Memorandum from the Institute of Road
Safety Officers (IRSO) Scotland, and the Scottish Accident Prevention
Council (RS 45)
On 4 February 2008 a seminar took place in Edinburgh
run jointly by IRSO (Scotland) and the Scottish Accident Prevention
Council. Some 60 Road Safety practitioners from all around the
country took part and—as a key part of the day—considered
the 7 points of consultation in workshops. The following represents
the bullet pointed views that were collated that day—I trust
they are of some assistance to inform your deliberations.
Q1 To what extent have targets for casualty
reduction been a useful tool for focusing professional activity?
— Useful in a professional sense for
focusing strategies.
— In a limited way for senior managers
and sourcing funding.
— Local targets much more important
for day to day working.
— National targets more useful at strategic
level.
— Validity of targets doubted due to
a change in the reporting of accident data.
— Due to press/public perceptions KSI
targets are focused on.
— Fatal accidents are usually random.
Q2 What further measures need to be adopted
to reduce deaths and injuries arising from drinking and driving?
— Reduction in the current drink drive
limit. Set level low enough to prevent anyone having one drink.
Zero level difficult to enforce and not possible.
— Review Drink drive education to make
it more socially unacceptable. Start earlier, at primary school,
as once children leave primary their attitudes are set.
— Review the number of outlets/retailers
that are permitted to sell alcohol. This would take many years
to become socially acceptable but would assist in other areas
outwith drinking and driving—health of the nation.
— Increase penalties for drink drive
convictions. Increased fines, longer disqualification periods,
re-sit driving test. Harsher penalties for reoffenders. Crush
cars of drink drivers.
— Frequent and improved public transport,
particularly in rural areas, to encourage motorists away from
drink driving.
— Increase the numbers of Police Officers
able/available to enforce the drink drive limit. The fear of getting
caught is a simple deterrent.
Q3 How does Great Britain compare with other
EU countries in its approach to reducing deaths and injuries?
— Not enough info on European RS education
to compare.
— On surface compare well against southern
& eastern European countries but poorly against northern.
— Road Policing has been thinned down.
— More vehicles on road and more young
drivers.
— Graduated licenses—P Plates,
restricted driving, number of passengers.
— National Government directed approach
rather than local—more joined up.
— Funding from other areas eg education.
Q4 How do approaches in reductions in risk
on the roads compare to those adopted in other modes of transport?
— Compare with training for train drivers
and pilots.
— Revamp the driving test to include
motorway, night etc.
— Change the law to have a probationary
period.
— Change the age limit, brain not developed
until 25.
— Restrict engine size—would
not affect top speed but would restrict acceleration.
— Zero tolerance for drink driving,
allow random testing, alcolocks.
— Increase in traffic police.
— Methods of delivery is OK at present
but more publicity, local and national, required. Tell the truth
about accidents don't hide behind statistics. Get media on our
side to describe how/why certain accidents happen.
Q5 Are there specific blockages caused by
shortages of appropriately trained and skilled staff?
— Longer term funding is required—short
term leads to unfinished business.
— Road safety not used as a patch for
other problems in society.
— Make road safety compulsory in schools.
— More effective funding—not
just year by year.
— Funding year to be September to September
for engineering—more able to use up left over money in August/September.
— Stop comparison of stats between
single years and five year averages as these move around a lot
for small areas.
— Injuries to older road users—pedestrians,
drivers and passengers.
Q6 What further policies, not already widely
used, might be considered for adoption and what evidence there
is for their success?
— Graduated licences for young people
eg no passengers for first year—pass plus thought to be
good.
— Change speed limits from mph to kph.
— Education a vital priority.
— Develop a good public transport system.
— Retesting for older drivers.
— Managing driver behaviour—dealing
with in car distractions such as mobile phones and sat nav systems.
— Reduction in the drink drive limit.
— Vehicle fitness—stricter MOT
test.
— Dealing with boy racers—graduated
licenses, education for both pupils and parents—parents
bad habits get passed down.
— Road engineering—better maintenance—more
money.
— Advanced driving tests to give better
knowledge and cheaper insurance.
— Funding of road safety should be
provided if these priorities are thought to be socially necessary.
— Learn from other countries.
Q7 What should be the priorities for government
in considering further targets for casualty reduction beyond 2010?
— Disaggregation of current targets
eg children within certain age groups, young drivers and passengers,
older people or vulnerable groups.
— Index link with other modes of transport—perception
and reality of casualties—more media coverage of these accidents.
— Linking school development plans
to road safety education—school travel plans.
— Targets for road safety education
in schools.
— Legislation regarding driving laws
and licensing—such as reducing drink driving offences.
— More road policing—cannot set
targets if not able to enforce.
— Protected funding streams for road
safety under a national body.
— Put funding in place to enable challenging
targets to be met.
— More evaluation of the effectiveness
of travel safety initiatives.
— National targets related to the roll
out of engineering eg 20 mph zones, setting appropriate speed
limits.
February 2008
|
