Traffic lights to be switched off in safety experiment

A glimmer of light in our increasingly authoritarian, you-cannot-be-trusted-to-think-for-yourself society: The possibility of the removal of over 100 traffic lights from the heart of London. Whoop!

The Telegraph has this to say: 

While appearing radical, similar initiatives have already been undertaken on the continent. In the Dutch town of Drachten, where many of the lights were stripped out, the number of people injured in accidents fell because road users took greater care. In many towns in the United States, motorists approach four way junctions where there are no lights and have to negotiate priority between themselves.

"We will be creating a bit of indecision in all road users' minds to create a safe environment," said Martin Low, Westminster City Council's head of transportation.

"When lights are out we have noticed that drivers are far more considerate and show more care and attention than they are when they have the reassurance of traffic lights."

"We think there is a huge potential to reduce delay for all road users."

I confess to feeling a little gloomy that not only is a measure such as this described as "appearing radical", but also that a full explanation and illustrative examples to demonstrate its efficacy are apparently required.

Only in a dystopian climate do we doubt that the vast majority of people, if permitted to take full responsibility for their own actions, would do almost anything to avoid mowing pedestrians down, colliding with other vehicles, causing costly damage and generally risking life and limb - the warped logic being, of course, that human beings are a savage and destructive lot requiring ever-increasing control from our morally superior lords and masters, for our own good. 

This initiative also offers the potential for improved travel efficiency - a benefit that Martin Low brings to our attention only after having stated the compelling case for a safer road environment. So, everyone's a winner! Oh no -

The initiative worried Brake, the road safety charity. "We would hope that they have done a full risk assessment before they start taking out lights.

"Their priority should be aimed at making roads safer for walkers and cyclists, rather than making traffic move more quickly."

That'll be "stopping the carnage, caring for the victims" Brake - the hectoring "charity"* whose longevity can, of course, be guaranteed only for as long as we continue to be injured, maimed and killed on the roads.

*Brake is supported by (amongst others) the Department for Transport, the Department of Health, the Office for Criminal Justice Reform, The Scottish Government and the Youth Justice Board, not to mention these "affiliated partners", many of whom have made donations to Brake.

H/T @rogthornhill, who also blogs here, for bringing this to my attention.

One of the best things about blogging is the wider community within which one blogs. Not only have I been provided with really useful information and further reading by one generous blogger I've also been gratified to read Blogdial's excellent posts of this week, covering some of the areas I would love to get my teeth into but simply don't have the energy for at the moment.

So a very quick summary.

Blogdial writes a very important post on social work and child protection; I cannot emphasise this enough. Please read it.

Simon Webb, himself a home educator (and allegedly a close colleague of la Badman, not to mention a "third rate hack" - his words) calls for his masters to "get tough" on the rest of us, especially those who educate autonomously. What Simon appears not to understand is that fighting for anything other than the freedom for all to educate as they choose within the existing legislation (which protects children and parents alike) actually puts him and his family at risk in the future. For those who desire it, there is always a suitable time and place for intelligent debate about people's personal choices -- so let's talk.

Jeremy Yallop soundly refutes Simon Webb's argument in the TES here. Blogdial also takes his arguments apart here. All I would add is that in his desire to impose his narrow and limited worldview on everybody else, Simon does perhaps deserve sympathy. Anyone who so desperately gravitates towards illegitimate power, desiring complete control over other people's futures probably has less power and control than he would like within his own life.

Ed Balls spoke about another pet initiative - the Family Intervention Project - perhaps Ed is finally showing us his sense of humour by satirising his dictatorial tendencies? Quote:

"The British government is to put the more irresponsible families under CCTV supervision in their homes – just to ensure their children attend school, go to bed on time and eat proper meals. Private security guards will also be sent round to carry out home checks, while parents will be given help to combat drug and alcohol addiction, Children’s Secretary Ed Balls says. As per the £400million plans announced, the problem families will be under 24-hour CCTV surveillance."

Working Dad covers it here with additional links, if you can stomach them, but for all of those "nothing to hide, nothing to fear" types: Do not ever assume that the government's ever-expanding definition of "irresponsible" will not extend to cover you. Eventually, it will.

Well, time to enjoy the rest of the weekend. I have a date with my family, a bottle of Gaviscon and several boxes of soap for my sniffing pleasure - my most bizarre craving to date.