Memorandum from dbda (RS 10)
I refer to the recently published call for evidence
to be submitted to the Transport Committee as part of a new inquiry
into what further road safety policy frameworks can be put in
place to assist casualty reduction on roads beyond 2010.
At the time of writing in the Department for
Transport's (DfT) most recently published Road Casualties Great
Britain sets out the latest position in relation to collisions
on the GB roads.
This document also outlines the present casualty
trends in respect of the year 2010 targets set by Government in
2000.
Progress has been excellent, by the end of 2006,
with:
— KSIs 33% below the 1994-98 baseline
target.
— Child KSIs 52% below the 1994-98
baseline target.
— Slight casualties 28% below the 1994-98
baseline target.
These figures do make encouraging reading for
not only those involved in road safety, but society in general.
However, during 2006 over 250,000 people were victims of reported
road collisions in GB.
dbda, are an organisation who have had involvement
for over 20 years with road safety education not only in the UK
but internationally and are known for the quality of our products.
dbda have built a bank of respected "blue
chip" corporate clients who are considered to be major players
in terms of road safety delivery in the community.
We would be pleased to assist in any way the
Transport Committee in its deliberations and our comments below
to each of the seven questions posed by the Committee will we
trust be helpful in formulating the new policies beyond 2010.
1. To what extent have targets for casualty
reduction been a useful tool for focusing professional activity?
Targets have the ability to focus attention
and concentrate/motivate national effort on specific priority
areas.
Any targets much be soundly based on robust
research evidence and good quality collision data and statistics.
Targets also have to be reviewed on a regular
basis, at present the existing three year review is adequate and
gives a good indication of current developments and allows for
realignment of strategy in light of emerging trends in terms of
collisions.
Our organisation would therefore support the
development on new specific targets post 2010.
2. What further measures need to be adopted
to reduce death and injuries arising from drinking and driving?
Aligned with EU levels, GB still continues to
have one of the highest BAC limits (80 milligrams of alcohol per
100 ml of blood) in the EU.
A graduated change from the year 2010 until
2020 to harmonize with Norway, Poland and Sweden of 20 milligrams
would be advantageous in terms of casualty reduction.
In the absence of an appetite for such a quantum
leap, we would certainly suggest a reduction to 50 mg by 2015
in conjunction with high profile enforcement campaigns. It has
been intimated previously that this step change would alone save
about 65 lived per year.
3. How does GB compare with other EU countries
in its approach to reducing death and injuries?
dbda have for a number of years used their road
safety expertise to assist the Red Cross National co-ordinators
across the EU with delivery of road safety education messages.
This is carried out as part of the first aid lectures to children.
As part of the development of the resources
dbda carried out an EU wide study of what was being developed,
what was being delivered, how it was being received and ultimately
what the casualty reduction picture was like across these countries.
What did come over was how well the UK was doing
in reducing casualties, how well it was supported financially
and the quality of educational resources were high. There was
however a lack of joined up thinking across some authorities and
a high degree of non-engagement with Central Government on certain
issues.
Many EU countries particularly the ones that
are new to the EU could benefit from the experience of the Road
Safety movement in the UK and in certain countries this has already
happened.
Where we must do better, however is in relation
to child pedestrians, for an advanced country in terms of road
safety we should be aiming to be on a par with the countries we
consider our equal on safety terms, namely Scandinavia and Germany.
At present we sit at 0.6 child pedestrians deaths per 100,000
compared to the 0.2 of Sweden. 0.3 of Finland and the 0.4 of Germany.
The UK should consider implementing a national
progressive education programme addressing risk from the early
years, for instance the well researched and evaluated Children's
Traffic Club.
4. How do approaches in reductions to risk
on the road compared to those adopted in other forms of transport?
Risk on the road in terms of safety procedures
is the poor relation when compared to air and rail travel.
In the Institution of Civil Engineers publication
"A Vision for Road Safety Beyond 2000" published
during the consultation period for the present targets, a table
of Relative Safety Indices for Passenger Travel indicated that
if the risk by distance travelled on rail was 1, car was 10, however
Air was 0.1. This I would contend reflects the expectancies of
the user and also the scale of investment in training and safety
precautions for these modes of transport.
More investment is required on the roads in
terms of driving for business as this is where the largest gains
can be made in terms of casualty reduction by ensuring safe systems
of work are in place.
Perhaps for this to have some effect there will
have to be a high profile prosecution following a major collision
on our roads.
5. Are there specific blockages by shortages
of appropriately trained and skilled staff?
Government had primed he pump with recent funding
of child pedestrian training, however a lot of the momentum was
lost due to the lack of published research. From this and in the
absence of long term contracts being forthcoming from the Local
Authorities, many of the highly skilled and well motivated staff
left to go to more permanent positions out with road safety and
hence the skills were lost after substantial outlay.
Some have gone onto to become road safety officers,
however sadly some are lost to the profession altogether.
With the up surge and sustained funding for
travel co-ordinators/cycle trainers this offers an ideal opportunity
for a multi-tasking with these groups and assist in the delivery
of risk and safety messaging.
However there is still a problem where established
RSOs are finding posts not being filled with their organisation
as the green issues become more prominent, there requires to be
some consolidation and support for the specialist role and a return
to 1 RSO ETP specialist per 50,000 of population as adopted by
many authorities previously from the LARSOA Code of Good Practice.
Road safety education should become compulsory
on the school curriculum.
Higher levels and greater funding for road traffic
policing, enabling Highway Patrols to have powers of enforcement.
6. What further policies, not already widely
used, might be considered for adoption and what evidence is for
their success?
Many policies and practices have been tried
and to a certain extent some testing has gone on, occasionally
research has been slow in coming out.
One area where we appear to not be progressing
is the child pedestrian issue. Sweden in 1999 sat at 0.2 per 100,000
of population, at this point Scotland and Wales sat at 1.6 and
1.4 respectively, England was at 0.8. In Road Casualties GB 2006,
Sweden remains unchanged at 0.2, Scotland and Wales have experienced
massive reductions and are now down to 0.6 and England down to
0.5.
Although starting from a high level Scotland
and Wales rate of decrease has been much better than England.
Why should this be?
Both of these countries have their own National
Road Safety organisations (Road Safety Scotland and Road Safety
Wales) co-ordinating road safety ETP measures country-wide. Both
also have Road Safety integrated into the curriculum and both
run the Children's Traffic Club free of charge to every three
year old in the respective countries.
Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland
are at present considering implementing The Club on a national
basis.
The Club is the most researched and evaluated
road safety initiative in the UK. Previous research has shown
that:
— 12% fewer overall road casualties
than non-members.
— 4% fewer casualties when walking.
— 20% fewer casualties as a result
of crossing whilst hidden by vehicle.
— Reduces the number of children who:
— play in the street; and
— Increases the number of children
who:
— hold hands with carers when out;
— are careful when crossing driveways;
— walk on inside of pavement;
— stop at kerb before crossing;
— look and listen for traffic before
crossing; and
— recognise safer crossings places.
— In a survey of parents of Club members:
— 76% said the Club had helped them
become more road safety aware; and
— 89% said it helped them teach road
safety to their other children.
Discussions are underway for further research
to take place in the next few months.
Government should consider implement through
subsidy The Children's Traffic Club to every three year old in
England.
Consideration should be given to a three year
pilot, along similar lines to "Kerbcraft" with a view
to Local Authorities/Health Boards taking it over financially
on conclusion of pilot.
7. What should be the priorities for government
in considering further targets for casualty reduction beyond 2010?
— Government should keep targets as
they focus effort and builds partnerships.
— Should be kept simple to encourage
understanding and engagement by the public, unlike the slight
target in Tomorrows Roads.
— Some index linking to the safest
forms of transport (Air and Rail).
— A challenging target for child casualty
reduction—Child Zero.
— Target period perhaps five years,
with annual reviews.
— Vision Zero is a highly laudable
target and in practice is probably never achievable, however it
does process the motivation for all groups to united behind and
bring road safety to the top of the agenda.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment and
I trust you will find the foregoing points from dbda to be of
assistance when formulating the new targets which I am sure will
be extremely challenging.
This submission represents the thoughts of dbda
ltd. and has been prepared by:
Bill Smith, Senior Business Development Manager,
dbda ltd. Bill Smith is at present Chair of RoSPA's National Road
Safety Committee, Chair of the Scottish Accident Prevention Council
Road Safety Committee and formerly Chair of the Road Safety Scotland
Publicity Committee.
These organizations I believe will be commenting
separately through their relevant secretariats and dbda will be
fully supportive of their comments.
February 2008
| 
