IT IS six months since Oxford’s 20mph zones were introduced. How are they treating you? Your answer will probably depend on whether or not you drive.

On the one hand, drivers can’t see the point of 20mph. On the other, 20mph is better for people who walk, cycle, or use wheelchairs.

Pretty much everybody in society benefits – even the most hardcore drivers walk sometimes.

The county council was lobbied by every section of the community to install 20mph limits (and by the vocal roads lobby not to).

They were ultimately persuaded by the accident-reduction argument: collisions on Cowley Road have fallen by 35 per cent since the introduction of a 20mph zone a few years ago.

A child hit by a car doing 30mph has an 80 per cent chance of dying.

At 20mph, the child has an 80 per cent chance of living.

Accident reduction isn’t the only concern. Children and the elderly, who have the quietest voices, benefit massively from quieter streets that they can cross easily and safely.

Novice cyclists may venture out in slower, less-threatening traffic. Communities across the whole city said they wanted their streets to be quieter, pleasanter places.

The limits were not introduced to benefit drivers, so it can be hard for drivers to see the point. Yet lower speeds make life better for everyone at little cost to drivers.

While 20mph might feel “too slow”, at 30mph you are simply zooming to the next queue of traffic. It makes scant difference to cross-city journey speeds.

Nationally, average speeds on 30mph roads are just over 30, and on 20mph roads just over 20, and this is, I suspect, the reduction they are looking for in Oxford.

My casual observation, as a driver, a cyclist and a pedestrian, is that motorists are increasingly willing to obey the speed limits.

The effect is especially noticeable on the smaller residential roads, less so on the wider arterials.

I have been taken aback by the condemnation of 20mph zones, and by claims that the scheme was a a waste of money, that it is losing the co-operation of motorists, and that the police have got more important things to do.

It sounds as if, because motorists don’t want to comply with a law, then it’s the law that’s wrong. But hang on – surely everyone should obey the law and it should be enforced. If it isn’t enforced, I agree it’s a waste of money.

But it’s the lack of enforcement that is the waste of money, surely, not the measure itself?

The county council, traditionally car-huggers, have been brave to stick their necks out and do something slightly “anti-car” that communities really wanted.

Better road designs that support 20pmh are incredibly expensive.

Until we can afford them, why can’t we ask our police to enforce the law?