It's hardly an enviable position, but Britain's transport minister has the power to improve commutes, reduce the rate of traffic fatalities, streamline public transport and reduce emissions.
With our road network pockmarked by potholes, a nationwide upgrade to smart motorways causing lengthy tailbacks and a confused political position preventing a smooth shift to electrification, we ask: what would we do with the authority?
Here's what the Autocar writers would do if they were put in the hot seat for the day:
Matt Prior
Approve a massive transport infrastructure project, making the UK the easiest country in the world to travel around. Approve every bypass currently under consideration.
Commission a new national airport, in the middle of Oxfordshire – an hour from London, an hour from Birmingham, between the M1 and M40, with a new motorway link between the two, which then heads due west into Wales and due east into East Anglia. Modify HS2 to fit it. Make a straight motorway link to the M40 from the M6, to the west of Birmingham, and then from M40 to the south coast.
Install dual carriageway into Cornwall. Make a new motorway from north Wales for Liverpool to Manchester to Leeds to near York and make the A1 a proper motorway all the way to Scotland.
And crucially add a rail line alongside every one of these new or upgraded roads, with regular big, free car parks at stations near towns. And streamline train prices.
Andrew Frankel
If I were transport minister for the day, I would:
Use ‘smart’ motorways to raise speed limits as well as lower them. Create cycle lanes with solid white lines over which neither cars nor bicycles can cross. Lower speed limits to 20mph in all urban residential streets and outside all schools during term time.
Join the debate
Add your comment
Jesus wept:
Jesus wept:
Policy is meant to be evidence based, these solutions are not, might as well have asked some guys in a pub.
A much more valid excersize as proper motoring journalists would have been to explore where UK road policy isn't evidence based and then write on that.
Simple facts are:
1: Road building generally difficult and not popular
2: Government spends on more on rail maintenance/improvement than roads
3: Road pricing would sort out some congestion but is politically unpopular
The simple solution is spend more on roads and price them to control demand the difficult and unaddressed question is how to build a political arguement for this.
Lane discipline, lane
geed wrote:
..flash them with my lights...
Over-cautious drivers?
I'm no fan of the so-called "smart motorways" either, but a white number in a red circle is a speed limit, Rachel Burgess. If a 40 limit appears, as a law-abiding driver, I will obey it. I might swear at it, I might wish to see the idiot who thought it was a good idea sacked, but it is a speed limit. I am not over-cautious, and nor is anyone else who slows down when the law requires it. Forgive me if that's a tad absolutist, but if everyone kept their distance on the motorway, those obeying 40 limits wouldn't cause traffic jams. Do I wish the motorway speed limit was more flexible and sometimes higher than 70? Yes. But it isn't, and until the rules change, I sincerely hope I don't have you driving behind me when I slow down to avoid breaking the law.
TurtleGerald wrote:
Catch the train mate. You have missed her point entirely. As a sentient conscious being....you are empowered to interpret situations and make rational judgements. If Stanislav Petrov was as obtuse in thought as you....this whole discussion, smart motorways and let's face it, both if us would not exist. Be considerate and think for yourself.
TurtleGerald wrote:
Catch the train mate. You have missed her point entirely. As a sentient conscious being....you are empowered to interpret situations and make rational judgements. If Stanislav Petrov was as obtuse in thought as you....this whole discussion, smart motorways and let's face it, both if us would not exist. Be considerate and think for yourself.
Not keen on trains, nor am I obtuse.
I'm sorry you feel this way. I haven't missed her point. Or would you rather I got a speeding fine for passing a 40 limit gantry with a camera at a higher speed? I do think for myself, and without wishing to sound arrogant, you'd be hard-pressed to find a more considerate driver than me. I always leave gaps to let people in and out, I always keep my distance, I don't speed up until someone has passed me to avoid leaving them stuck if they, like me, don't want to break the speed limit... the list goes on. As I said in my post, I don't like these limits at all, I think they're dangerous and ill-advised, but the limit is the limit. If smart motorways functioned properly, nobody should need to drop their speed by more than 10mph for the next limit down the road, but they don't always and sometimes a 40 pops up out of nowhere. I have a PhD in law and will happily debate the merits of the law all day long, but whatever academic discussion there is to be had on the matter, one must respect and obey it in the real world. That is my choice. Thinking for myself, you see.
Also...
I would also just add that rarely, if ever, have I braked to slow for one of these annoying 40 limits. Most of the time there is sufficient room to decelerate, but I still get people overtaking and getting angry. Lorries especially.