• Alexa@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    The prime minister of the UK everyone, showing the world he is stuck in the 1960’s and that the world was a better place then, when families were strong and white… oh wait a moment l…

  • Mrkawfee@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hopefully this will discredit pro car policies by associating them with cheap populist stunts.

    • AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That and leading Starmer to double down on pro-motorist red-meat policies to appeal to the Daily Mail-reading petrogammon he assumes the English Everyman is.

  • tal@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I can see limiting highly-restrictive speed limits, as there could be a broader public interest outside of the location placing the limit in having traffic moving. Like, when traffic is moving from point A to B to C, B may be on the only route from A to C and not care how long it requires to get from A to C. But B’s restrictions still affect people at A and C.

    But how does limiting traffic cameras make sense? I mean, either you have a speed limit or you don’t. I can’t see a good argument for limiting enforceability of speed limits.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The narrowness and shit parking on most residential streets means you’d be lucky to even reach 20mph, let alone be limited to it.

    And drivers needn’t worry. Councils have barely got the budget for the signs, let alone any enforcement of it.