Local elections 2025: Oxfordshire candidates split over 20mph
Driving through Oxfordshire's towns and villages, it is clear that the default speed limit for anywhere away from major roads is no longer 30mph.Most residential areas now have a 20mph limit - a change that some love and others loathe.The rollout has been happening since 2022, and the new limit is in now in place in more than 200 places.But ahead of local elections for Oxfordshire County Council on 1 May, residents and candidates remain split on whether the 20mph scheme has been a success or a waste of money.
For places to get a 20mph speed limit in Oxfordshire, a degree of local support has to be demonstrated.The zones need the backing of both the parish or town council and the area's county councillor.Many have proved uncontroversial - but in larger towns in particular there has been opposition.More than three quarters of people responding to a consultation on a 20mph limit for most roads in Banbury objected or expressed concerns.After a review, new 20mph zones were brought in, but four routes were excluded.Now the limit is in place, residents we spoke to had mixed views on whether it has been a good thing for the town.Kieran Andrews said he thought 20mph was "too slow"."It builds up the traffic and then stops everyone from getting where they need to be as soon as possible," he said.But Paul Clement said the benefits were huge."The difference between 20mph and 30mph in respect of safety is phenomenal," he said.Linda Morris also supported the limit - but said vehicles were not respecting it.She said: "A lot of people down here aren't actually doing 20mph they're doing a lot more."
Candidates that took part in BBC Oxford's debate ahead of Oxfordshire County Council's election on May 1 were also split over 20mph.Concerns were raised about the lack of enforcement.Labour's Liz Brighouse said: "It really is frustrating to see roads, which should be 20mph and people are actually going on them sometimes 60 or 70mph and that really can't be acceptable."Felix Bloomfield from Reform UK said: "This is something that Thames Valley Police cannot enforce."They've told us that their 30mph speed cameras cannot be recalibrated to deal with 20mph zones. "And they don't have capacity to police with mobile cameras."
Originally £8m was budgeted for the scheme, but the authority now says it will be completed in the next financial year for a total of just over 3.8m.Some have questioned if it was all money well spent.Conservative Eddie Reeves said in the village of Cropredy there was "a new 20mph sign literally signposted on a 90 degree bend". "Now you cannot drive more than about five or maybe max 10mph," he said. "The 20mph zone, therefore, is a complete nonsense."But the Liberal Democrats and Green Party, who have been running the authority while 20mph has been implemented, defended the scheme.Liberal Democrat Dan Levy said: "I think it's been a huge benefit to the people of Oxfordshire. "Where there are 20mph zones we've seen a reduction in accidents and an increase in people cycling and walking, particularly to school."Helena Richards from the Green Party said: "If you're a pedestrian hit by a car at 20mph you are seven times more likely to survive than if you were hit by that same car at 30mph."Polls are open for the Oxfordshire County Council election between 07:00 and 22:00 on 1 May.
You can follow BBC Oxfordshire on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
All change after Hamilton – but not perhaps in the way you expect
To elect is, literally, to choose. And people in this by-election have chosen, narrowly, to put their faith in Labour's Davy Russell, who fought a doorstep campaign, remote from media concerns. This was the change contest. Understandably pleased, the Prime Minister hailed a 'fantastic victory' for Labour – before adding that 'people in Scotland had once again voted for change.' Read more Brian Taylor I think that is true but I suspect it may not be quite the change advanced by Sir Keir Starmer. I understand his perspective. He is seeking to fit Hamilton into the wider Starmer narrative. You will recall that, at the July UK General Election, Sir Keir repeatedly offered 'change'. His aim was to gain from the discontent – no, the loathing – which had attached itself to the Conservatives. To posit Labour as the remedy, without being all that specific about details. So, with these comments on Hamilton, he is seeking to suggest that Davy Russell's victory is, in some way, continuity: an endorsement of the approach pursued by his government. To repeat, I understand his motivation in so doing. But I am certain that this is awry. You have only to listen to senior figures from Scottish Labour to grasp that Hamilton disquiet was aimed at incumbency. The SNP at Holyrood, yes. But also Labour at Westminster. Broadcasting to an astonished nation on the wireless, I was most struck by Labour MSP Paul Sweeney who disclosed candidly that he had experienced 'pretty grim conversations' with voters. Despite those doorstep difficulties, Labour contrived to oust the defending SNP. Incidentally, only the third time the incumbents have lost in the twelve Holyrood by-elections which have taken place since devolution. But Labour's Scottish leader, Anas Sarwar, knows this fell far short of an enthusiastic vote of confidence. He knows people want much more from Team Starmer. He knows they are upset over the economy and benefit curbs. Still, that Labour victory does represent change. The ousting of the SNP. Which itself demands a further change. John Swinney acknowledged as much at his news conference. His party, he said, had made some progress – but not enough. The aim now must be to address the priorities of the people, specifically the cost of living and NHS waiting times. He was accused by Labour's Anas Sarwar of seeking to drive voters towards Reform UK. Again an understandable point, but not entirely valid. Certainly, Mr Swinney suggested that the by-election was a two-horse race between the SNP and Nigel Farage's party. In so doing, he was seeking to polarise the contest, to pitch his party as the ones to stop the seemingly resurgent Reform, aware that Labour had comfortably outpolled the SNP at the UK election last year. Sir Keir Starmer is keen to tie the by-election into a wider story about Labour (Image: free) It was, in short, a strategy rather than a forecast. Nevertheless, the SNP came up short – and a degree of humility can now be expected from the First Minister. So he too must change the SNP formula. To a substantial degree, he already has, concentrating upon popular priorities such as the NHS, while sidelining issues such as gender. Some within the SNP may question Mr Swinney's own judgement. I suspect, however, that the majority will back his determination to focus firmly upon the economy and public service delivery. If there was even a fragment of complacency in the SNP leadership, it has been utterly expunged by Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse. Might this result also sideline the issue of independence, as the campaign group Scotland in Union suggest? Not in those terms. John Swinney will continue to pitch independence as a solution to persistent problems. But I expect he will primarily concentrate upon the problems themselves. Listening, in short, to voters. That emphasis may further disadvantage the Tories who tend to do well at Holyrood when they can depict themselves as the stalwart defenders of a threatened union. However, there are other changes to consider. Labour's vote is well down on the UK General Election in this area and on their by-election showing in Rutherglen and Hamilton West. Folk are scunnered with the SNP. But they are also unhappy with the PM and the Chancellor, Rachel Reeves. If she doubts that, perhaps she could have a word with her Commons aide, Imogen Walker. The MP for Hamilton and Clyde Valley. So Anas Sarwar will pursue a twin strategy. Gently, diplomatically urging his Westminster colleagues to pursue policies which palpably help voters. While at the same time offering to change the government at Holyrood. Pitching himself as the sole contender to oust Mr Swinney. Seeking to marginalise rivals. Another change is the emergence of Reform. They came a creditable third, consigning the Tories to a whimpering fourth. Indeed, they got a higher percentage in this area than the Tories have historically managed. A sign perhaps that Reform can appeal to a wider range of voters, also eating into Labour and SNP support. Read more But will that endure? Or will Reform fall back again, perhaps beset by the internal divisions which emerged sharply on polling day itself when their chairman, Scots-born Zia Yousuf, resigned? On quitting, he said that he no longer wished to devote his time to installing Nigel Farage in Downing Street. He was also less than delighted with the new Reform MP Sarah Pochin who said in the Commons that the burka should be banned. However, the Tories are not exactly exempt from internal division, at Westminster and Holyrood. They must simply strive to recover from this by-election nadir – and hope that Reform will subside. Does this by-election change expectations of the Holyrood outcome next year? In itself, no. It tells us that voters are scunnered. But then you already knew that. It tells us that folk want and expect change. They want an easing of this age of anxiety. But then you knew that too. Brian Taylor is a former political editor for BBC Scotland and a columnist for The Herald. He cherishes his family, the theatre - and Dundee United FC
The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
So now you know, SNP: indy is not what people care about
There may have been little talk of independence in the campaign but Katy Loudon, the SNP candidate, put out a Facebook video on the morning of the by-election which made clear it's all about separating us from the rest of the UK. The unionist parties' share of the vote at the by-election was just short of 66%. If that doesn't send a clear message to the SNP and the Greens that independence is not what is important at the moment, I don't know what will. Maybe if the SNP improved our NHS, our education system, housing, our infrastructure, managed to build ferries and dual our roads on time and improve our economy, it might get more support. That would be novel, would it not? Jane Lax, Aberlour. Nothing short of humiliation It wasn't only the kitchen sink that the SNP flung at the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. It threw the washing machine, tumble drier and dishwasher as well. Anyone who saw on social media the gangs of SNP enthusiasts roaming the constituency, saturating it with MSPs including ministers, as well as foot soldiers, with a massive intensity, for weeks and especially in the last two weeks, must have imagined that it was a seat they could not lose. I wondered, in the last days, whether the SNP was not engaging in overkill, that the good folk of the constituency might be saturated with SNP propaganda to the point of apathy. The turnout, at 44 per cent, suggested that as a partial possibility. In this by-election, it was possible to utilise all the party's resources, and it did. That would not be remotely a possibility in any one constituency in a General Election. The result was nothing short of humiliation for the SNP. It is also a personal humiliation for John Swinney, who spent much time in the last week campaigning in the constituency rather than attending to First Minister's business. Nothing much will change at Holyrood, of course, but Mr Swinney's insistence that Scotland does not welcome Reform UK looks a bit hollow after it scooped up 26 per cent of the vote. Perhaps we can have a break from his preaching about Scotland being allegedly more moral than England. Ah well, one can but hope. Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh. Read more letters For many, politics is not working It is alarming that, in Thursday's by-election, Reform UK came third with 7,088 votes, a mere 1,471 behind Labour. The victorious Labour candidate, Davy Russell, is quoted as saying that 'this community has [also] sent a message to Farage and his mob tonight. The poison of Reform isn't us – it isn't Scotland and we don't want your division here.' I suspect Mr Russell was speaking from within the excitement of winning and did not realise the significance of Reform UK winning so many votes. The party of Nigel Farage, that enthusiastic Trump supporter, was understood to hold little attraction for the Scottish voter compared with his standing with the English electorate. The Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse voters have demonstrated otherwise. The UK political establishment, Labour in particular, has one important lesson to learn, that being that politics in our country is not working for a significant element of our population. The vote for a disastrous Brexit was the first warning sign of a significant discontent with the inequalities and injustices in our society and economy. Uncontrolled neoliberalism has done untold damage to our social contract with our politicians accepting unquestionably the words of Mrs Thatcher, 'there is no alternative'. John Milne, Uddingston. Reform will be a Holyrood force The most interesting thing about the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election for Holyrood is not who won, Labour, nor the fact that the voting was a three-way split between it, the SNP and Reform UK, but where Reform's votes came from. Compared to its vote share in the constituency in the last Holyrood election four years ago, the SNP vote dropped by almost 17% of the votes cast and the Tory vote by 11.5%. Labour's vote share actually went down by 2% as well. This means that Reform UK's 26% of the vote came more from parties of the left than the Tories. Clearly Reform is not just a threat to the Conservatives. In the climate of dissatisfaction with the established parties, Reform is on track to be a force at Holyrood next year. Otto Inglis, Crossgates, Fife. • After all the ballyhoo, the result is in and the real winner is Reform UK. John Swinney talked Reform up too effectively. Labour's candidate was nearly invisible. The result speaks volumes. The SNP lost. Labour just limped home despite being helped a huge amount by the SNP's travails. Reform UK came from a near-zero base to gain over 7,000 votes and run both other parties close. This by-election was a real test of public opinion for the shape of Holyrood in 2026. Reform could still founder given frequent party in-fighting. Equally the Tories could re-assert their desired position as defenders of the Union. John Swinney has made another major SNP blunder and released the genie from the bottle. Is he going to be the architect of the SNP's downfall? Dr Gerald Edwards, Glasgow. Labour far from home and hosed While Labour's victory in the Hamilton by-election seemingly points to the party winning the Scottish Parliament elections next year, if I were Anas Sarwar, I wouldn't be sizing up the curtains of Bute House just yet. The seat was won comfortably by the SNP in the last Scottish Parliament election in 2021 and is just the sort of seat that Labour needs to win if Anas Sarwar is to become Scotland's next First Minister. The SNP has made little progress in restoring its fortunes following its heavy defeat in last summer's Westminster election, with polls suggesting that the party's support across Scotland is still 15 points down on its tally in 2021. In the event, the fall in the party's support in Hamilton was, at 17 points, just a little higher than that. However, Labour's own tally was also down by two points on its vote in 2021, when overall the party came a disappointing third. That drop was very much in line with recent polling, which puts the party at just 19 per cent across Scotland as a whole, while the SNP has around a third of the vote. In addition, Labour is losing somewhere between one in six and one in five of its voters to Reform since last year's election. After nearly two decades in the political wilderness, there is little sign that Labour, as it currently stands, is set to regain the reins of power at Holyrood. Alex Orr, Edinburgh. Now flesh out the policies All the pundits initially claimed the Hamilton by-election would go to Labour, given local circumstances. Now a Labour win is described as a 'shock' after even some in Labour were describing their own candidate as not up to the job. But Labour needs to up its game for the next election. Criticism is easy, but Labour needs more fleshed-out policies for government, beyond centralising health in Scotland. The SNP needs to drop all the 'student politics' stuff; it was embarrassing to see a squabble over £2 million when it should be asking why Scotland does so poorly on defence procurement and jobs. Formulate a proper industrial policy for Scotland, and back any project that would enhance jobs and prosperity for Scotland. Refuse nothing and put the onus on unionists to explain their plans in detail. Trident: are the unionist plans for keeping Trident in Scotland similar to those for Diego Garcia? Nuclear power: why do they think Scotland should have it, given its high-cost electricity and the extensive lags on construction? What of waste disposal and site security? The SNP should be in favour of local pricing for electricity as a draw to attract jobs, and for North Sea oil/gas production (until Scots are empowered to decide its future). A Labour/SNP coalition? It looks like the only feasible outcome. GR Weir, Ochiltree. • For all the fuss about the Hamilton by-election, it should be noted that almost 56% of the electorate really don't care who represents them in the Scottish Parliament. Malcolm Parkin, Kinross. Russia claim is baseless Brian Wilson ("Yes, we should stand firm over Putin, but let's not make Russia our implacable foe", The Herald, June 5) tells us today that the rights of the former Soviet republics to seek security (membership of Nato) should have been balanced against Russian fears of encirclement. This raises two issues. Firstly, the Soviet Union consisted of 15 republics: the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (Russia itself) and 14 others. Of these, only three (the Baltic states,which were independent between the wars) have joined Nato. I am unclear as to how this constitutes encirclement. Does Mr Wilson envisage the Central Asian former republics (Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan etc) expressing a wish to join the alliance at some point, thus making encirclement a reality rather than a baseless claim? Secondly, does Mr Wilson not wonder why these small countries wished to be under the umbrella of the Nato alliance? To avoid the current fate of Ukraine perhaps? Alan Jenkins, Glasgow. • Brian Wilson expresses the hope that we should not categorise the Russian people as being inevitably in the enemy camp. He concluded his article by observing that narratives about Russia should have "due regard to past history and also future potential for peaceful co-existence". Such narratives should certainly not fail to take account of the contribution made by Russian armed forces and the civilian population during the Second World War, which is estimated to have resulted in some 25 million Soviet deaths. It is clear that the Russian effort during that war was profoundly influential in assisting toward the eventual defeat of Germany. The Russian people at the time called upon impressive levels of love of country and perseverance in the fight toward victory over a formidable enemy. Once we were allies. While Russia remains in the firm grip of the dictatorial, ambitious and ruthless Vladimir Putin, it is difficult to see to what extent meaningful steps can be taken to pursue the "potential for peaceful co-existence". Ian W Thomson, Lenzie. A Pride rally in Glasgow (Image: PA) Pride needed now as much as ever Gregor McKenzie (Letters, June 6) suggests that LGBT Pride has had its day. In fact, since the end of the pandemic restrictions, more people have been going to more Pride events across Scotland than ever before. Why? I think it's in part because people see how, after several positive changes in the law for LGBT people in the past 25 years, things are now starting to get worse again. Mr McKenzie asks why we can't all just let people be, and I wish we could. But the increased restrictions being introduced on trans people in the UK are quite the opposite of that. Trans people just want to get on with their lives, but the new rules make that much more difficult. And trans people are constantly maligned currently by some parts of the media. So Pride events are needed as much now as ever. They are a celebration of how far we have come in the 30 years since the first Pride Scotland, and they are a protest against the regression we're seeing now. One day perhaps Pride will be solely a celebration, but that day still seems some way off. Meanwhile people join together in the streets to say "Not going back". Tim Hopkins, Edinburgh.
Scotsman
3 hours ago
- Scotsman
Why Labour's Davy Russell produced the funniest by-election result of my lifetime
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... I have reacted to by-election results over the years with despair and delight in roughly equal measures. However, I have never laughed so much as I did in response to this one. That wasn't just because Labour won in the face of relentlessly negative soothsaying. Nor was it just because pundits and prognosticators who feed off the received wisdom of each other were made to look stupid, delicious though that is. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The bonus was that the result exposed the sleekit politics of John Swinney so effectively. He falsely framed the by-election as a crusade against Reform UK which only he, Honest John, could forestall – and lost not only the vote but also his credibility. Scottish Labour's leader and deputy, Anas Sarwar and Jackie Baillie, celebrate Davy Russell's election as the MSP for Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse. Picture: Jeff| Getty Images Voters ignore Swinney's crude strategy Time and again, he claimed it was 'a straight fight between SNP and Reform'. I don't expect a lot from Swinney but even I found it surprising that the First Minister of Scotland should front such a crude strategy. A little dignity, slightly above the fray, would not have gone amiss. A couple of months ago, it was 'Scotland' that must unite against Reform and we had Swinney's ridiculous summit to brand them outcasts beyond the political pale. Then, hey presto, a by-election comes along and it was only the SNP which could stop them; party and nation conflated. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad READ MORE: Labour pulls off stunning victory over SNP as Davy Russell set for Holyrood The big laugh is that while lazy commentators regurgitated this script, the voters ignored it. Twenty-six per cent voted Reform anyway while enough of the rest voted Labour. The SNP's whole campaign was built around a lie and it backfired beautifully. While they were talking about Farage, Labour was hearing basic concerns from actual voters. Unsurprisingly, these tended to be about the state of the NHS and impoverishment of local government rather than abstractions such as a candidate declining the invitation to be baited in a televised rabble. Received wisdom Was I surprised by the result? Well, yes and no. When it was called, I expected it to be a fairly straightforward SNP hold. They had a decent majority to defend; the circumstances of the by-election arising were entirely devoid of scandal; the Labour government had not exactly covered itself in glory over ten months. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad On top of that, our old friend 'received wisdom' suggested that a strong showing by Reform would further split the 'unionist' vote, though I was sceptical about whether the constitutional question is of great relevance to Reform's appeal. On the other hand, I knew the relentlessly upbeat tone of Labour's well-organised campaign reflected what they were hearing on the fabled doorsteps. This was at odds with Swinney's 'vote SNP to stop Reform' con trick – and if Labour's number crunchers knew that to be untrue, so did the SNP's. Labour will celebrate with good cause but won't get carried away. It was still a close-run thing but its importance is that it changes the narrative. It leaves Anas Sarwar with a clear message to prosecute – that if you want change next year, there is only one way to deliver it. Having got back onto that front foot, they now have to stay there. 'Peak Reform' Scottish Labour's decline in fortunes since last July has been entirely linked to perceptions of the UK Government, which are beginning to improve. However, if the same thing is not to happen again, it will be essential that every Whitehall action is viewed, in significant part, through the Scottish and Welsh electoral prisms, which certainly did not happen last July. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I think there probably is a 'peak Reform' in Scotland, ironically because they are fishing in the same pool of general disgruntlement that the SNP used to rely on. Much of that is now directed against government from Edinburgh, creating room for a populist party which is not the SNP, but only up to a point. Sensible voices have warned against branding Reform voters racists or extremists rather than people with a legitimate sense of frustration about conditions in which they and their communities find themselves. I am sure that is where most of the Reform votes in this by-election came from. Then Nigel Farage turns up with a bizarre attack on Anas Sarwar, suggesting he owes more loyalty to Pakistan than to Scotland. It's as if Farage can't help himself. Almost nobody whose votes Reform did not already have could take this charge seriously while it must have driven away a fair number of undecideds, for now and the future. Tories should hold their nerve What the Reform vote confirms is not that there are 26 per cent racists and extremists in South Lanarkshire but that there is a gap in the Scottish market for a party of the right which does not have Tory on the label. Indeed, that was personified by the Reform candidate who, six months ago, was a Tory councillor. A change of rosette took him from six per cent to 26. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Maybe more than any other party, the Scottish Tories have a vested interest in the Reform star waning over the next 11 months. Given the past record of parties with which Farage has been associated, that is quite likely to happen. The best bet for the Scottish Tories is to hold their nerve and hope for that outcome, rather than lurch to the right in order to compete. But the biggest loser from this by-election deserves to be John Swinney who has always survived by political calculation rather than any higher principle. This time, he seriously miscalculated and ended up with less than 30 per cent of the vote. It's 'game on' for long overdue change.
