INTRODUCTION

  The Road Haulage Association (RHA) was formed in 1945 to look after the interests of haulage contractors in various areas of the country, in effect, amalgamating local organisations that had already been established. The Association has subsequently developed into becoming the primary trade association representing the hire-or-reward sector of the road transport industry. There are presently some 10,000 companies in RHA membership, varying from major operators operating hundreds of vehicles through to single vehicle owner-drivers. Operators represented by this association run between them approximately 100,000 heavy goods vehicles. As such the evidence below focuses on the interests of the professional road haulier.

BACKGROUND TO THE INDUSTRY

  The road haulage industry has an essential role to play in the UK economy, accounting for 6% of Gross Domestic Product and employing overall some 1 million people. Government figures show that 103,000 registered goods vehicle operators carry out over 80% of all the domestic freight movements within the UK, utilising 394,600 licensed heavy goods vehicles and 265,000 semi-trailers.

  When considering the level of traffic policing carried out by the present 42 individual police authorities it must be remembered that, as well as the domestic commercial fleet outlined above, there are also many thousands of Continental registered goods vehicles regularly running on UK roads. At present it is apparent that a percentage of these trucks and their drivers are not adhering to the strict rules with which the domestic fleet complies.

Are traffic officers adequately resourced, trained and supported?

  Physical and visible traffic policing by trained and professional officers of the law has been in decline for several years. Government's own figures show that, between 1999 and 2004, operational traffic officer numbers fell by 21%. Specialised in-house traffic policing schools and instructors are now virtually non-existent, with training being carried out by private bought-in providers, as well as well publicised incidents of individual police officers carrying out "vehicle awareness" by travelling on the public highway at excessive speed without the guidance of a professional instructor.

  Furthermore, there has been some restructuring of traffic policing and an increasing use of "non-sworn" police staff which is a cause for concern.

What impact has the joint Roads Policing Strategy had on the work of traffic officers? How has it influenced the priority given to roads policing, and the resources invested?

  The road casualty reduction target is part of the Department for Transport's Public Service Agreement, yet traffic police are within the remit of the Home Office. This split could account for a failure to adequately include traffic policing objectives into the National Policing Plans. The Department for Transport published the joint Roads Policing Strategy with the Association of Chief Police Officers and the Home Office. This road policing strategy set a focus on denying criminals use of the road, reducing road casualties, tackling terrorism, reducing antisocial use of roads, and providing reassurance to the public.

  However, the RHA is concerned that the road policing strategy is presently not fulfilling these objectives. In recent years we have experienced a significant increase in the theft of vehicles and/or loads by professional criminals engaged in organised crime. Although the absence of any consistent approach to data collection makes it difficult to quantify how much road freight crime costs the United Kingdom each year, thefts recorded by Truck-Pol amounted to approximately £74 million in 2003-04.  This is a conservative estimate, as over 55% of crime reports received by Truck-Pol do not specify the load value. To compound this situation there are reports that Truck-Pol may well lose its government funding. This would only exacerbate a growing problem.

Have police forces across the UK got the balance right between technology-led enforcement and officers carrying out road policing duties?

  A dramatic increase in the reliance on technology rather than face to face enforcement has led to a reduction in confidence in the police and there is a widespread concern that emphasis has now changed from prevention of traffic related offences to collection of fines via electronic evidence alone.

  Safety Camera Partnerships now operate throughout most of England and Wales and unmanned side of the road safety cameras have changed the context of roads policing, offering local authorities an unending stream of funding, while at the same time reducing the perceived need to budget for extensive traffic car movements within an authorities area of jurisdiction.

  Although it can be argued that safety cameras (speed and red-light enforcement cameras) act as a visual deterrent, they only achieve their aim in one specific locality/area. Furthermore, a speed camera cannot detect other types of dangerous driving or driving whilst under the influence of drink or drugs. Nor can criminals or terrorists be deterred from their illegal activities by the presence of a camera, whereas the sight of a police car and traffic officers may well make them think again before committing an offence.

  The RHA feels that technology is being used as a replacement for the physical presence of uniformed traffic police officers, rather than as an additional tool for traffic police officers to use.

What evidence is there that the changing balance between traffic officers and technology has influenced casualty reduction rates?

  Although technological advances have undoubtedly had some effect on road traffic incidents, physical road traffic policing is an essential element of road casualty reduction. In 2004, traffic collisions killed 3,221 people and seriously injured a further 31,130. On average nine people still die on our roads each day. A further 85 are seriously injured.

  However, we must not forget that, despite its higher levels of traffic and congestion, the UK shares with Sweden and the Netherlands the lowest road fatality rates of all 25 European member states. Britain's roads are becoming safer to drive on and roads rated as having a high or medium risk for death and serious injuries have fallen by 30% since 2002 (source: AA Motoring Trust).

How effective and how efficient is roads policing in reducing the number of road casualties? Are police forces concentrating traffic enforcement on the right areas and activities to achieve maximum casualty reduction? To what extent do approaches to traffic enforcement and casualty reduction differ between forces across the country?

  Inter-urban single carriageway roads are amongst those categorised as having the highest risk of incident involving injury or fatality to those travelling in motor vehicles, with an accident rate of more than 10 times those of motorways. (source: Eurorap). It could be assumed from these statistics that police forces are not allocating enough resource to A and B roads, yet the priorities of Police and other enforcement agencies are largely determined, or at least strongly influenced by Government policies and priorities, so it is difficult to comment on this aspect of the Inquiry questions.

  Best Value Performance Indicator (BVPI) 132 (reduction of KSI road casualty rate) is the only BVPI applying to the Police Service, which deals with "road policing" and in the context of all the other BVPI's applicable to policing, clearly reflects the priority (or lack of) attached by Government to road policing.

  This in turn clearly influences Chief Constables' decisions about the deployment and management of resources within their respective forces and it can be no coincidence that the past decade has seen either a transfer of resources away from traffic patrol duties, or an increase in the non-traffic functions performed by traffic officers in most UK police forces.

  The RHA is concerned that different police forces have differing approaches to enforcement, particularly with regard to speeding. In the past enforcement action on speed was limited to those vehicles exceeding the 10% + 2 rule. However, a number of forces are now known to be employing much lower tolerances—and these are not consistent with each other. Whilst speeding must not be condoned, such differing approaches can only lead to confusion amongst drivers. The RHA would prefer to see a common approach.

How have technological developments affected both the detection and enforcement of drivers impaired through alcohol, drugs and fatigue? Is the best use being made of these technologies? What legislative, strategic and operational changes would improve the effectiveness of these technologies?

  There is much debate regarding intelligent speed adaptation, impairment detectors and "alcolocks". However, until these methods of detection have been thoroughly tested and approved the only proven way to improve detection of drivers operating vehicles whilst impaired by alcohol, drugs and fatigue is a police officer making an informed decision to interrogate a driver and use whatever technology is available.

How will the new funding arrangement announced by the Secretary of State affect the work of the road safety camera partnerships? What lessons can be learned from the experience of speed limit enforcement using camera technology?

  The management arrangements for the programme have encouraged closer working arrangements between the police, highway authorities and other local stakeholders to improve road safety.

  Although the introduction of safety camera technology has been received in a positive manner by a majority of the public, the various surveys that have been carried out since they were first introduced in the 1990's have shown a gradual reduction in support. A perceived over-dependence on safety camera enforcement, to the detriment of a physical police presence on our roads, urgently needs to be addressed.

How effective are multi-agency approaches to safety issues? What steps are required to improve partnership work between the police, Department for Transport, local authorities and other agencies?

  VOSA has recently been given the "Power to Stop" by the majority of the existing police authorities, to enable them to stop or pull over vehicles/drivers, without a uniformed police officer being in attendance. The RHA supports this move as it has facilitated an increased level of enforcement activity.

  The role of another Department for Transport agency, the Highways Agency, has been completely restructured over the last two years and staff levels are rising month by month to cover their new areas of responsibility. This is in contrast to the situation at VOSA where responsibilities are being increased when a 5% staff reduction is taking place.

  Highways Agency Traffic Officers are focussed on reducing congestion and improving reliability of the strategic road network, rather than being tasked with enforcement. Clearly this releases police officers from one of their previous roles and allows them to focus on higher priority activities. However, the RHA is concerned that the availability of HA traffic officers must not be used as an excuse to cutback on the number of police officers deployed.

CONCLUSION

  The most effective measure that could be implemented to change behaviour of drivers would undoubtedly be an increase in the number of traffic police patrols on our roads. Despite a Government commitment to provide a highly visible police presence on our roads (January 2005), the RHA believes that resources should be increased. Indeed, we believe there is a case for the establishment of a "national traffic police" force to ensure that this area is given appropriate priority and is undertaken in an effective, efficient and consistent manner throughout the country.

15 February 2006