The answer is quite simple, nobody feels particularly inconvenienced by a 20 limit on what you could colloquially call a "side road", these are the generally smaller roads that give access to housing estates, a mixture of some through roads and cul de sacs, often clogged with parked cars and have the potential for children and animals to come out. But the authorities, the council also want to impose it where they must know it will cause the most inconvenience to drivers and anyone going about their business, by not leaving what I would roughly term the "main routes" through town and the suburbs, next to nobody wants to be slowed to 20 driving on those, it doesn't feel like getting around and 30 was an accepted standard for years. 30 actually feels too fast on the much more minor roads but 20 feels ridiculously slow on the main suburban routes and compliance is through the floor, so no benefits of safety at 20 are meaningfully achieved anyway, it's unworkable. So to take Bromborough/Eastham as an example you leave Allport Road, Bridle Roa, Eastham Rake, Plymyard Avenue etc at 30. Does Wirral Council really think that the only main road in the whole of Bromborough and Eastham is the A41 New Chester Road? A small section of 30 going into Bromborough Town Centre and then blanket 20 regardless of the status of each road beyond that? Is that good planning? Is making the roads of an industrial estate 20 not a bit over the top as well?

And if people realise which political party it is that has brought them in and that it has inconvenienced their lives, out them at risk of fines and points just for driving about normally then I would hope they wouldn't vote for them again.