BETTER DRIVING SAVES LIVES

The Complete Antidote to Unreasonable Speed Limit Setting
and Heavy-Handed Roads Policing

Introduction

Welcome to the home of common sense road safety – a no-nonsense campaign to counter the woefully simplistic ‘Speed Kills’ mantra with the core proposition that ‘Better Driving Saves Lives‘.

We are troubled by road deaths and injuries caused by careless, dangerous or reckless driving since most of these tragedies are preventable. But we are equally troubled by contemporary enforcement methods which are claimed to prevent crashes but ride roughshod over ‘Policing by Consent’.

Policing By Consent is the cherished principle upon which the British Police Service was founded by Sir Robert Peel back in 1829. Police discretion was welcomed as a defining feature of our British way of life; the British police service was admired and respected throughout the world because of it.

Regrettably, consensual roads policing, a jewel in our national crown, has gradually fallen victim to authoritarian policing methods which are alien to our libertarian culture and sensibilities. It was arch technocrat, the king of authoritarianism Tony Blair who initiated the demise of Policing By Consent.

The Problem

Blair’s way was to prioritise technology over people. On his watch speed cameras became a third-rate subsitute for proper roads policing once carried out by experienced police road traffic officers whose face-to-face engagement with drivers and other road users was firm, fair and even friendly!

Through this policing traditon, decent people respected the police and came to expect fairness in their dealings with them when going about their lawful business. Rogue drivers on the other hand could expect the police to apply the full force of the law against them as appropriate, and even they would usually concede when it was a “fair cop”, In short, the system wasn’t broken.

British people have a visceral sense of fair play and reasonableness, (think cricket for example), whereas speed cameras now criminalise millions of drivers each year who would not otherwise come into contact with policing. No wonder drivers feel affronted and are up in arms

Speed Doesn’t Kill!

Speed ‘per se’ doesnt kill but “speed kills” propaganda that gained traction on Blair’s watch claimed that it did. This claim was then used to justify policing by technology instead of policing by humans. And so, at the stroke of Blairs pen, the death knell of ‘policing by consent’ was sounded.

Without the discretion that police road traffic officers used to have at their disposal, all drivers are now treated exactly the same as the rogue drivers and have had their right to have their mitigation considered by the Police Service or a Jusitce Of The Peace effectively curtailed.

By means of this coercive ‘one-size-fits all’ tyranny which fails to discriminate between drivers and circumstances Blair managed to replace George Dixon with George Orwell. The latter would be staggered by his foresight whereas the former would be turning in his grave!

Make No Mistake, This Is Socialism At Work

Notions of ‘controlling people’ and ‘equal misery for all’ are defining hallmarks of socialism; a realisation that, thankfully, more and more people are waking up to realise.

The enforcement practices described might (just) be tolerable if it wasn’t for the fact crashes are the product of much more than speed in isolation and so speed cameras are just a third-rate proxy for preventing them.

Blair’s wish, nevertheless, was to see speed cameras proliferate. This was naive at best but, at worst. would be consistent with a long-term Fabian agenda to control people and strip them of their rights.

‘Policing by Consent’ would then be a blockage to this agenda and would need to be replaced.

Drivers And Crash Victims Deserve Better

We believe that drivers, crash victims and all other vulnerable road users
deserve better than ineffective, authoritarian, proxy, ‘poundshop policing’ methods.
The time has come for these people to unite around a common cause,

The lucrative industry which Blair established preys indiscriminately on drivers whose only option is to cave in to being controlled a nanny state. It is egregious because speed limits are nowadays set ideologically by politicians with agendas which detract from the road safety imperative.

Our Campaign seeks boldly and unapologetically to address these injustices
by restoring road safety policies and practices to how they once operated pre-Blair
when ‘Policing By Consent’ was considered essential

The Solution / Way Forward

We can win this battle if ‘right of centre’ political parties find the courage to include our

‘Five Reforms For Safer Roads Through Better Driving’

in, first, their Welsh Senedd Election Manifestos for 2026 and, later, their General Election Manifestos for 2029.

The Political Imperative Of Our Time

Every government since Blair, including Conservative Transport Ministers who should have known better, allowed speed cameras to become ever more ubiquitous on their watch rather than challenging the basic premise of whether they needed to be deployed at all.

The reason for this is that most politicians have now been captured by the same socialist / globalist / marxist / progressive liberalist (i.e fascist) EU agenda of which Blair was an exemplar, which is why the Conservatives and Labour are now referred to as ‘the uniparty’.

This has precipitated the fight for our way of life and existence as a country we now find ourselves in given the unbridled authoritarianism that the Fabian Labour Government under Sir Keir Starmer is now pursuing.

The UK voted to leave the EU in 2016 but has yet to reap the benefits of being able to do things our way, in keeping with our own culture and traditions; surely the society our forebears fought for and which we would now want to pass to our children and grandchildren intact.

We view our ‘Five Reforms as one small but significant element in this patriotic fight but we cannot do it alone. All right thinking patriotic citizens therefore must now unite, especially groups opposed to unreasonable speed limit setting, heravy-handed enforcement and state over-reach.

If political parties can find it in themselves to be big enough
and patriotic enough to put the national interest first, and unite around our
comprehensive Road Safety Agenda,
then they will surely win the respect, admiration and votes
of up to thirty five million voting drivers;
-oOo-

The Background: Speed Kills – A Safety Scare That Costs Lives’¹

‘Speed Kills – A Safety Scare That Costs Lives is the apposite title of a book chapter which we summarise later.

It provides valuable insights into how the State works vis a vis how the idea that ‘speed kills’ took hold consistent with the classic ‘Problem-Reaction-Solution‘ playbook.

Problem-Reaction-Solution is the ‘go to’ method for governments when they want impose policies that they know will be unpopular.

It is the means by which they try to forge consensus amongst the general population by first creating a scare and then selling their preferred solution as being for “the greater good.”

They got away with this approach for years until they finally overplayed their hand during the manufactured ‘covid crisis’ and unwittingly woke many people up!

The chapter in question points the finger at speed kills zealot, Richard Brunstrom, former Chief Constable of North Wales Police, and diehard eco-warrior and Guardian columnist, George Monbiot, for setting the scene for a police / public relations disaster through their unbridled enthusiasm for a ‘zero-tolerance’ approach to so-called ‘speeders’.

Sane people tried to warn that their uncompromising stance would not save lives and that respect for law enforcement would be trashed, but those brave and tenacious critics, (the likes of Paul Smith from ‘Safespeed’ and Idris Francis from ‘Fightback With Facts’), became early victims of what we now know as ‘cancel culture’.

These heroes found themselves rounded upon by an establishment that was determined to drive through Blair’s plans, supported by a ‘dodgy dossier’ from the DfT which falsely proclaimed the effectiveness of speed cameras in saving lives.

Unfortunately for the establishment, Smith proved, (and the below video from Top Gear reinforces), that speed cameras do not save lives, they merely catch people breaking speed limits, but Blair pressed ahead with his mission regardless.

Tactic: If You Can’t Win The Argument, Try To Diss Your Opponents!

One tactic used by speed kills enthusiasts was to sow the seeds that all drivers exceeding posted speed limits, however marginally, were

“boy racers” and “anti-social bastards”.

(This designation would apply with wilful disregard to whether speed limits were set rationally or not).

Emboldened by this emotive and derogatory labelling, the State propaganda machine was able to kick in and turn the ‘speed kills’ myth into an othodoxy with the collusion of a compliant, (now increasingly discredited), legacy mainstream media.

If only Smith he had been listened to and respected rather than slagged off and dismissed many more lives might have been saved and we might not be where we are today.

The upshot is that…..

The undue influence of pious zealots like Brunstrom and Monbiot on UK traffic policy
has normalised the lucrative criminalisation, vilification and gaslighting of drivers
on an industrial scale through the implied premise that speed kills ‘per se’, when
even a modicum of thought shows the truth to be much more nuanced.

We Are Neither “Boy Racers” Nor “Anti-Social Bastards!”

Perhaps we need to say at this point that our earnest campaign to spare more people the heartache and misery of being involved in road crashes is neither “pro-speed” nor “anti-enforcement”.

Rather we argue for integrity in both speed limit setting and enforcement which doesn’t criminalise the safe and reasonable majority of drivers; traffic laws which don’t unjustly punish people safely going about their lawful business by giving them a criminal record and emptying their wallets².

Whilst of course we want to see safer roads for everybody, our campaign abhors all forms of divisive authoritariansm characterised by current traffic enforcement methods; coercive, impersonal, technocratic Orwellian practices which have alienated so many and destroyed our all-important social contract with the police and the legal system.

We are in an abusive relationship with the State for sure!

Technocracy – The Enabler of Globalist State Overreach

Blair’s premierships ushered in a new zeitgeist, (a term which refers to “the defining spirit or mood of a particular period of history as shown by the ideas and beliefs of the time“)

This zeitgeist was globalism; the idea of ‘One World Government‘ which Blair was excited about.

Technocracy facilitates globalism which is why Patrick Wood describes it as:

‘The Trojan Horse of the New World Order’³ ,

Question: Why is this important and relevant here?

Answer: Because Tony Blair’s speed camera regime can now be seen in the context of the globalism agenda and understood as a foundational building block in the quest for the technocratic dominance over our lives that authoritarians crave.

We cannot address such issues as the blanket 20mph speed limits in Wales
and other aspects of the war of attrition against drivers and motor vehicles therefore,
without first understanding the globalist agenda behind them
and calling out the politicial parties and other players
that are involved in promoting them.

The Globalist Capture Of Transport Policy Throughout The UK

This campaign sees globalism as ‘the elephant in the room’ since it is ‘hidden in plain sight’ behind most of what we see happenning in our Transport agenda today,

It feels like it is a deliberate quest to villify and demoralise motorists using speed limits and restricted freedom of movement as the weapons of choice until harassed people are eventually ground down and decide to throw in their car keys.

COWDUNG: The Conventional Wisdom Of The Dominant Group

If we did road safety properly, speed cameras would be a rare sight on British roads whereas today they are commonplace.

This is symptomatic of weak Transport Ministers and lazy Civil Service ‘groupthink’ which has resulted in an out of control nanny state dangerously intent on micro-managing driving.

Leading systems thinker, Russ Ackoff, made the general observation that:

“We can do the wrong thing, the wrong thing wronger,
the wrong thing righter or the right thing!”

Regrettably, most political decisions seem to fall into the first three categories, a product of what Professor Conrad Hal Waddington called ‘COWDUNG’: the Conventional Wisdom Of The Dominant Group⁴.

The Road Safety Industrial Complex’ (RSIC) – Purveyors Of Cowdung?

So called ‘Industrial Complexes’ have a decidedly poor reputation in fields as diverse as pharmeceuticals and the military because of their warped decision-making which mostly serves their own interests rather than the good of the people.

What we are calling ‘The Road Safety Industrial Complex’ (RSIC) is an extensive international network road safety organisations, academics, lobby groups and charities, that inexpert Transport Ministers are guided by and seem reluctant to challenge by not being on top of their game.

Withou wishing to take anything away from dedicated and competent people who still exist in the roads safety field, the RSIC as a whole seems prone to being

prime purveyors of globalist propaganda and groupthink
the very COWDUNG which gave rise to the ‘speed kills’ orthodoxy in the first place.

With the often worthy objective of trying to appease everybody, they end up pleasing nobody, or else pleasing only those with the loudest voices or those most aligned with their globalist zeitgeist.

It was under pressure from victims groups saying “isn’t it awful, something must be done” for example, that Tony Blair did away with proper roads policing that had served us so well. Civil Servants from the Department for Transport (DfT); members of the infamous “blob”, readily supported Blair’s speed camera solution instead of cautioning him to:

“Do Whats Right, Not What’s Easy!”

The die having thus been cast, cognitive dissonance within the RSIC community now stands in the way of real progress in reducing crashes as adherents to the “speed kills” orthodoxy seek to find any way open to them to validate their earlier flawed decisions so as not to be the first to break ranks and have to admit they might have got it wrong.

Speed enforcement policy, innocuous though it may seem is thus
an outstanding object lesson in how COWDUNG takes hold and gets locked
in when unelected officials are strong and elected Transport Ministers are weak,
This provides an outstanding opportunity for new political parties as well as
old ones facing extinction to show that they can
rise to the challenge of doing the right thing..

The Speed Enforcement Wrecking Ball

The destructive folly of having speed enforcement as the dominant means of reducing road casualties should by now plain to see.

We explain under ‘Mind Driving‘ the danger of isolating speed in assessing crash risk. Our facile approach to casualty reduction however seems still to be based on the notion that:

“speed enforcement is the answer, now what’s the question?³

By disregarding knowledge and wisdom from experienced ‘Voices of Reason‘ such as those we cite later, Tony Blair was able to hasten the speed camera roll-out.

It now seems likely this ticked several boxes for him as part of a bigger agenda whilst simultaneously being seen as championing the concerns of crash victims and their familes who understandably, yet simplistically, viewed speed enforcement as a panacea.

To paraphrase H.L.Mencken:

“for every complex problem there is a simple solution;
neat, plausible and wrong!”

Controversial Issues and Inconvenient Truths

There were, and continue to be, a raft of unconscionable side-effects arising from the speed camera enforcement regime and digitised adminstrative justice arrangements that support it.

These running sores, (which we explore later under ‘Allied Issues‘), are not going away, especially now as the relentless ‘war of attrition’ on motorists gathers pace, driven by globalist agendas.

Our section headed ‘More On Speed‘ explains several inconvenient truths and paradoxes that seem to have escaped Blair. To attempt to summarise these in one statement:

Travelling at speeds in excess of posted speed limits will often be the safest speeds
at which to travel, and a relatively rare factor in crash causation, (around 3-5%).
It might only become an issue when combined with other factors such as
driver distraction or inattention which, (irony of ironies), increases
when speed limits are set wrongly, forcing people to drive slower than
feels natural to 85% of drivers for the prevailing road conditions
with their eyes fixated on their speedometers
to avoid being snared!

Ask yourself this. Would you still be able to drive safely if your speedometer was broken or covered up? Of course you would! (But not so with your windscreen of course).

Throwing The Baby Out With The Bathwater

Majoring on speed limit enforcement, even if done with the best and purest of intentions, was never going to save as many lives as could have been saved by other methods.

What it did do, unfortunately, was to distract attention from those other methods; things that could have been improved such as better road engineering, better crash analysis and investigation and better driver training and licensing.

What Blair did, in effect, was to throw the baby out with the bathwater when he substituted speed cameras for road traffic patrols.

Instead of the State providing proper levels of funding through better use of existing taxation for tried and tested preventive road safety measures such as those contained in our Five Reforms, speeding fines would now become an open-ended source of new funding, not for such measures but for a whole new, and patently unnecessary, back-office industry.

And so road safety partnerships, ticket offices and speed awareness courses burgeoned with a proportion of the financial surplusses from them funding ever more camera vans and roadside speed cameras.

Blair must have quietly congratulated himself on this stroke of genius as he pressed ahead with his favoured technocratic solution which would now be self-funding, or rather, funded by drivers who the system was designed to ensure would not have a voice.

The lower the speed limits and the more unreasonable drivers felt them to be,
the more drivers would be caught breaking them and so
the more revenue would be generated, plus it could now also be claimed
that the ‘reckless act ‘of exceeding speed limits was growing as a factor
in crash causation as irrational speed limits were set lower and lower
calling for more and more enforcement.
What was not for Blair to like!

A Win/Win Proposition

if it is finally accepted that preventing crashes involves much more than enforcing arbitrary speed limits we believe that crash prevention need not be the ‘zero-sum game’ that it has now become.

Instead it can be a win/win endeavour for all stakeholders, because all stakeholders have a role to play in making for safer roads; not just drivers but all the people who use the roads including pedestrians, horse riders, cyclists, motor cyclists and the wider community working together to share the responsibility.

This can only be achieved if reasonable dialogue is restored;
eschewing aggressive woke anti-car ideology
such that “them and us” can become “WE”
in joint pursuit of the sorts of measures
that do prevent crashes
as contained in our

‘Five Reforms For Safer Roads Through Better Driving’

Trigger Warning For The Anti-Motorist Lobby

The Freedom for Drivers Foundation (FFDF) is a body that aims to educate the public about the benefits of road vehicles. It holds the view that:

“With cars, vans and taxis accounting for 80% of the mileage of all trips in the UK, and over 65% of goods being carried by road, the road network and people who use it are of vital importance to the nation’s economy”.

We therefore agree with FFDF founder, Roger Lawson, when he says:

“It is unfortunate that transport policies in the last few years
have been dominated by anti-car factions
who either hate cars or are cycling fanatics“

Motornormativity! (Yes, Really!)

As noted, Blairs globalist ideals have been perpetuated by weak and lazy Transport Ministers; politicians from all the mainstream parties that succeeded him, and the results are now plain to see.

In Wales for example, the bonkers 20mph blanket speed restrictions are a manifestation of Blairite policy on steroids arising because of the disproportionate influence that people and organisations sympathetic to globalist agendas have had over the Welsh Labour Government.

Such people despise what they disparagingly call “motornormativity” even though viable alternatives to motor vehicles are for the birds, unless of course you want to spend your life imprisoned within the boundaries of one of their “fifteen minute cities”.

Rescinding 20mph Limits

The upshot is that it would be naive for any political party the think that rescinding the blanket 20mph regime in Wales can be achieved without generating a fierce backlash from well-funded activist groups.

One such group is “Twenty’s Plenty’who are gleeful champions of the ‘New World Order’ and whose founder, Rod King MBE, has already suggested that lawfare could be used to keep 20mph in place.

. Our Mission, on the other hand, is:

….to champion the restoration of the ‘Old World Order’
to include restoration of the personalised and effective way
that roads policing used to be udertaken before Tony Blair,
the High Priest of Technocracy, got his hands on the wheel
and the unreasonable demands of globalist lobby groups
were given free rein and allowed to hold far too much sway.

The people have already made up their minds. Governments will need to decide where they stand

Crash Victims Pay The Heaviest Price For The Facile ‘Speed Kills’ Narrative

The people that pay the heaviest price for scaremongering around speed are past, present and future crash victims and their loved ones, with persecuted drivers coming a close second.

People within the DfT with woke agendas act as blockages to worthwhile innovations that challenge their speed kills panacea, thereby ensuring that the right things never get done. A good example of this is that road victims’ charities have campaigned for years to see improvements to the driver licensing system but have so far got nowhere.

It is regrettable therefore that certain organisations purporting to represent crash victims have become complicit with the simplistic ‘speed kills’ narrative rather than being open to challenging it when demanding something better. Our ‘Five Reforms’ should help them enormously.

‘Vision Zero’ – Another Flawed Gimmick?

To pick up on Ackoff’s typology above, by definition,

‘nearly right is always wrong’.

And so we view ‘Vision Zero’, which styles itself as a ‘safe systems’ approach, as the latest iteration of flawed groupthink from the globalist RSIC trying to appease ‘liberal progressive’ lobby groups above the wishes of others; pitching environmentalism and active travel, for example, ahead of road safety concerns and the needs and wishes of drivers. (Think blanket 20mph, Fifteen Minute Cities and ULEZ zones for example).

Whatever merit certain aspects of ‘Vision Zero’ may have, therefore, it will be
forever vulnerable to the suspicion that it is little more than a cunning marketing ploy
designed to advance a globalist agenda for getting motor vehicles off the road,
whilst appearing to be doing something to improve road safety.

Towards A Better Way

Compounding the flawed ‘speed kills’ narrative, ‘Vision Zero’ sets a target for zero road casualties by 2040 – as if nothing whatsoever has been learned about the fallacy of target-setting since Blair introduced this managerialistic concept into the mainstream.

True ‘systems thinking’, (which Vision Zero claims to be), would never entertain target setting for the reduction of road casualties. Instead we should be applying scientific method for the continuous, never-ending improvement of measures of interest whilst understanding the concepts of ‘common cause’ and ‘special cause’ variation and measurement systems such a statistical process control.

The PDSA (Plan, Do, Study, Act) model advanced by Dr W. Edwards Deming³ is a structured, iterative approach for ‘continuous, never-ending improvement’ used to test changes in a process or practice, learn from the results, and then make adjustments to further improve the outcome.

This is now what we should be doing in our quest to reduce crashes – an idea that, unfortunately, seems to be lost on the civil service and most politicians but which is incorporated in our ‘Five Reforms’ proposals.

Libertarianism versus Authoritarianism

Lest we forget, we are descendants of soldiers who fought and died for our freedom from authoritarian regimes in two World Wars; our visceral instincts are forever libertarian.

The remote, impersonal, authoritarian nature of today’s road safety practices are therefore upsetting to the many people affected by them because they do not sit well with traditional libertarian values.

No UK citizen voted to live in a soviet-style surveillance society which uses remote technology to control them, whereas they do accept being policed by sworn, accountable and fair-minded police officers drawn from their own communities, in the best traditions of the British police servce.

The Blair-inspired technocratic policing approach, (‘poundshop policing’ as we have called it) sees every motorist as an enemy to be controlled. Yet the drivers Blair seemed happy to casually alienate are integral to the road safety system itself and, as such, are the very people we should be trying to keep ‘on side’ to help us prevent crashes, and become proud role models for others in doing so. In contrast, the prevalent attitude towards drivers feels to them like:

“the beatings will continue until the roads become safer”

It is precisely this approach that Britain’s thirty-five million voting drivers are up in arms about, not just because it is patently unfair and unjust because they know instinctively there are much better ways to make the roads safer such as those we set out in our ‘Five Reforms’,

We trust, therefore that politicians will give serious consideration to their plight and that of the crash victims, not least to secure millions of votes. The 2026 Senedd elections in Wales provide an opportunities to demonstrate true leadership and win back respect for the political process.

The Fundamental Principle For Parties To Sign Up To

A breakthrough will be achieved only when fearless politicians are willing reclaim a fundamental libertarian principle of British law that we used to take for granted, namely that:

“The Safe And Reasonable Actions
Of The Majority Of Drivers
Should Be Legal”

This principle, articulated by the fore-mentioned Canadian road safety organisation Sense BC, (Safety Through Education Not Enforcement)² provides the foundation upon which our Five Reforms now sit.

Amongst many collateral benefits, the principle encourages restoration of personal responsibilty in driving and will facilitate the transformation of a blame culture into a learning culture.

Where Do You Stand?

If, as a prospective Transport Minister, you or your party disagree with this Fundamental Principle, then this is tantamount to you saying that:

“The Safe And Reasonable Actions
Of The Majority Of Drivers
Should Be illegal!”.

Really?

As a political candidate seeking election to represent fellow human beings, would you really feel comfortable standing in front them at a hustings arguing in favour of the above position, because that is the authoritarion positio you would be taking if you continue to acquiesce in the status quo.

Drivers are crying out for you
to champion something better
Your leadership is required!

_{Speed Camera money machine laying in wait in a layby to catch drivers behaving safely and reasonably whilst going about their
lawful business. Someone please explain to me how this is ‘proper policing’ not ‘pound shop’ policing.}

The Only Reasonable Conclusion Is That We Are All Being Played!

The conclusion that people come to is that contemporary roads policing has
little to do with road safety and everything to do with extorting money from drivers
to fund policing on the cheap. Yet our taxes have risen relentlessly
and eye-watering sums can be found for vanity projects and wars
rather than essential services like the “Three E’s” of road safety
that people actually want, which would include
putting road traffic police back on the road.

Back To The Future – The Three Es Approach

We want to see the return of critical thinking in road safety matters through the restoration of the tried-and-tested “Three Es” approach which once served us well. This comprised:

Engineering and Education as a first resort
with Enforcement as a last resort
(except for the rogue drivers)

Testimony to this approach can be found under our “Voices of Reason” page citing the road engineers, policemen, driving instructors and other professionals who practiced these methods.

These were the grown-ups in the room back in the day before Blair-era changes undermined them.

Their methods were evidence-based, rational, effective and, we believe, they deserve to be listened to again.

Crash rates which had been falling year on year using their methods
suddenly flatlined for a decade with the removal of police patrols
and the substitution of speed cameras

In the woke, upside down world we now inhabit, Enforcement of technical breaches of arbitrarily-set speed limits has now become the first resort, whilst the bare minimum amount of ‘Engineering’ and ‘Education’ work seems to be done to actually prevent crashes.

Our Five Reforms For Safer Roads Through Better Driving

Our ‘Five Reforms For Safer Roads Through Better Driving’ will restore sanity to a situation which is now hopelessly adrift. They will achieve this by:

1. Restoring Reasonable Discretion to enforcement and prosecution decisions
   
2. Putting Thinking Skills at the heart of Driver Training and Licensing system to make it finally fit for purpose.
   
3. Reinstating Police Road Traffic Patrols which Blair sacrificed on the alter of technocracy to target, in particular, rogue drivers who are the real “anti-social bastards in our midst” (to quote Monbiot)
   
4. Restoring Sensible Speed Limit Setting to be carried out by non-woke, non-conflicted Road Engineers, (i.e. not Politicians), using the time-honoured ’85th Percentile Principle’.
   
5. Engaging Communites to inspire a National Culture of Safer Driving

The above policies are honest and straightforward measures to be implemented as a package.
They are driven by rationality and common sense, not woke ideology,
AND THEY WILL SAVE LIVES.

Welcoming Roads

A timely initiative called ‘Welcoming Roads’ led by the Motorcycle Action Group (MAG) complements our Five Reforms by challenging the largely divisive ‘Vision Zero’ / Sustrans cult which is holding back progress because of its ideological disdain for all things motorised in an obsessive quest for active travel.

We have no issue with encouraging active travel in principle, but would want to explore
better ways to achieve it in practice that do not create winners and losers.

The Essential Return To First Principles

No responsible citizens in a free society, (like the little old lady in the Top Gear video), should become victims of a nanny-state or suffer stress through institutionalised coercion and bullying as they currenty face simply for going about their lawful business safely and innocently.

If some need to become better drivers let’s identify and help them. We therefore look to politicians elected to serve the people to muster the courage to speak up for their fellow citizens and support the ‘Fundamental Principle’ that:

“The Safe and Reasonable Actions
Of The Majority Of Drivers
Should Be Legal”

Then, and only then, can we put in place a comprehensive package of road safety measures that will bring the misguided ‘blame culture’ regime to an end; a genuine alternative for reducing road casualties which restores faith, goodwill and the all-important consent needed from safe and reasonable drivers.

Wanted: Knowledgable, Proactive and Engaged Transport Secretaries

For far too long successive Secretaries of State for Transport and their Ministers have been asleep at the wheel. The frequent turnover of postholders is lamentable, their hands-off approach regrettable and their tendency to listen to woke Civil Servants captured by the Road Safety Industrial Complex unfortunate.

The upshot is that power and direction for transport policy has been ceded to an unelected cabal of civil servants, academics and quangos promoting woke agendas whilst weak Ministers have apparantly swallowed their COWDUNG whole whilst merely keeping the Transport seat warm.

We can no longer tolerate our road safety agenda being dictated by unelected, authoritarian ‘speed kills’ zealots and diehard eco-warriors; globalist sympathisers who have gained way too much power and influence, (albeit, usefully, they have now overplayed their hand).

Thankfully it is finally being recognised in the polling booths that the era of Ministers being hands-off cannot contunue because the wishes of the people who elect them can no longer be ignored.

A Glimmer Of Hope From The Current UK Transport Secretary

Roger Lawson, founder of the Freedom For Drivers Foundation notes that:

“It is deeply regrettable that politicians seem to grab at the simple, if expensive solutions, as a quick fix or panacea to road safety problems. In reality, the issues are often complex and expert advice is often ignored in the search for a simple solution. The law of unintended consequences also applies – for example speed humps can actually cause accidents and have certainly increased air pollution substantially”.

In light of the above, Heidi Alexander, the Labour Party’s UK Transport Secretary gave what can only be described as a refreshing television interview in May 2025 in which she declared that:

“One of the things we shouldn’t be doing is
penalising people behaving responsibly”,

Albeit this was said only in relation to the topic of Graduated Driving Licences, (which, incidentally, our Reform 2 addresses and on which we agree with Ms Alexander), at face value she appears to accept the ‘Fundamental Principle’ which underpins our ‘Five Reforms’, namely that:

“The Reasonable and Safe Actions
Of The Majority Of Drivers
Should Be Legal”

We are encouraged by Ms Alexander’s acknowledgement in this interview therefore that a review of UK road safety strategy is overdue albeit we take issue with her suggestion that doubling down on ‘Vision Zero’ might be the answer.

Heidi Alexanders apparant willingness to resist repeating Tony Blair’s mistake of a knee-jerk reaction to pressure groups is commendable however. Instead she intends to have her ‘Future Of Roads’ Minister undertake a “proper piece of work” to come up with “a proper holistic road safety strategy”

The question we will now want to explore with the Ms Alexander is whether she sees our ‘Five Reforms’plus Welcoming Roads as a contender for the road safety package she is looking for; especially since our Reform 2 advocates for a Progressive Driving Licensing Scheme based on Mind Driving rather than a Graduated Driving Licensing Scheme which some victims groups have been advocating but which she is rightly sceptical of.

We believe our Five Reforms consitute the “proper holistic road safety strategy” that the Secretary of State is seeking and so we shall commend this website to her and watch with interest how this progresses, albeit we hope:

our policies may be introduced in Wales
by other political parties before her study reports.

Time To Restore Democratic Accountability

Whatever the outcome of the Transport Secretary’s review, democratic accountability and transparency which Blair also destroyed must now be restored.

Hopefully this will be achieved through a Great Repeal Act in the process of being prepared by the Great British Political Action Committee (GB PAC) in time for the General Election of 2029.

Parties need to secure a democratic mandate for our road safety reforms and deliver on it when in office. Promises Made Promises Delvered

Happily, GB PAC have expressed a serious interest in our campaign, so let’s all give some thought as to what traffic legislation we would want to see repealed and what need to be done to turn our proposals into draft legislateion for both the Senedd and Westminster.

The Welsh Senedd Elections 2026

We believe that what people in Wales crave
is a “One Wales Government” rather than a “One World Government”

Prior to the next UK General Election in 2029, an opportunity exists for parties to campaign on a road safety platform in will Welsh Senedd elections in 2026. In this regard we caution against soundbite politics, which is why our policies will only appeal to parties of gravitas.

For reasons we have argued, it will not be sufficient to campaign simply to rescind the hated blanket 20mph speed limits, superficially appealing though that may seem, because of the fierce opposition, including lawfare, that globalist groups opposed to this have already threatened to bring forth.

In the words of Stephen Covey⁷:

“It is easier to say “no” to something
when there is a bigger “yes” burning inside.

We commend our Five Reforms package plus Welcoming Roads as the bigger “yes for Wales. This comprehensive package of road safety policies includes setting all speed limits rationally by professional engineers. (Reform 4) which will deal with the 20mph issue from a road safety standpoint.

Our campaign offers vote-winning proposals to serious political parties in Wales
astute enough to recognise that time must be called on anti-motorist policies;
a holistic package of road safety reforms rather than quick-fix soundbites
to include in their manifestos to secure widespread popular support.

Towards Cross Party Consensus

Road Safety should ideally be above party politics of the the left and right, but the unfortunate reality is that it is has become caught up in the power struggle between ‘one world government’ globalist idealism and nation-state patriotism in which well-funded left-leaning globalists currently have the upper hand.

Our campaign eschews liberal democracy and is firmly in the patriotic ‘nation state’ camp, taking back control over what WE THE PEOPLE want to see happen in our lives.

And so we say ‘enough is enough’ of all the lies, deceptions, angry rhetoric and propaganda around speed which the globalist camp has perpetuated. Instead, the time has come for a unifying approach which all parties can unite behind to bring an end to ideological road safety practices.

In the words of St Francis of Assisi, (not St Frances of Rome, the Patron Saint of Motorists, )

“Where there is discord, may we bring harmony.
Where there is error, may we bring truth.
Where there is doubt, may we bring faith.
Where there is despair, may we bring hope“

Our Message To Aspiring Transport Ministers

Who could argue against saving more lives through the restoration of tried and tested road safety policies and practicies that have no negative side effets, for this is what our Campaign is about.

We recognise however that prospective Transport Ministers may find it difficult to reverse over a quarter of a century of globalist thinking in the road safety arena thanks to the Welsh Labour Government.

A robust democratic mandate will thus be essential if we are to defeat the prevailing globalist / technocratic zeitgeist so far as transport policy is concerned.

Prospective Welsh Transport Ministers can secure that mandate by including our full set of proposals in their Senedd Election manifestos for 2026. (See our ‘Party Manifesto Promises’ tab on ‘Senedd Campaign 2026’ page).

Right-leaning parties in Wales may therefore wish to give a lead for the rest of the UK
by uniting around a common Transport Policy for the greater good.
Indeed this may be the only way to ensure your party’s survival.

Vote Winning Policies

Marketed properly, we believe our ‘Five Reforms’ package plus ‘Welcomimg Roads’ will win enthusiastic support from all but the most hostile drivers upon whom the renewed traffic police will be laser-focussed, (Reform 3), leaving everyone else free to go about their lawful business safely without fear of harassment.

We urge political parties therefore to recognise both the electoral and the road safety benefits of
incorporating our Five Reforms into their manifestos together with the Fundamental Principle that underpins them and the Welcoming Roads agenda that enhances them.

Our Mission Then Is Clear…

To Identify And Engage Prospective Transport
Ministers Dismayed At The Current Situation Who Are
Willing To Challenge Groupthink And Propaganda
Espoused By The Road Safety Industrial Complex,
With The Courage, Vision And Resolve To Take Forward
The Win/Win Policies Of Our ‘Five Reforms’
Underpinned by Our ‘Fundamental Principle’
And Enhanced by ‘Welcoming Roads’
Whilst Eschewing Globalist Influences and Dogma

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

References

¹‘Speed Kills – A Safety Scare That Costs Lives’ is Chapter 10 from Scared To Death – From BSE to Global Warming: Why Scares are Costing Us The Earth by Christopher Booker and Richard North

² Here we acknowledge the considerable contribution of the Canadian road safety organisation Sense BC (Safety By Education Not Speed Enforcement) to our thinking and have drawn extensively from their website. This is a goldmine of factual information which we can be used to provde an informed challenge to the tyrannical speed limit regime that exists in the UK

³ We are grateful to Brian Gregory, Founder and Policy Director of the Alliance of British Drivers / Driving Sense for freely sharing his considerable knowledge with this campaign, including his observation that “speed enforcement is the answer, now what’s the question?

⁴Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse Of Global Transformation by Patrick M Wood

⁵COWDUNG – The Conventional Wisdom on the Dominant Group – a term coined by Professor Conrad Hal Waddington in his book Tools For Thought.

⁶ See W.Edwards Deming ‘Out of the Crisis’ and ‘The New Economics’

⁷Dr Stephen R Covey. The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

WE ARE NOT THERE YET!

THIS WEB SITE IS WORK IN PROGRESS

Please see the Latest Updates to Website tab within the Breaking News stack to see what’s changed recently.

When completed and fact checked it will serve as a ‘one-stop-shop’ Resource Centre for researchers, drivers, voters, campaigners and political parties, pulling together solid road safety information with information relevant to political campaigns to curtail globalist agendas which are detrimental to road safety and which have got us into the mess we currently find ourselves in.