A host of medical professions, road safety charities, motoring groups and emergency services support a #lowerlimit | https://t.co/s9WYmKrQhe pic.twitter.com/h90GKtpGt6— IAS (@InstAlcStud) October 10, 2016
@InstAlcStud @R_S_P_H @Allianz @roadvictims @racfoundation @IAMRoadSmart @UK_AHA @PFEW_HQ @TheBMA @PACTS Vested interest, ideology, & no CV— Drivers E. Midlands (@EastMidsDrivers) October 10, 2016
so what does @EastMidsDrivers recommend to reduce drive deaths?— PACTS (@PACTS) October 10, 2016
— Drivers E. Midlands (@EastMidsDrivers) October 10, 2016
@EastMidsDrivers - entirely unhelpful and unconstructive as usual— PACTS (@PACTS) October 10, 2016
@PACTS You're the people who frauduelnetly don't count road accidents, solely part of rail & air journeys, as air & rail casualties.— Drivers E. Midlands (@EastMidsDrivers) October 12, 2016
@EastMidsDrivers Oh dear. Insults, ignorance, paranoia - no room for dialogue— PACTS (@PACTS) October 12, 2016
@PACTS You refuse to discuss proven expert fact & valid points but call that paranoia instead. If it's so untrue sue me.— Drivers E. Midlands (@EastMidsDrivers) October 14, 2016
So all the evidence, facts, research on these three massive sites is 'Paranoia' according to the bogus road safety profiteers exposed within.
These Tweets prove PACTS' attitude to fact and clear evidence provided on the basis of independent non vested interest expertise. Perhaps you may be able to get your MP to inquire into the activities and objectives of this group.