So what is your policy on potholes?

Nice, short, observation from an informed commentator I admire.

Populists are very good at broadcasting what they are against, and who is to blame for shortcomings in the current system. They grab attention with wild, often unsubstantiated theories, and make impossible promises. When they are unable to fulfil these, they deflect attention from themselves by heaping further blame on their chosen scapegoats.

They are less good at coming up with practical solutions to mundane problems such as road maintenance that affect us all.

Basically, if you don't have a policy on filling potholes, you shouldn't be running for political office 🙂

[media=https://youtu.be/AVr6eHq3PRw]

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Lugwho · 61-69, M

They're a bit of a nuisance but I can't help thinking they should be easy to avoid in most cases. Just drive slower or go around them.

SunshineGirl · 36-40, F

@Lugwho They are worst on rural roads where there is not enough room to drive round them or they cannot be seen in the dark. They are potentially fatal to cyclists.

Lugwho · 61-69, M

@SunshineGirl I drive on plenty of narrow rural roads, I haven't come across one I couldn't avoid yet. Maybe cyclists should start paying road tax 😏

SunshineGirl · 36-40, F

@Lugwho Cyclists do not break up road surfaces with two ton vehicles. They also do not require the same standard of surfacing which motor vehicles need to use public rights of way. I actually think all motorists should pay a surcharge to dedicated cyclists and pedestrians for the danger and inconvenience they cause on shared roads.

Lugwho · 61-69, M

@SunshineGirlI am playing devils advocate a bit here, but in general I don't agree. Cyclists don't break up the surface, but they should be prepared to pay something towards whatever route they use. There are plenty of cycle paths that cars don't use, who should pay for these.

SunshineGirl · 36-40, F

@Lugwho I heartily disagree. Most roads follow the path of ancient rights of way which were maintained at minimal cost until motorised transport came along. Now some are practically unusable by anyone but motorists. Pedestrians and two wheelers need compensating 🚶🏼‍♀‍➡🚴🏼‍♀

Lugwho · 61-69, M

@SunshineGirl That's just not true. The route might be the same but they are built and maintained for cars. There was no need for a tarmac surface for horses or pedestrians, and potholes wouldn't be an issue.