Glad the people of Italy and not just rolling over and taking it as Oil and Gas (no doubt behind this) will get their climate destroying ways until we say NO.

Fuck me. And in Germany a proposition by the federal government to allow theses types of measures was declined by the regional governments and mayors. They declined having more power themselves. Everybody‘s fucking nuts

This is the best summary I could come up with:

But the Clean Cities campaign group - backed by Europe’s Transport & Environment (T&E) collective - claims the government is using the issue as an excuse to attack sustainable mobility measures.

“In fact, most of the text is focused on the types of collisions that have a large echo in the media, such as when the person responsible was under the influence of alcohol or drugs, but which only amount to five per cent of total road killings.”

In Milan, an ordinance forcing buses and lorries to install blind spot sensors in a bid to reduce cyclist deaths met with similar kickback from the transport minister last year.

Andrea Casu, MP for the main opposition party Partito Democratico, says the government is carrying on “an absurd crusade against the powers of mayors, against cycling and sustainable mobility.”

"Instead of strengthening local public transport in crisis by using at least part of the 22 billion euro we spend every year on environmentally harmful subsidies, Minister Salvini writes a Road Code that looks to the past rather than the future of mobility,” he tells Euronews Green.

With EU elections around the corner, Magliulo sees a connection to Salvini’s drive to push this reform through, positioning Lega as the party applying law and order to road traffic.

The original article contains 1,332 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 84%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

@lgsp@feddit.it

A lot of quotes from @claudio in this article! Thank you for bringing this to Europe, so that we are not alone!

The reform is focused on increasing penality for the types of collisions that have a large echo in the media, such as when the person responsible was under the influence of alcohol or drugs,

This would be nice if only the law add some more mandatory controls. You can put all the rules and laws you want but if you don’t enforce them they are useless since actually you get caught just by sheer bad luck.
And people who already respect the law don’t need more severe penalties to continue to respect the same law.

but in reality it risks increasing the main factor in road mortalities: speed.

Disagree. Speed itself is a factor, not the main one, which in my opinion is inattentiveness.
As long as someone drive looking at the phone or paying attention to everything else except the road, the problem is not the speed but the fact that he is not aware of his surrounding.
Of course there are exceptions: someone who drive at 100 Km/h in a city street in the middle of the day is extremely dengeous and in the case of a crash there is a high probability of fatalities.

In fact the reform will limit mayors’ ability to create new cycle routes or

Cycle routes are nice but cyclists need to start to using them. In my town the current mayor had someone to check how much the cycle routes wanted by the previous one (with the usual groups of people asking for them) are used. Well, it turn out that on a week basis (one with nice weather) only 7% of the cyclists that ran through roads where a dedicate cycle route where present used it. So again, why build one when it is not used ?

car-free ‘school streets’,

It make no sense to close a road to the cars just because there is a school. It is ok to close while the children enter and when they exit, but in the meantime ?

or to keep polluting cars out of city centres.

Yes. And that good. Until the mayor of a city don’t understand that a) smog don’t stop at the city border and b) the city exist in a complex system any decision to close down the city to the cars could be really stupid. I agree that some areas would be better without cars (old town for example) but we were at the point that the decisions were all just PR stunts.

Yeah, Milano is closed to the most polluting cars… which are in the bordering towns across the street trying to park somewhere because there is no fucking way to enter city outside the rush hours without using a car if you have not a couple (or even more) more hours to waste using a train. Oh yes, also put all the exchange parking with the subway or other public transportation inside the closed area, just to have fun. Sound like an intelligent decision ?

It also restrict the possibilities to deploy speed traps.

which is also good, as they are now used to just make money and do nothing to make the roads more secure.
Don’t get me wrong, speed traps are good where there is a documented problem with crashes and fatalities or in sensible zone but honestly when they become a thing that make for the bigger part of a city balance, maybe something is wrong.
This change is a direct consequence of the fact that we have a lot of examples of speed traps deployed without any logic behind, just to make money.

Campaigners held demonstrations in dozens of Italian cities last week, calling for the reform to be scrapped and re-written in consultation with bereaved families.

The same campaigners should held demonstrations calling for more reliable and available public transports (especially outside the rush hours), the cyclists to be punished when they don’t use a present cycles route or do not follow the roads laws, for having more city police out in the street at every time (come on, Milano has only 2 patrol out in the night for all the city) to look out for people infringing the laws.