Memorandum from Sustrans (RS 27)
SUSTRANS
1. Sustrans is the UK's leading sustainable
transport charity. Our vision is a world in which people choose
to travel in ways that benefit their health and the environment.
We work on practical solutions to current transport challenges.
Our aim is to transform the UK's transport system and culture
so that:
— the environmental impacts of transport—including
climate change and resource depletion—are significantly
reduced;
— people can choose more often to travel
in ways that benefit their health;
— people have access to essential local
services without the need to use a car; and
— local streets and public spaces become
places for people to enjoy.
2. To achieve our aims we work on a wide
range of practical, evidence-based projects. These include:
— The 12,000-mile National Cycle Network.
— Connect 2: our £50million award-winning
programme to increase accessibility in 79 urban areas.
— Safe Routes to School and Bike It!,
which are promoting children's health and independent mobility.
— Low Carbon Travel, Liveable Neighbourhoods
and Active Travel: all promoting low carbon, non-motorised travel.
— TravelSmart: our pioneering work
in behaviour change, which is leading to a 10% reduction in traffic
in the Sustainable Travel Demonstration Towns and in other projects.
3. However, a perceived general lack of
road safety by the public makes our work more difficult. Adults
and young alike are often reluctant to use non-motorised transport,
certainly not at the levels often common in the rest of Europe
and sufficient to make real changes in improving health or reducing
carbon emissions. This lack of real road safety has wide-reaching
consequences, for ourselves and for our partners in national,
regional and local government. We hope the debate stimulated by
this Inquiry will help improve matters.
POLICY INTEGRATION
4. Historically "Road Safety"
was a topic very much in its own right, and for years was stuck
within its own policy silo. Recently the Government has made successful
attempts to broaden its policy linkage to other key areas, such
as social inclusion, young people, and improved health.
5. Sustrans strongly welcomes this, but
believes that much more remains to be done in the way of policy
integration. Accordingly before replying to the specific questions
posed by the Committee, we sketch out below some key players and
themes we believe important.
Road Danger Reduction
6. We believe that the main focus of road
safety should be tackling the danger caused by motorised traffic,
primarily cars. Therefore measures to reduce the power, volume
and speed of car traffic are a priority. Allied to this approach
should be a determined effort to promote sustainable modes, and
to "lock in the benefits", that is to reallocate road
space in their favour.
Staying Safe Action Plan
7. This was launched by the Government on
5 February 2008. It is a cross-Departmental plan, aimed at improving
the safety of children and young people. It encourages local authorities
to create more 20 mph zones and Home Zones; will create materials
for parents, children and young drivers; and will consult on issues
concerning 16-18 year old drivers and passengers. From April 2008
Child Death Review Panels will have to examine each unexpected
child death in their area. Sustrans welcomes this kind of integrated
approach to improving road safety.
TASTS
8. In October 2007 the Department for Transport
published "Towards a Sustainable Transport" system.
This began a year-long debate about how our economy can work efficiently
within a low carbon world. A major element of this will be "Government
having a role in removing barriers that prevent people from using
lower-carbon transport" (TASTS, page 33). Clearly, then,
there is a major strategic need to encourage these modes and make
them safe, in order to support wider Government objectives.
ROADPEACE
9. For years the cause of road traffic victims
has been championed by RoadPeace. Their work continues to highlight
the rather casual attention road traffic victims receive from
the police and the legal system, and the way that the consequences
of anti-social behaviour on the road are not fully considered.
Much of their effort is beyond Sustrans' core work, but we urge
the Committee to examine carefully the many constructive and necessary
comments RoadPeace will undoubtedly have to say.
PACTS
10. Sustrans is not a member of PACTS, but
we wish to underline the very useful work this body undertakes.
We have been particularly impressed by their recent publication
"Beyond 2010—a holistic report to road safety in Great
Britain". We believe this wide-ranging, integrated approach
is exactly the way forward, and commend it to the Committee.
NICE
11. In January 2008 the National Institute
for Health and Clinical Excellence published its recommendations
on "Promoting and creating built or natural environments
that encourage physical activity". A very useful quick reference
guide is available from www.nice.org.uk/ PH008.
12. This evidence-based work contains crucial
recommendations relating to health, physical activity, open spaces,
access to buildings, spatial planning and transport. One finding
is that transport planners should:
"Ensure pedestrians, cyclists and users
of other modes of transport are given the highest priority when
developing or maintaining streets or roads".
Other recommendations include restricting motor
vehicle access, introducing more traffic-calming, creating Safe
Routes to School, and reallocating road space to physically active
modes.
ECOTOWNS
AND HOUSING
GROWTH
13. Sustrans is pleased to have been invited
on to the DCLG expert reference group for EcoTowns. This is doing
valuable work regarding the integration of safe and sustainable
means of transport, in particular linkage to public transport
provision, reduced car use and low speeds. We believe the principles
here should be adopted in all new areas of Housing Growth, thereby
inbuilding road safety from the outset.
LOWER SPEEDS
14. Lower and better enforced speed limits
are central to improving road safety for all. Crucially, moving
the default 30 mph limit down to 20 mph would transform our urban
streets and save many lives (1). In 2003 the Health Development
Agency suggested this would reduce child deaths and injuries by
67%. 20 mph zones in London, Hull, Portsmouth and Newcastle are
supporting these findings, and we commend the present London Mayor
for his proposals to make 20 mph the main default speed.
MOTORCYCLES
15. At 2% of the traffic but 20% of its
fatalities there are clearly serious issues still to be addressed
with motorcycling. We remind the Committee of its inquiry into
this topic in the Session of 2006-07. At the time it said "Motorcycle
accident rates are far too high . . . It is time to consider radical
action to tackle this problem" (page 24).
ACCESS
16. Safe pedestrian access to tram, bus
and rail services is still not all it could be. There remain particular
problems—partly to do with historic legacy—with safe
routes on foot or by cycle to railway stations. Though we welcome
the Government's recent Station Travel Plans Steering Group, it
is a mater of regret that this has no money allocated to it. Sustrans
has itself developed detailed proposals over years for "Safe
Routes to Stations", but has found neither the public or
private sectors willing to back them (2).
CRITICAL MASS
This is also known as the "safety in numbers"
theory. Broadly speaking, the more pedestrians and cyclists there
are on the street, the more drivers "see" them and take
extra care (3). Thus contrary to popular fears, cycle use can
increase and overall casualties fall. Central London since the
introduction of the congestion charge is an excellent example
of this. Consequently any measures which raise the levels of walking
and cycling—such as Sustrans' new "Connect 2"
scheme—can in themselves contribute to Road Safety. The
same is achieved by modal shift, as in our TravelSmart work in
the Sustainable Travel Demonstration Towns.
LORRIES
18. There is a wide range of safety issues
associated with lorries, mostly foreign. About a third of cyclist
fatalities in central London are due to lorries, and older vehicles
are exempt from recent moves to retrofit better wing mirrors.
TACKLING THE
"CLARKSON EFFECT"
19. The great majority of road users are
law-abiding, but a vociferous and unrepresentative minority have
been allowed to capture much of the media. Issues to do with speed
and safety cameras are a case in point. The BBC has been wholly
irresponsible in allowing programmes like "Top Gear"
such prominence. The Committee may wish to examine the extent
to which the "Clarkson effect" exercises an adverse
influence on younger male drivers.
EFFECTIVE POLICING
20. We believe effective traffic policing,
whether on motorways or local streets, plays an important role
in combating a wide range of road safety and anti-social measures.
Greater use of police on bicycles has been very successful, and
more scope for this still exists. Community safety audits used
under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 can provide the police with
a powerful tool for public consultation on road safety issues.
When implemented they consistently show high levels of public
concern about speeding traffic (4).
ANSWERS TO
QUESTIONS
1. To what extent have targets for casualty
reduction been a useful tool for focusing professional activity?
21. Clearly a framework is needed for casualty
reduction. However great care is needed that casualties do not
"fall" simply because people are travelling less, in
particular by sustainable modes. We must beware of a mechanistic
approach to road safety which does not embody the kind of necessary
change in travel behaviour we outline elsewhere. Thus there should
also be instruments of measurement for traffic reduction, increases
in sustainable modes, and public attitudes to road danger.
22. We wish to remind the Committee that
there are major social inclusion issues here. Road crashes account
for 52% of all child fatalities. Children in social class 5 are
four times more likely to die from road crashes than social class
1 (5).
23. The bottom line is that by European
standards our streets are too often hostile and dangerous places,
where traffic adversely affects social inclusion and community
cohesion. The result is that the UK still has relatively low levels
of cycling and walking, and not very impressive levels of safety
either. It is also worth noting that a serious though unrealised
consequence is a lack of "passive surveillance" of the
public realm by those not in cars. It is within this context that
the much-publicised anti-social behaviour by some groups of young
people is allowed to go unchecked.
2. What further measures need to be adopted
to reduce deaths and injuries arising from drinking and driving?
24. The Government needs to build in measures
to tackle drink-driving with its wider proposals for tackling
excess consumption of alcohol. Equally, though, a tougher stance
on drink-driving could be used to reflect back more widely among
drinkers themselves. There seems no good reason why our drink-drive
limit of 80 milligrams should not be reduced to the 50 mg limit
common in the EU.
25. It is not our area of expertise, but
there appears to have been much public concern recently over drugs
and driving, and we urge the Committee to examine this topic also.
3. How does Great Britain compare with other
EU countries in its approach to reducing deaths and injuries?
26. We have noted elsewhere that most EU
countries have a lower drink/drive limit. Many make extensive
use of lower speed limits in residential areas, eg 30 kph (6).
Some have strict driver liability, which we have elsewhere urged
the Committee to investigate. On a per driver basis Holland issues
40 times more speeding tickets than the UK. Most countries spend
far more per head on walking and cycling (eg £5 compared
to the UK's £1). Holland leads the way in developing Sustainable
Road Safety, whilst Sweden looks further ahead with its Vision
Zero.
4. How do approaches in reductions in risk
on the roads compare to those adopted in other modes of transport?
27. Air and rail have quite clearly superior
approaches to safety. The lack of enforcement and margins for
error tolerated on the roads would not be countenanced by these
other modes. It should be noted that the exceptionally high standards
for rail put it at an unfavourable cost advantage vis-a"-vis
road, for both freight and passenger travel.
5. Are there specific blockages caused by
shortages of appropriately trained and skilled staff?
28. There appear to be two main areas:
(a) Within the wider policy-making community,
which is still not linking road safety into the wider sustainability
agenda.
(b) Within the police, magistrates, Crown Prosecution
Services and judges—where the full consequences of anti-social
behaviour on the road (speeding in particular) are still not fully
considered.
6. What further policies, not already widely
used, might be considered for adoption, and what evidence is there
for their success?
29.
— Wider use of Automatic Number Plate
Recognition: people who commit anti-social behaviour on the road
tend to be those who do the same elsewhere.
— Mandatory fitting of Intelligent
Speed Adaptation: these have now been extensively trialled in
the UK, and were strongly supported by the EC MASTER project nearly
a decade ago (7).
— Mandatory fitting of in-vehicle black
box recorders.
Changes in the Law
30. Road death offences should be put on
a par with manslaughter. The law needs to deal more seriously
with causing serious injury.
Strict Driver Liability
31. This is an issue which we now believe
deserves official research and consideration. It would place the
duty of care on those posing the greatest risk ie motorists. It
would only involve civil compensation, but if implemented has
the potential to send a very strong and positive message about
safety on the road. We urge the Committee to consider this issue
and the best ways of taking it forward.
7. What should be the priorities for government
in considering further targets for casualty reduction beyond 2010?
32.
— Integration of Road Safety into wider
programmes of sustainability.
— Adoption of a road danger reduction
approach.
— Decreasing the volumes of motor traffic.
— Overall reductions in speed limits.
— Reductions in the power and acceleration
of cars and motor-cycles.
— Much closer integration with public
health programmes to promote active travel and to counter obesity.
— Pay particular attention to the skills
and attitudes of young drivers.
— Pay high regard to the needs of pedestrians,
cyclists, children, young people, the elderly and those with mobility
problems.
— Conduct a separate review of road
safety in rural areas.
— The Health and Safety Executive should
establish a unit for road deaths investigation within the course
of work.
— Extra awareness training of vulnerable
road users to be given to the drivers of fleet cars, vans, buses,
taxis and lorries.
— Any revenues from road-pricing schemes
should be ring-fenced for the increased use and safety of sustainable
modes.
— The closure of public facilities
be audited for road safety issues, notably the increase generated
in motor traffic.
CONCLUSION
33. Sustrans believes that the Government
faces a new policy agenda, one which includes issues of Climate
Change, Resource Depletion, Localism, Obesity, Housing, and Low
Carbon Travel. Central to tackling these issues will be major
reductions in private car use, and a large increase in sustainable
travel. Real and lasting improvements in Road Safety will be a
crucial part of this change, and make a major contribution to
achieving these new aims.
REFERENCES
(1) RoadPeace (2007) "20 mph default
speed limit: good for cyclists, children and the planet".
(2) Sustrans (2003) "Safe Routes
to Stations", Information Sheet FF40, Bristol.
(3) Jacobsen, P. "Safety in numbers:
more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling".
Journal of Injury Prevention 2003, volume 9.
(4) Slower Speeds Initiative (2001) "Killing
Speed: a good practice guide to speed management".
(5) Christie, N. (1995) "The High
Risk Child Pedestrian", TRL.
(6) Commission for Integrated Transport
(2005) "Study of European best practice in the delivery of
integrated transport".
(7) MASTER Project (1999) "Managing
speeds of traffic on European roads", Office of European
Communities.
February 2008
| 
