petition to increase the speed limit

Just came across this on EMTB forum, increase the speed limit to 20mph.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/332333

It's an old chestnut that has done the rounds on here before, no change will occur as we already have the legislation set in stone by the lawmakers and the EU.

As flecc in the past has mentioned we harmonised with the EU many years ago by raising our 12.5mph speed limit to 15.5mph and allowing 250w to become legal instead of the 200w rating.

Edited July 29, 20205 yr by Nealh

Can't do any harm, vote or not, your decision.

Can't do any harm, vote or not, your decision.

 

But it cannot succeed under any circumstances, so it's pointless.

 

The reason is that there is already the L1e-A class, also bicycle based and allowing a bit more power yet still restricted to 15.5 mph assist and requiring registration, number plate, third party vehicle insurance and compulsory m/c helmet wearing. Obviously there is no way uncontrolled pedelecs will ever be allowed a higher speed limit than those machines, yet without all that bureacracy.

 

And this is the fundamental problem with this petitioning, the public being clueless about all the existing laws surrounding the issue they are tackling. The subject has to be fully known and understood first.

.

But it cannot succeed under any circumstances, so it's pointless

 

That's a pretty depressing outlook [mention=4]flecc[/mention], we do live in a democratic country don't forget!

 

Whilst I agree that change is extremely unlikely, I feel it's important for the cycling "lobby" to make as much noise as possible on as many issues as possible, if only to remind the government that we exist....

That's a pretty depressing outlook [mention=4]flecc[/mention], we do live in a democratic country don't forget!

 

Whilst I agree that change is extremely unlikely, I feel it's important for the cycling "lobby" to make as much noise as possible on as many issues as possible, if only to remind the government that we exist....

 

Not extremely unlikely, it's impossible. If the pedelec law is changed, then so does the L1e-A above it, person A can't be subjected to laws that person B c an ignore. Then the S class and L1e-B above those have to change, then the various motorcycle classes above them.

 

You see it has to be thought through, and if you do that you'll realise that the DfT and parliament will never make such changes since everyone is already taken care of thus:

 

Want more power than a straight pedelec?

 

Lie-A allows you a 1000 watt rating, four times as much.

 

Want more speed but still cycle?

 

The S class registered as L1e-B allows 28 mph assist plus up to 500 watts rating to achieve it.

 

Don't want to pedal ever?

 

The L1e-B Moped class allows 30 mph and 4.5 Kw rating to climb anything.

 

So there you have it, everything we've ever wished for granted already!

 

Trouble is people want to have their cake and eat it, gain all the extras without any of the safety measures like insurance and driving licences, but of course that is never going to happen. Nothing to do with democracy, everything to do with common sense.

 

I feel it's important for the cycling "lobby" to make as much noise as possible on as many issues as possible, if only to remind the government that we exist....

 

You must be joking, the government never stops wittering on about encouraging cycling and has done for many years! They even have their own All Party Parliamentary cycling group and many MPs cycle daily. We've even had at least three cycling Prime Ministers, Sir Alec Douglas-Home, David Cameron and Boris Johnson.

.

Edited July 29, 20205 yr by flecc

Want more power than a straight pedelec?

 

Lie-A allows you a 1000 watt rating, four times as much.

 

Want more speed but still cycle?

 

The S class registered as L1e-B allows 28 mph assist plus up to 500 watts rating to achieve it.

 

Don't want to pedal ever?

 

The L1e-B Moped class allows 30 mph and 4.5 Kw rating to climb anything.

 

.

I don't see why changing the speed to 20mph will affect Lie-A or L1e-B as they are still significantly higher.

I don't see why changing the speed to 20mph will affect Lie-A or L1e-B as they are still significantly higher.

 

No they are not and why I say you need to know the law. The L1e-A assist limit is 15.5 mph, the same as pedelecs, but having much more bureaucracy.

 

Raise the pedelec limit and it means raising the L1e-A one, then in turn the L1e-B to justify their bureacracy. Arbitrarily selected citizens cannot suffer discriminatory laws.

.

Not extremely unlikely, it's impossible. If the pedelec law is changed, then so does the L1e-A above it, person A can't be subjected to laws that person B c an ignore. Then the S class and L1e-B above those have to change, then the various motorcycle classes above them.

 

You see it has to be thought through, and if you do that you'll realise that the DfT and parliament will never make such changes since everyone is already taken care of thus:

 

Want more power than a straight pedelec?

 

Lie-A allows you a 1000 watt rating, four times as much.

 

Want more speed but still cycle?

 

The S class registered as L1e-B allows 28 mph assist plus up to 500 watts rating to achieve it.

 

Don't want to pedal ever?

 

The L1e-B Moped class allows 30 mph and 4.5 Kw rating to climb anything.

 

So there you have it, everything we've ever wished for granted already!

 

Trouble is people want to have their cake and eat it, gain all the extras without any of the safety measures like insurance and driving licences, but of course that is never going to happen. Nothing to do with democracy, everything to do with common sense.

 

 

 

You must be joking, the government never stops wittering on about encouraging cycling and has done for many years! They even have their own All Party Parliamentary cycling group and many MPs cycle daily. We've even had at least three cycling Prime Ministers, Sir Alec Douglas-Home, David Cameron and Boris Johnson.

.

 

I'm not challenging your knowledge of the law in this area [mention=4]flecc[/mention], because it far exceeds mine. What I'm challenging is your use of the word "impossible".

 

Acts of parliament can be (and are) repealed to suit the changing demands of citizens in exactly the same way as governments can (and do) change for the same reason.

 

The point I'm making is that the cycling lobby needs to "get noisy" and make a nuisance of itself at a political level, and there's never been a better time to do it....

I think that 25 kph is a sensible limit anyway. There aren't many people that exceed that average speed on unassisted bicycles, especially when hills are involved, so ebikers are not really being held back compared to them. Compared to motorcyclists, yes, but you always have the option of buying a motorbike if speed is that important to you.

 

It definitely would not be a good idea (and almost certainly illegal?) to exceed 25 kph on most cycle paths.

 

If you really want to be going faster than 25 kph then there is nothing stopping you pedalling a bit harder (unless you have health issues).

I'm not challenging your knowledge of the law in this area [mention=4]flecc[/mention], because it far exceeds mine. What I'm challenging is your use of the word "impossible".

 

Acts of parliament can be (and are) repealed to suit the changing demands of citizens in exactly the same way as governments can (and do) change for the same reason.

 

The point I'm making is that the cycling lobby needs to "get noisy" and make a nuisance of itself at a political level, and there's never been a better time to do it....

 

I have to disagree, it is impossible and I haven't even begun to cover all the reasons why that is. Firstly pedelec law is a de facto international standard, most of the world aligning with ours. Governments and civil services don't rock such boats, they invariably follow the norm rather than take risks, which is why we are where we are now.

 

And why would they even consider duplicating what they already allow as I showed above? They can't on the terms demanded in the petition:

 

They cannot allow pedelec riders to be powered at 20 mph while saying to all others you can't be.

 

They cannot allow pedelec riders to be powered at 20 mph without third party motor vehicle insurance while insisting all others have to have it.

 

They cannot allow pedelec riders to be powered at 20 mph without registration, number plate and traceability while insisting all others have to have them.

 

They cannot allow pedelec riders to be powered at 20 mph without wearing a M/C approved crash helmet while insisting all others have to wear them.

 

But of course, if you and the petitioner really want to be lumbered with all those in addition and kill pedelecs stone dead, by all means go ahead.

 

That's what getting too noisy could achieve, there's plenty of anti-cycling people around who would be very happy for any cyclists suffering more restrictions, those 30 million car drivers who say we should pay road tax for starters.

 

Be careful what you wish for and be thankful for the considerable freedom we have at present. That's the wise thing to do.

.

Edited July 29, 20205 yr by flecc

May I also add that a run through the nightmare we had here over 30 months with a half witted government seemingly determined to have e-bikes classed as mopeds with all the guff that would entail. We got out of it by the skin of our teeth. Give them half a chance to hammer us because of demands for a higher speed limit - no thanks.

Edited July 30, 20205 yr by TedG

That's what getting too noisy could achieve, there's plenty of anti-cycling people around who would be very happy for any cyclists suffering more restrictions, those 30 million car drivers who say we should pay road tax for starters.

 

Be careful what you wish for and be thankful for the considerable freedom we have at present. That's the wise thing to do

 

This strikes me as a sensible viewpoint to take if the country were a sensible place...but sadly it's not.

 

I agree that cyclists and (15.5mph/ 250w) pedelecs have a huge amount of legislative freedom, but the price we pay for that freedom is that we are treated like crap by every other road user, local councils, road planners and central government. Even pedestrians hate us! The reason? Because we've got no voice.

 

The 30 million car drivers you mention aren't all potential adversaries- many (like me) are actually potential allies. How many of those car drivers would use a bicycle if it was a practical and safe alternative?

 

You also mention road tax which leads me to my final (extremely contentious) point. The reason cyclists have no voice is because they don't pay tax. I wonder how many cyclists would be willing to pay a (reasonable) rate of tax if in return they got proper cycle lanes like the Dutch have...

 

We'll only get these things if we shout loudly!

 

Now, please form an orderly (socially distanced) queue to beat me up...!

Increase the speed limit to 20mph and you would probably wipe out any resale value 15.5 mph eBikes currently have. My take on paying "Tax" or Vehicle Exercise Duty is again No. VED is charged based on emissions. My electric car attracts no VED so why should my eBike ?

Increase the speed limit to 20mph and you would probably wipe out any resale value 15.5 mph eBikes currently have. My take on paying "Tax" or Vehicle Exercise Duty is again No. VED is charged based on emissions. My electric car attracts no VED so why should my eBike ?

 

Emissions-based VED is ludicrous and is full of loop-holes. An electric car takes up the same amount of road space and does the same amount of damage to the road surface as an IC car.

 

Paying VED is a bit like having a stake- without it you're not even in the game...

That's a pretty depressing outlook [mention=4]flecc[/mention], we do live in a democratic country don't forget!

 

Whilst I agree that change is extremely unlikely, I feel it's important for the cycling "lobby" to make as much noise as possible on as many issues as possible, if only to remind the government that we exist....

 

Currently lobbying/consultation is not about speed or changing pedelecs/ebike legislation, the current work being done is to change the Highway code and vehicular users thinking to give the vulnerable road user more protection. Hopefully we will see changes that are lawful for us and others to use the roads in a safer manner.

When/if it comes to fruition vulnerable road users will be able to command more of the road in rightful legal manner without so much harassment, having the right of way on any roundabout whether coming from the left or right, the right to command road/lane position at junctions, vehicles not being allowed to left hook riders approaching a turning.

In turn pedestrians will also have more care and thought afforded them by law, all modes of transport to give way to them at road crossings and when turning into a side road.

It is to be recognised a the Hierarchy law and an updated Highway code where the larger vehicle user should concede more to the more vulnerable user.

This strikes me as a sensible viewpoint to take if the country were a sensible place...but sadly it's not.

 

I agree that cyclists and (15.5mph/ 250w) pedelecs have a huge amount of legislative freedom, but the price we pay for that freedom is that we are treated like crap by every other road user, local councils, road planners and central government. Even pedestrians hate us! The reason? Because we've got no voice.

 

The 30 million car drivers you mention aren't all potential adversaries- many (like me) are actually potential allies. How many of those car drivers would use a bicycle if it was a practical and safe alternative?

 

You also mention road tax which leads me to my final (extremely contentious) point. The reason cyclists have no voice is because they don't pay tax. I wonder how many cyclists would be willing to pay a (reasonable) rate of tax if in return they got proper cycle lanes like the Dutch have...

 

We'll only get these things if we shout loudly!

 

Now, please form an orderly (socially distanced) queue to beat me up...!

 

No disagreement, I fully support what you are saying now. Just forget the assist speed limit increase since that is a killer.

 

However no need to pay more or any tax, the Dutch don't and in London car drivers pay for cycling facilities via the congestion charge. That's temporarily £15 a day to give extra for more cycling facilities to support the current Covid expansion of cycling. Other councils all over the country are also doing more for cycling now, so you see it is already happening.

 

But we'll have to wait until many more cycle before we'll get a hugely expensive facilities program like the Dutch one, they never dropped below about half the population cycling daily so easily justifying very big expenditure.

.

An electric car takes up the same amount of road space and does the same amount of damage to the road surface as an IC car.

 

Paying VED is a bit like having a stake- without it you're not even in the game...

 

This is irrelevant since there is no stake for any driver, there is no road tax.

 

VED (excise duty) is funding for the exchequer for any purpose.

.

This is irrelevant since there is no stake for any driver, there is no road tax.

 

VED (excise duty) is funding for the exchequer for any purpose.

.

 

Agreed. The point I was making regarding tax/ VED is that by not paying it, cyclists (and horse riders) are viewed as freeloaders by the average road user.

 

This in turn fuels the belief that they are second-class road users who must stay out of the way of the "proper" vehicles.

I think that 25 kph is a sensible limit anyway. There aren't many people that exceed that average speed on unassisted bicycles, especially when hills are involved, so ebikers are not really being held back compared to them. Compared to motorcyclists, yes, but you always have the option of buying a motorbike if speed is that important to you.

 

It definitely would not be a good idea (and almost certainly illegal?) to exceed 25 kph on most cycle paths.

 

If you really want to be going faster than 25 kph then there is nothing stopping you pedalling a bit harder (unless you have health issues).

 

I'm with you 100%. I don't see any need to increase the assisted speed limit beyond 25kph. It's plenty fast enough. If you want to go faster on two wheels get a speed pedelec or a moped or a motorbike.

Agreed. The point I was making regarding tax/ VED is that by not paying it, cyclists (and horse riders) are viewed as freeloaders by the average road user.

 

This in turn fuels the belief that they are second-class road users who must stay out of the way of the "proper" vehicles.

 

That is changing though, it has changed enormously in London and surroundings since the huge expansion in cycling here since the Millennium. I think you'd probably be surprised by the extent of the courtesy often shown to cyclists now. As cycling expands further it will continue to improve and deaths and injuries also reduce in consequence. Our London record number of deaths in a single year was 22 many years ago when only a quarter as many cycled. Last year it was 13 and has been as low as 8 with some 138 million commuting journeys alone completed each year, without all the other types of cycling, utility, club, Mountain, BMX etc.

 

And of course there's also a benefit to cyclists from all the electric cars we have now, including mine, no longer gassing them or in some cases deafening them as they exert cycling effort.

.

Edited July 29, 20205 yr by flecc

And of course there's also a benefit to cyclists from all the electric cars we have now, including mine, no longer gassing them or in some cases deafening them as they exert cycling effort.

I don't like loud vehicles, but I worry that electric vehicles may become too quiet! My hearing isn't brilliant so there is a risk of me not hearing very quiet cars coming up behind me.

 

Are there any rules forcing manufacturer's to fit warning devices to ensure at least some minimum noise level? A soft hum would probably be enough.

I don't like loud vehicles, but I worry that electric vehicles may become too quiet! My hearing isn't brilliant so there is a risk of me not hearing very quiet cars coming up behind me.

 

Are there any rules forcing manufacturer's to fit warning devices to ensure at least some minimum noise level? A soft hum would probably be enough.

 

Actually louder than a soft hum. There are worldwide rules making them have a pedestrian warning sound all the time with a variation in the UK. That's due to our law that Horns, called in law an audible means of warning of approach, cannot be used betwen 11.15 pm and I think 7.30 am. Of course that also stops e-cars making any approach sound between those times, so ours had to have a stop switch! However from next year that no longer applies and all new ones will have to have unswitched sound.

 

The sound on mine only operates up to 19 mph since above that speed someone will be hit before they hear it anyway unless the noise level is intolerable.

 

In practice a sound isn't necessary for many reasons. All e-car drivers like me are very aware of our silence and take great care to avoid startling anyone on roads and pavements. Pedestrians aren't able to distinguish any one car from the general background vehicle noise. Enough pedestrians jaywalk to make driver ever aware of that happening in urban areas. Many i.c. cars, especially luxury ones, are even more silent that many e-cars. Today's traffic levels mean there's so much traffic noise that its always there.

 

In fact in my third year now of driving my Nissan Leaf I've never had the warning sound switched on and have never found it necessary or got remotely near to any risky situation. My air-con usually makes more noise!

 

In the USA the drivers of the two most popular e-cars there often have them take out the warning sounds fuse to stop it's irritating noise which sounds totally unnatural.

 

And that's the daftest aspect, none of them are remotely car like sounds so no-one is likely to think of them as a car approaching.

.

Edited July 29, 20205 yr by flecc

Now that we are leaving the EU and their beloved level playing field we need to be bold and derive our own rules on Pedelecs etc. Start by scrapping the Pedelec Classes L1e and L1e B that few understand and just have the normal Pedelec , but allow a maximum speed of 20 mph . This would allow the E scooters to be a class below and limit them to 15 mph . Then allow the 50 cc Mopeds to exceed the silly maximum speed of 28 mph and cap it at 40 mph .

We are about to make new laws and have wholesale changes after December 31st, so start as we mean to go on . I have two Classic machines a 1982 Suzuki Roadie 50cc that is restricted to 30 mph which cannot keep up with modern traffic , even in Towns . My other a 1982 Suzuki X7 caused the Law to be changed, as it was too fast for the 250 cc Class . It is capable of 100 mph but I won`t be doing that on it , in 10 years I have not passed 70 mph . Which brings me to the point that just because something like a Pedelec could be designed to reach 20 mph , it doesn`t mean that all Riders are going to be riding everwhere at that speed as some seem to suggest .

The Covid Pandemic and Brexit gives us a perfect opportunity to sort out the Laws on small powered machines and we ought to do it soon .

"flecc,

I think you'd probably be surprised by the extent of the courtesy often shown to cyclists now."

 

Have to wholehearted agree with this comment.

Been cycling for 61 years now and I have seen a marked and distinctly noticeable difference in the amount of space and respect currently being shown to cyclists.

Even after the "lockdown" period when traffic is now building again, when I am following my wife I can see deliberate actions to be patient and to give a decent wide berth.

Very welcome.

Edited July 30, 20205 yr by TedG