Memorandum from the Retail Motor Industry
Federation (RMIF) (RS 46)
The Retail Motor Industry Federation (RMIF)
welcomes the opportunity to respond to the call for evidence for
the forthcoming Inquiry into Road Safety.
The RMIF represents businesses concerned with
providing motor industry products and services and has more than
11,000 members throughout UK. You will be aware that the annual
turnover of the UK retail motor industry is in excess of £70
billion and employs 600,000 people in 30,000 businesses. Annually
the industry raises £33 billion in tax revenue.
The following comments are offered on the questionnaire:
1. To what extent have targets for casualty
reduction been a useful tool for focusing professional activity?
These targets have served the dual purpose of
highlighting the magnitude of the problem as well as setting a
benchmark for improvement and the industry has reacted in a positive
manner. Vehicle build quality, particularly with regard to pedestrian
safety has accelerated exponentially.
2. What further measures need to be adopted
to reduce deaths and injuries arising from drinking and driving?
— This must be an Educational matter.
It is quite obvious that the initial "threat" of penalty
and disqualification has had an effect on the casual drinker.
To now attack the hardcore drinker would increase the cost of
policing out of all proportion.
— More research is required to identify
habits and locations of serious drinkers. Is it drinking at home,
public house, restaurant or another quantifiable source, and that
the focus be placed there. Pubs currently honour their social
responsibilities by having posters about drinking and driving
yet restaurants, golf clubs etc . . . do not.
— It is also recommended that additional
education is needed about "the morning after" and how
alcohol can stay in the blood and lead to accidents.
3. How does Great Britain compare with other
EU countries in its approach to reducing deaths and injuries?
Northern Ireland offers a certificate or qualification
as part of secondary education (see item seven below).
4. How do approaches in reductions in risk
on the roads compare to those adopted in other modes of transport?
Vehicles that are used for public transport
undergo regular professional maintenance. The same criteria do
not apply to cars or motorcycles. Drivers consider the MOT as
a chore that they only carry out because the law requires them
to do so. Many motorists would not have any servicing carried
out if it were not the MOT. For drivers of new cars, the first
MOT point at three years is the first time many vehicles receive
any servicing. This begs the question is service to be considered
preparative or reparative; the latter would suggest that cars
are un-roadworthy until the fault is disclosed rather than preventing
a vehicle from becoming un-roadworthy with service.
5. Are there specific blockages caused by
shortages of appropriately trained and skilled staff?
There remains a continuing shortage of skilled
staff, which causes inevitable delays.
6. What further policies, not already widely
used, might be considered for adoption and what evidence there
is for their success?
— Better levels of highway maintenance.
— Action on road engineering and design
to identify and eliminate accident black spots.
— Action to reduce diesel spillages
particularly at roundabouts and road junctions, which are a major
cause of crashes affecting motorcyclists.
— Greater clarity is required for the
policy on road speed humps. Speed humps cause considerable safety
damage to vehicles, leading to premature failure of suspension
components such as sway-bar bushes, shock absorbers and steering
swivels.
— Speed humps also greatly increase
pollution from car emissions due to constant acceptation and deceleration.
7. What should be the priorities for government
in considering further targets for casualty reduction beyond 2010?
— The current system whereby the Highway
Code is studied just to pass a theory test leaves the learning
far too late, and demeans the purpose of the code to all road
users.
— Greater focus should be made on children
and the young people about the use of roads and vehicle safety.
Teaching the "highway code" should start at school.
The process of education should continue as they grow older right
through the period when they use the road first as pedestrians,
then as cyclists and later as motorcyclists and drivers.
MOTORCYCLE RIDER
TRAINING
Within the RMIF, The RMI Motorcycle Rider Training
Association (MRTA) exclusively represents the companies involved
in the provision of motorcycle rider training. 83,000 people took
their motorcycle rider test in 2006-07. There are 662 training
bodies authorised to carry out Compulsory Basic Training (CBT)
in the UK.
Almost two thirds (65%) of motorcycle test candidates
pass first time. Motorcycle test candidates have the highest pass
rate for the national theory test—84%, compared to 68% for
car and 75% for lorry.
The MRTA was successful in getting vital changes
made to the regulations implementing the second EU Driving Licence
Directive (DLD). The new bike test that comes into force in September
2008 is now far less prescriptive than originally planned. For
example, speed timing will now only cover swerve and emergency
stop manoeuvres after the specified turn radii were dropped, and
restrictions on space have been relaxed. Our focus is now firmly
on the forthcoming 3rd Driving Licence Directive.
In 2007 the MRTA strengthened its relationship
with the DSA with the formation of a joint forum designed to be
at the front end of DSA policy making. It has been established
at a time when motorcycle training schools are facing a plethora
of issues, including the new 2008 test, Pass-Plus for bikes, the
CBT review, Pre-test training and DAS reviews, not to mention
the Post Test Register and the third DLD.
The RMIF would very much welcome an opportunity
to give oral evidence before the Committee in due course.
February 2008
| 
