Speed Limits: Revised Policy (P.167/2010 3rd Amd.) Comments of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 1 April 2011:

Decision Reference: MD-T-2011-0034
Decision Summary Title :	Comments on the Third Amendment to Speed Limits: Revised Policy (P167/2010)		Date of Decision Summary:	29 March 2011
Decision Summary Author:	Manager – Transport Policy		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Oral		Person Giving Oral Report:	Manager – Transport Policy
Written Report Title :	N/A		Date of Written Report:	N/A
Written Report Author:	N/A		Written Report : Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)	N/A
Subject: Speed Limits: Revised Policy (P167/2010) - Comments on the Third Amendment
Decision(s): The Minister approved the draft comments on the Speed Limits: Revised Policy (P167/2010) as attached and instructed the Chief Officer to arrange for the comments to be presented to the States for consideration during the debate on 05 April 2011.
Reason(s) for Decision: To enable the comments to be presented to the States.
Resource Implications: Officer time at TTS and the Greffe for the preparation and presentation of comments.
Action required: Chief Officer to request the Greffier to arrange for the comments to be presented to the States for consideration during the debate on 05 April 2011.
Signature:		Position:
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Speed Limits: Revised Policy (P.167/2010 3rd Amd.) Comments of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services

STATES OF JERSEY

SPEED LIMITS REVISED POLICY

(P.167/2010) – THIRD AMENDMENT

(P.167/2010 Amd.(3))- COMMENTS

Presented to the States on 01 April 2011

by the Minister for Transport and Technical Services

COMMENTS

Deputy Higgins has proposed that St Aubin’s Inner Road be designated a 25 mph limit between the King George V homes and the St Helier/St Lawrence boundary at Millbrook.

I believe the review group’s recommendations for a system of 20, 30 and 40 mph limits will provide a reasonable balance between mobility and the safety of road users, and provide an understandable and simplified structure. Introducing yet another speed limit level will only serve to confuse the motorist and exacerbate the difficulties of gaining public compliance, which my proposition seeks to address.

The group recommended that urban main roads such as St Aubin’s Inner Road should continue to be subject to a 30mph limit. There is evidence from the review groups’ public consultation that the majority of the public favour a 30 mph limit rather than 20 in the built up area.

In considering one particular road in isolation it is tempting to make an emotional case for a lower limit, on the assumption that if motorists wish to travel faster they can do so elsewhere. There are however many roads of similar character to St Aubin’s Inner Road. Deputy Higgins proposes that the 25 mph limit would apply only to the section within St Helier. However the section of St Aubin’s Road in St Lawrence is of similar character and has a similar accident record. To change at the Parish boundary would be illogical and confusing to the public.

Deputy Higgins’ amendment is a good example of why it is important to consider individual requests for changes to speed limits against an island wide policy. An emotional argument such as the Deputy makes could result in many and varied speed limits across our island to the confusion and frustration of the general public. The main report and proposition considers speed limit policy rather than individual locations and concludes that there is no need for a new 25mph category. I would ask the house to vote against Deputy Higgins’ amendment on that basis.