Road Safety Strategy – renewed impetus required?

We have received the abstract of PACTS’ 14th Westminster Lecture on Transport Safety, which was delivered by Professor David Begg in December 2003. Although this is not strictly ‘news’ because it took place several months ago, such is Professor Begg’s standing that we thought readers may be pleased to have the opportunity to read it should they wish to do so.

Safety and Integration: Putting the Two Together
Transport safety encompasses all modes. Rail is one of the safest forms of passenger transport (the majority of casualties are caused by trips or falls at stations). Major incidents do sometimes occur, but travel by rail is still inherently safe.

Tube travel in London is equally, if not more safe. The annual number of deaths on the London Underground have numbered single figures in recent years, with most caused by accidents at stations or suicides.
Aviation is an even bigger success story. Air transport is easily the safest mode of travel – six times safer than travelling by car and twice as safe as rail.

One of the biggest challenges facing the UK in the transport field, and by far the most important transport safety issue, is delivering improved safety on the roads, where over 3,500 people are killed each year. Even one tenth of these fatalities annually in any other mode would, rightly, cause an outcry.

That said, we have enjoyed remarkable success over the last decade or so in reducing road casualties, and the Government’s Road Safety Strategy has provided the focus in setting challenging targets for 2010. However, there are worrying signs that gains in casualty reduction are now beginning to level-off and renewed impetus is needed.

Key to achieving, and perhaps surpassing, the Government’s road safety targets is the need for an increased and highly visible traffic policing presence. Increasing the number of traffic police will make it possible to detect and deal effectively with the wide-ranging behaviour that contributes to accidents and road casualties – such as dangerous driving, drink-driving and driving while under the influence of drugs.

There is also clear evidence linking those who have committed motoring offences with more serious criminal offences and an increase in traffic police would improve detection rates overall. More traffic police should be funded by ring-fencing excess revenue generated from safety camera partnerships – ensuring that all income is spent on road safety and not surrendered to the Treasury.

CfIT commissioned the Motorists’ Forum to provide advice on how delivery of the Government’s Road Safety Strategy by the target date of 2010 might be more effectively achieved. The Forum commissioned a research project to provide robust advice on the matter. CfIT strongly endorsed the Forum’s overall recommendations as practical, effective and deliverable in the short-term. However, there were a number of issues that CfIT would like to examine further.

A recent upward trend in the number of drink-drive offences recorded has focused CfIT’s attention on the impact that reducing the blood alcohol level – perhaps to 50mg per 100ml of blood – could have on casualty reduction. Evidence from a new ‘Grand Rapids’ study undertaken in the USA strengthens previous analysis pointing to alcohol levels above 40mg resulting in a significantly elevated crash risk. It is estimated that 50 lives a year could be saved if the blood alcohol limit was reduced to 50mg. It is also worth emphasising that the Motorists’ Forum recommended more targeted enforcement of the existing limit and called for legislation to enable the results of roadside breath testing to be admissible as evidence in court. We, rightly, expect airline pilots and our train, tube and bus drivers to be sober on duty. It is time to review the levels of blood alcohol acceptable in the drivers on our roads.

Safety cameras have led to a 35 per cent reduction in deaths and serious injuries and there is no doubt about the link between speed, accidents and their severity. CfIT will be reviewing evidence on covert and overt cameras, and providing advice on their relative merits and how they should be deployed to be most effective in reducing accidents. In the meantime, it is also worth paying recognition to the positive contribution that 20mph speed limits have had on casualty reduction in local areas.

Looking ahead, there is a range of measures that will have a further impact on road safety. Intelligent Speed Adaptation (in-vehicle speed control) is one. Another is improved crash protection through front-end vehicle design – mandated by a European Directive from 2005 – which will provide increased safety for vulnerable road-users, although there is nothing to prevent manufacturers from acting in advance of the legislation. Early research to assess the benefits of extending driver rehabilitation from drink-driving to other motoring offences should be considered, as should revisiting the question of adopting single/double summertime as a means of further reducing road casualties.

Footnote: Copies of Professor Begg’s full lecture can be purchased from PACTS for £15 (p&p included within UK, but extra outside UK).

For further details contact Sally Verkaik, PACTS, 3rd Floor, Clutha House, 10 Storey's Gate, Westminster, London SW1P 3AY. Tel: +44 (0)207 222 7732. Fax: +44 (0)207 222 7106.
Email: sally.verkaik@pacts.org.uk
Web: www.pacts.org.uk