fit. There are statutory obligations that govts (mainly through councils) have to provide, such as waste collection, education etc so you couldn't cut all funding but within reasonable parameters the Welsh Govt is fit to allocate resources as they see fit.

That's why when the UK govt announces extra funding on some specific health initiative for example, they give a chunk of money to the devolved govts but it doesn't have to be spent on the same thing.

There was a lot of finger pointing and stamping of tiny feet on here a few months back when it was ‘revealed’ that the WAG hadn’t used its full NHS funding allocation (under the formula at the time) on the NHS. They had moved some of their health budget into adult social care - to help join up the services and get better value and outcomes from the money available to them. On the face of it that was smart and sensible - but denounced by government ministers on weekend politics talk shows and by the army of Tory cheerleaders on CCMB.

So yes - there is some discretion on how London determined funding is used.

[JamesWales]

There was a lot of finger pointing and stamping of tiny feet on here a few months back when it was ‘revealed’ that the WAG hadn’t used its full NHS funding allocation (under the formula at the time) on the NHS. They had moved some of their health budget into adult social care - to help join up the services and get better value and outcomes from the money available to them. On the face of it that was smart and sensible - but denounced by government ministers on weekend politics talk shows and by the army of Tory cheerleaders on CCMB.

So yes - there is some discretion on how London determined funding is used.

Yeah there is a FullFact thing on it here - refers to Scotland but in this respect it's the same for Wales too.

The WG have a huge say over health expenditure. Not only can they allocate the main WG as they see fit, they can also choose what to do with additional funds that come about as a result of increases in England. They also have more tax raising powers now.

https://fullfact.org/online/scotland...ding-devolved/

[North Cardiff Blue]

Lobby your party in Westminster to provide the funds.

For Drippy to waste on nonsense

[North Cardiff Blue]

It's a both. I son't know how Devolved Government budgets work, maybe you do, Bit i would be very surprised if money could be taken from one thing to another (From Health to infrastructure) I would have thought that spending is set out and it has to be used on the things it is allocated towards. Unless someone can tell me different.

It didn't have to be spent on this nonsense policy, 31 pages and everyone seems to agree because no one has come out and said yes this should be the Welsh government's absolute top priority and was the best use for this money, even though the is the CCFC labour board.

We got there in the end, now how do we overturn it and make sure this never happens again, we are a poor Country and can't afford to be throwing Millions, down the toilet.

[the other bob wilson]

It didn't have to be spent on this nonsense policy, 31 pages and everyone seems to agree because no one has come out and said yes this should be the Welsh government's absolute top priority and was the best use for this money, even though the is the CCFC labour board.

We got there in the end, now how do we overturn it and make sure this never happens again, we are a poor Country and can't afford to be throwing Millions, down the toilet.

I take it ***** (he who cannot be named) board is the Tory one?

[Tuerto]

It didn't have to be spent on this nonsense policy, 31 pages and everyone seems to agree because no one has come out and said yes this should be the Welsh government's absolute top priority and was the best use for this money, even though the is the CCFC labour board.

We got there in the end, now how do we overturn it and make sure this never happens again, we are a poor Country and can't afford to be throwing Millions, down the toilet.

It wasn't 'Absolute Priority' And although i prefer Welsh Labour to Parliamentary Labour, i am no fan of The Labour Party, Believe me.

[North Cardiff Blue]

I take it ***** (he who cannot be named) board is the Tory one?

Yes there is a clear political divide.

Who's the first to say **** off over there then

Probably Sludge or JR.

My job of educating you lot is not finished yet

[TWGL1]

Yes there is a clear political divide.

Who's the first to say **** off over there then

Probably Sludge or JR.

My job of educating you lot is not finished yet

One or two hold a few prejudices as well if you dare to question the official narrative, or sway towards a different political ideology, the last time I looked, I thought All OpiNioNs arE welcomE ….

[79blue]

To put to bed the argument about the effects of an impact at 30mph compared to 20mph we just need to go back to the basic physics. An object moving at a given velocity (speed) will have a kinetic energy (energy due to its mass and motion) as shown below:


Kinetic energy (in joules) = ½ MV2 - where M = mass (kg) and V = velocity (m/s)

30 mph = 13.4 m/s (meters per second) - 20 mph = 8.9 m/s

Weight of average sized car = 1900kg


At 30 mph the kinetic energy of a car is:

0.5 x 1900 x (13.4 x 13.4) = 170,582 J


At 20mph the kinetic energy of a car is

0.5 x 1900 x (8.9 x 8.9) = 72,250 J


That is a percentage difference of 57.6%. Therefore a car striking a pedestrian at 30mph will have more than double the energy of a car travelling at 20mph. This is because the energy is dependant on the square of the speed.

[North Cardiff Blue]

To put to bed the argument about the effects of an impact at 30mph compared to 20mph we just need to go back to the basic physics. An object moving at a given velocity (speed) will have a kinetic energy (energy due to its mass and motion) as shown below:


Kinetic energy (in joules) = ½ MV2 - where M = mass (kg) and V = velocity (m/s)

30 mph = 13.4 m/s (meters per second) - 20 mph = 8.9 m/s

Weight of average sized car = 1900kg


At 30 mph the kinetic energy of a car is:

0.5 x 1900 x (13.4 x 13.4) = 170,582 J


At 20mph the kinetic energy of a car is

0.5 x 1900 x (8.9 x 8.9) = 72,250 J


That is a percentage difference of 57.6%. Therefore a car striking a pedestrian at 30mph will have more than double the energy of a car travelling at 20mph. This is because the energy is dependant on the square of the speed.

My five year old Grandaughter knows that.

You must agree there were better needs for the money

[Rjk]

My five year old Grandaughter knows that.

You must agree there were better needs for the money

it will save money

[Der Kaiser]

My five year old Grandaughter knows that.

You must agree there were better needs for the money

How many goalposts have you got and how many times do they move per day?

[North Cardiff Blue]

How many goalposts have you got and how many times do they move per day?

See no answers just deflection another one must agree the money was wasted, I think that's the lot now

[North Cardiff Blue]

it will save money

So you agree

[Der Kaiser]

See no answers just deflection another one must agree the money was wasted, I think that's the lot now

What's the point of providing answers when the response shifts goalposts or ignores fact. Far more enjoyable to just laugh at you.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

it will save money

Possibly, we'll wait for the accident stats to come out next year before we know for sure. This is undoubtedly going to cost others money.

[79blue]

My five year old Grandaughter knows that.

You must agree there were better needs for the money

The statistics show that 10 lives will be saved per year with this change, but the real cost for the tax payer is for those who are severely injured. This number far exceeds the number of deaths. When considering the cost of road traffic related injuries, it is not just the cost of initial treatment that needs to be considered. The lifetime costs of looking after severely disabled or brain damaged patients and their loss of economic output. In some cases this can run into millions of pounds.

To give an example, though not related to a traffic injury, I will show much my diagnosis of MND has cost myself and the state.

I was diagnosed with MND in May, having experienced the symptoms for 6 months. I have had to spend over £13,000 of my own money to buy equipment that helps my family look after me. This includes a stair lift (which now has be upgraded after only 4 months), a powered arm chair, bathroom rebuild and many other devices. The state has provided me with a hospital bed, hoists, wheelchairs, commodes and a lifting cushion. Next week I am a getting an eye tracking computer system that will allow me to communicate and control my environment (which on its own is about £4,000). I have on average 5 visits per week from different health care professionals and at present I can only travel by ambulance.

This in only 4 months is as you can see a large expense. Now image a young person with a severe brain injury requiring round the clock living for 40+ years. You can easily realise how much cost that impact on the tax payer.

[North Cardiff Blue]

What's the point of providing answers when the response shifts goalposts or ignores fact. Far more enjoyable to just laugh at you.

Not a great deflection, but well done, persistent but can't say the money is better spent on the 20mph fiasco.

Let's close this one down we are all in agreement, this was not the best use of the money and Drakeford should be sacked

[Bobby Dandruff]

The statistics show that 10 lives will be saved per year with this change, but the real cost for the tax payer is for those who are severely injured. This number far exceeds the number of deaths. When considering the cost of road traffic related injuries, it is not just the cost of initial treatment that needs to be considered. The lifetime costs of looking after severely disabled or brain damaged patients and their loss of economic output. In some cases this can run into millions of pounds.

To give an example, though not related to a traffic injury, I will show much my diagnosis of MND has cost myself and the state.

I was diagnosed with MND in May, having experienced the symptoms for 6 months. I have had to spend over £13,000 of my own money to buy equipment that helps my family look after me. This includes a stair lift (which now has be upgraded after only 4 months), a powered arm chair, bathroom rebuild and many other devices. The state has provided me with a hospital bed, hoists, wheelchairs, commodes and a lifting cushion. Next week I am a getting an eye tracking computer system that will allow me to communicate and control my environment (which on its own is about £4,000). I have on average 5 visits per week from different health care professionals and at present I can only travel by ambulance.

This in only 4 months is as you can see a large expense. Now image a young person with a severe brain injury requiring round the clock living for 40+ years. You can easily realise how much cost that impact on the tax payer.

Very sobering.

[North Cardiff Blue]

The statistics show that 10 lives will be saved per year with this change, but the real cost for the tax payer is for those who are severely injured. This number far exceeds the number of deaths. When considering the cost of road traffic related injuries, it is not just the cost of initial treatment that needs to be considered. The lifetime costs of looking after severely disabled or brain damaged patients and their loss of economic output. In some cases this can run into millions of pounds.

To give an example, though not related to a traffic injury, I will show much my diagnosis of MND has cost myself and the state.

I was diagnosed with MND in May, having experienced the symptoms for 6 months. I have had to spend over £13,000 of my own money to buy equipment that helps my family look after me. This includes a stair lift (which now has be upgraded after only 4 months), a powered arm chair, bathroom rebuild and many other devices. The state has provided me with a hospital bed, hoists, wheelchairs, commodes and a lifting cushion. Next week I am a getting an eye tracking computer system that will allow me to communicate and control my environment (which on its own is about £4,000). I have on average 5 visits per week from different health care professionals and at present I can only travel by ambulance.

This in only 4 months is as you can see a large expense. Now image a young person with a severe brain injury requiring round the clock living for 40+ years. You can easily realise how much cost that impact on the tax payer.

All the very best with your treatment, I am glad your family is helping you out and that you are making the most of your difficult circumstances.

We can agree to disagree on the use of the money for speed reduction, I appreciate we are looking at it from different perspectives, I would prefer the money to be spent on people like yourself, rather than wasted on road signs and traffic enforcement, that a large percentage of the population don't agree with and feel is a waste of time.

It's done for now, I'll just have to live with it until the changes back to 30mph are gradually reintroduced to the bigger safer roads away from schools.

Hopefully it will speed up Drakeford's leaving party so it's there is some good that will come from it.