A NUMBER of your correspondents have made the assertion that I am anti-motorist because I have, supported by the 59 other councillors on Bolton council, introduced a series of physical speed restrictions in a number of residential areas in the borough.

Nothing could be further from the truth. I have owned a car continuously for 35 years and, because of the jobs that I have done, have been a high mileage motorist, covering, over that period, approaching three-quarters of a million miles.

I have, however, a responsibility for highway safety in the town, and the fact is that we have in Britain an appalling record for pedestrian fatalities. Overall our death rate due to road accidents is better than the European average, but this hides the fact that our driver and passenger figures are the best in Europe and our pedestrian figures, particularly among children and the elderly, the worst.

Much of the reason for our poor performance in this area is down to the speed at which we drive in residential areas. Some children and the elderly people will inevitably be knocked down on our roads, but they are many times more likely to be killed if they are knocked down at 30 or 40mph than at 15 or 20mph. This is why we are introducing 20mph limits in residential areas.

In an ideal world, we would simply make the regulations and expect motorists to obey them, but we all know that a minority of motorists would ignore the rules and continue to drive at lethal speeds. This is why we have to introduce physical restrictions rather than rely upon the law.

Incidentally, the council policy is not to impose these schemes upon neighbourhoods, but to consult all residents affected by the schemes and to listen to their opinions. In view of the letters which have been published opposing road humps, readers might like to know that it is normal for us to receive an 85 to 90 per cent response in favour of our traffic calming schemes.

Cllr Guy Harkin

Deputy Leader

of the Council