Indian government drafts law to tame India's chaotic traffic

Measures include a points system to punish repeat offenders and stiffer penalties for speeding and failure to stop at red lights

Traffic in Delhi, India. Photograph: Alamy

For decades, the chaotic use of  roads has been held up as a point of pride by locals who argued that, though unnerving, the free-for-all worked in a way that foreign practices such as staying in your lane or using your mirrors would not.

Now the government, hopes to tame the rickshaws, elephants, trucks, luxury SUVs, bicycles, camels, five-seater motorbikes, cows and buses that battle it out each day on the country's highways.

The objective is an ambitious one. Around 150,000 people a year die on India's roads, with hundreds of thousands more injured in around half a million recorded road accidents.

There is no ongoing system of verification of vehicle, no central national agency of road safety, and a culture of flouting the law. A huge surge in car ownership has not been matched by investment in roads, safety education, monitoring or policing.

The new bill aims to save 200,000 lives over five years and boost economic development, which has flagged in recent years.

The World Health Organisation has said the number of deaths and injuries on the roads in India costs the country around three percentage points of GDP growth annually. Transport ministry officials put the figure higher.

Modi's government has disappointed some observers, particularly in the business community, for failing to pass "big bang" reforms immediately. BJP officials say they are taking a "softly softly" approach with measures aimed at "putting the house in order, not burning it down".

One spur to the reform was the death of a minister in a car crash in Delhi days after the election win.

The draft law was posted online by the road transport ministry at the weekend with a request for user comments.

Full Story at:  http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/14/modi-law-india-traffic-roads

Diesel drivers face higher costs in battle to reduce pollution.

UK cities considering low emission zones and London diesel drivers could face extra costs on top of the congestion charge.

Drivers of diesel cars may have to pay more in road tax or face extra charges to travel into city centres in an effort to tackle pollution according to reports.

Major UK cities are considering low emission zones to force out older diesel vehicles that are responsible for higher levels of fumes, the Times said.

Almost all diesel vehicles driven into central London will trigger a £10 charge under plans being considered by mayor, Boris Johnson who will also reportedly lobby the government to increase road tax on diesel cars to encourage a move to cleaner vehicles.

The £10 fee, which would come into effect in 2020, would be on top of the congestion charge, forcing diesel drivers to pay at least £20 to drive into the capital's "ultra low emission zone", the newspaper said.

Only diesel vehicles meeting the Euro 6 emissions standard will be exempt, while petrol cars registered before 2006 will also have to pay.

Labour is reportedly planning a countrywide network of low emission zones to force older diesel cars from city centres, proposals that are being considered by more than 15 cities including Sheffield, Birmingham, and Bristol. Oxford has already introduced a zone for buses and may expand its plans for other vehicles. The initiatives are being considered to help meet European regulations on clean air and avoid the threat of heavy fines for breaching them.

The mayor's environment adviser, Matthew Pencharz, told the newspaper: "We want to see an unwinding of incentives that have driven people to diesel. Euro engine standards on emissions have not delivered the savings expected, meaning we now have a legacy of a generation of dirty diesels."

Today there are 10m cars in Britain are powered by diesel engines – a third of the total.

"Part of the problem is regulation. In laboratory conditions diesel cars have meet strict test criteria. Unfortunately that performance hasn't been matched on the road and now we have a significant health issue because of the dash for diesel."

Magistrate court fines 'may rise substantially’

Maximum fines imposed by magistrates are set to rise dramatically under new proposals for England and Wales.

Justice Minister Jeremy Wright said financial penalties "set at the right level" were an effective punishment for offenders.

"Magistrates are the cornerstone of our justice system and these changes will provide them with greater powers to deal with the day-to-day offences that impact their local communities," he added.

His proposals could also see magistrates having unlimited fining powers for offences where there is currently a maximum of £5,000 or more.

Any new legislation would first have to be debated in Parliament but there is no current timetable for any such discussion.

Custody 'option remains'

Most driving offences that could involve a fine in magistrates' courts are subject to specific maximums, known as levels, which currently range from £200 to £5,000 and Some cases, such as environmental offences, can involve even higher fines.

Magistrates take into account the seriousness of the offence when setting the fine level.

Whilst the amount of a fine must reflect the seriousness of the offence, the court must also take into account the financial circumstances of the offender - in other words, their ability to pay.

This applies whether it has the effect of increasing or reducing the fine. Normally a fine should be of an amount that is capable of being paid within 12 months.

The aim is for the fine to have an equal impact on offenders with different financial circumstances.

It should be a hardship but should not force the offender below a reasonable "subsistence" level.

So, someone on benefits caught speeding on motorway, is not going to be given a £10,000 fine that they have no realistic prospect of paying.

The Ministry of Justice said custody would "continue to be used for serious offenders and fines will not become an alternative for those who would otherwise be sent to custody".

Rupert Lipton, director of the National Motorists Action Group, described the proposals as "disproportionate and draconian". He said: "I think it will have a serious chilling effect. We will find motorists will be deterred from going to court where they believe they are not guilty of an offence and there is a potential challenge."

However, the government is only now tabling the appropriate legislation to put that ruling into effect.

Google reveals driverless car prototype





Google's Driver Less Car

Google has demonstrated its own driverless car, a design that does away with all conventional car controls including the steering wheel, and says it will build 100 of the vehicles for testing with the eventual aim of "bringing this technology to the world safely".

The company has been testing everyday cars equipped with sensors, navigation equipment and computers to drive themselves but in the meantime it has secretly developed a prototype from scratch that will have no facility for a human to take control, other than an emergency stop button.

An initial 100 testbed versions would retain manual controls, Google said as it unveiled the car on Tuesday. The controls are needed to comply with the law in California which along with Nevada and Florida allows autonomous vehicles but only if a driver can take charge.

Chris Urmson, director of Google's self-driving car project, said the aim was to run extended tests in California where Google is based. Urmson argued driverless cars would improve road safety.

Google said its testing had suggested it was safer to remove conventional controls altogether because the results of a human having to take over suddenly and unexpectedly were unpredictable and potentially dangerous. “We saw stuff that made us a little nervous,” Urmson told New York Times.

The toy-like concept vehicle has two seats, a screen displaying the route and a top speed of 25mph (40km/h). An array of sensors allows the vehicle's computer to determine its location and surroundings and it can "see" several hundred metres, according to Google





Motorists may face penalty for overtaking cyclists on some city roads

Motorists may face penalty for overtaking cyclists on some city roads

Road safety proposal by Department for Transport would give cyclists priority, restricting cars to 15mph with potential £100 fine

Cyclists may win priority over cars on scores of urban roads, with motorists restricted to 15mph (24km an hour) and handed three penalty points and a fixed penalty £100 fine if they overtake bikes, according to a government proposal. .

However, cars will still dominate most streets: the policy would only cover some cities and "lightly trafficked roads where cycle flows are high".

The proposal for "cycle streets", backed by roads minister Robert Goodwill, is one of many changes and improvements suggested in a department of transport consultation document  making streets safer, through measures including reformed traffic regulations and signage.

The document says the bike priority streets will be tested in cities that have made a commitment to promoting cyclists – and to taking any available government cash for the purpose – including London, Manchester, Birmingham, Newcastle upon Tyne and Oxford.

"This is a bold initiative, which is being considered by some of the Cycle Cities and London, possibly including a ban on overtaking on lightly trafficked roads where cycle flows are high. Subject to any scheme trial, this prohibition could be accompanied by an advisory speed limit of 15mph," it says. The consultation ends in June.

The British Cycling association has welcomed the proposed changes, but warned political determination and funding were essential to make them work.

"We still need the leadership to ensure these designs make it on to our roads, a national commitment to grow cycling levels, and it must be backed by a long-term budget line. Only then can we say that the prime minister's ambition of creating a 'cycling revolution' can be achieved,"

Banned drivers who cause death face tougher Sentences

Banned drivers who cause death face tougher Sentences

Tougher sentences for banned drivers who cause death on the roads and a new offence of causing serious injury while disqualified are to be introduced.

A disqualified driver who causes death will face a prison sentence of up to 10 years, instead of two years.

The government said it was bringing in the changes after listening to concerns raised by victims' families.

The changes are expected to come into force in early 2015.

This will include those offences caused by uninsured and unlicensed drivers.

Justice Secretary Mr Grayling said: "I want to make our roads safer and ensure people who cause harm face tough penalties.

"Disqualified drivers should not be on our roads for good reason. Those who choose to defy a ban imposed by a court and go on to destroy innocent lives must face serious consequences for the terrible impact of their actions.

Labour has raised concerns that there are already issues with space in prisons.

Shadow justice secretary Sadiq Khan said: "The government also needs to assure the public that they have enough space in prison to cope with the increased demand.

"The current shortage of space and increased overcrowding on their watch has led to serious problems in our prisons."

The government said it planned to change the law shortly, which will apply in England, Scotland and Wales.

There is a separate framework of road traffic offences in Northern Ireland.

About 8,200 people were convicted for driving while disqualified in 2012, according to Ministry of Justice figures. There were 16 prosecutions and 13 convictions for causing death by driving when disqualified, unlicensed or uninsured.

Anger as Parking Fine is Issued Every 4 Seconds

Anger as Parking  Fine is Issued Every 4 Seconds

Ministers and campaigners  called for an end to rip off parking fines as it emerged  one is issued every four seconds.

Car insurance company Churchill said ‘ Town Halls have raked in £255millions as they dished out 7.8million tickets last year.

Meanwhile, civil liberty campaigners Big Brother Watch said councils raised £311 millions in traffic fines from CCTV alone in five years and urged  ministers  to probe whether cameras were being illegally used to snare motorists.

Local Government minister Brandon Lewis backed their call and said “ it is clear CCTV is being used to raise money in industrial volumes for town halls and we intend to clamp  down on this clear abuse. The public wants CCTV to be used to catch criminals, not to prosecute shoppers. “

Figures obtained under Freedom of Information laws, show that 23,000 tickets on average were issued by each town hall and Only 1 in 15 were successfully challenged.

Big Brother Watch  reported 87%  rise since 2009 in those councils using CCTV to spot road offences. That came despite Government guidelines urging cameras to be employed “ sparingly “ for this purpose. At least 58 councils used them with London accounting for 90% of all cash raised.

Big Brother watch’s Emma Carr said “ Ministers should investigate whether use of cameras to snoop on motorists breaches surveillance laws. Using CCTV for parking should be banned.

WORST HOTSPOTS IN LONDON       WORST HOTSPOTS OUTSIDE LONDON

Councils          PCNs issed in 2013                 Councils          PCNs issued in 2013              

Westminister City       455,390                         Cardiff                       56,766

Newham                      186,414                       Cornwall                    47,002

Barnet                         171,545                        Oxfordshire County    37,777

Haringey                     163,627                        Merseyside                 37,320

Croydon                      108,409                       Swansea City              35,543

Kingston upon                                                  Lincolnshire                35,275

Thames Royal             94,618                          Bournemouth              34,936

Enfield                        92,886                          Portsmouth City          34,510

Hackney                      90,095                         Milton Keynes            32,421

Barking &                                                        Maidstone (Kent)       30,848

Dagenham                   88,566

Merton                        86,817

NB – Source of data Churchill Insurance.