Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Aug 01, 2026 09:47

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jun 14, 2007 22:47 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a ... ge_id=1770

UK roads no longer the safest in Europe

Last updated at 13:00pm on 14th June 2007

The country has lost its top ranking position in the European road safety league as progress on reducing the number of road deaths has been slower than in other countries.

The UK now has a higher number of road deaths per million population than the Netherlands and Sweden, according to the European Transport Safety Council's (ETSC) first Road Safety PIN Report.

The report's findings were released at a conference on UK road safety organised by the ETSC and Loughborough University's Vehicle Safety Research Centre (VSRC).

The report shows that between 2001 and 2005 there was a 7 per cent reduction in the number of road deaths in the UK compared to a 25 per cent reduction in Sweden and the Netherlands and a 35 per cent drop in France.

However while the number of drink-driving related deaths has remained high over the past decade, the average driving speed has dropped by 9 per cent on urban roads.

There has been a 3 per cent reduction in the average speed on roads with a 70mph speed-limit but roads where the top speed is 60mph have seen an 9 per cent increase in the average speed of vehicles.

Only in France, Belgium and Switzerland have speeds been cut on all types of road in recent years.

In 2005, 90% of people sitting in the front seats of cars and vans in the UK wore seatbelts but the proportion people wearing seatbelts in the front seats of vehicles in France, Germany and Malta was even higher.

Professor Richard Allsop, ETSC Board Member and Chairman of the PIN Programme, said: "Much road safety policy and practice in the UK is good, but these comparisons with our fellow-Europeans come as a wake-up call to anyone tempted to acquiesce in present levels of death and injury on our roads - perhaps especially those concerned with priorities for law-enforcement."

Professor Pete Thomas, from VSRC, said: "The UK has been a leader in road and vehicle safety for many years helping to set the standard for Europe.

"Progress in reducing road deaths has slowed and the UK has to develop more innovative solutions and apply them."

Robert Gifford, executive director of the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, said: "This objective analysis of the performance of the UK reminds us of how much more progress we need to make.

"We used to claim that we had the safest roads in Europe. That claim is no longer matched in reality. The UK clearly needs to do much more to reclaim its position at the top of the EU road safety league."

Road Safety Minister Stephen Ladyman said Britain has some of the safest roads in the world.

He said: "Indeed when assessed on the basis of fatalities per passenger kilometre, which I believe is the best indicator to use when drawing a comparison as it takes into account both the number of fatalities and level of passenger mobility, Britain is second only to Sweden.

"We have been congratulated by the ETSC for reducing overall speeds on urban roads and continually improving seatbelt wearing rates.

"Alongside this, we have already met our target of halving the number of children killed or seriously injured by 2010."

***

This of course is the story that today's Times article was intended to bury.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 00:57 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Safe Speed issued the following PR at 23:06 Thursday:

PR503: We no longer have the safest roads in Europe

news: for immediate release

The UK no longer has the Safest Roads in Europe, the Daily Mail reports.

Commenting on the news, Paul Smith, founder of SafeSpeed.org.uk, said: "After
28 years of having the safest roads in Europe we have finally lost our crown.
There's one reason and one reason only. We have had bad road safety policy
since the early 1990s. At the centre of the bad policy are speed cameras and
the oversimplified notion that 'slower is safer' - if only things were so
simple!.

"An obsession with vehicle speeds has caused a gross neglect of road user
quality - and road user quality is the true foundation of all road safety."

"Department for Transport policies have been based on dodgy statistics and
false assumptions. No wonder they haven't worked. We need to scrap speed
cameras to 'wash away' the layers of oversimplified thinking. Department for
Transport must admit their mistakes and take full responsibility."

"Safe Speed's Scrap Speed Cameras Week will highlight the issues starting 24th
June 2007."

<ends>

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 01:13 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Here's the PR from ETSC: http://www.etsc.be/documents/PIN%20Repo ... 062007.pdf

But I'm damned if I can find the report. It's supposed to be on: http://www.etsc.be/PIN.php but it doesn't seem to be.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 03:06 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 02:25
Posts: 331
SafeSpeed wrote:


From the PR

5) A sound rule of thumb is that, on average, a 1% reduction in mean speed of traffic leads to a 4% reduction in fatal accidents.

Height Kills


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 07:52 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
Quote:
We have been congratulated by the ETSC for reducing overall speeds on urban roads ...

Why would this be something worthy of congratulations exactly?

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 07:54 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
The BBC should arn't reporting this and many other anti camera/government stories. They should be shamed and exposed

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 08:29 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
SafeSpeed wrote:
But I'm damned if I can find the report. It's supposed to be on: http://www.etsc.be/PIN.php but it doesn't seem to be.


First Report

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 08:35 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 20:14
Posts: 252
Location: Hampshire
I do believe that we need more traf pols. That said I read this quote from ROSPA and wondered what evidence backed it up. Also could there be other factors that might have a low alcohol level as more of a coincidental factor.

For example are the chances of being in a fatal accident greater if you drive in the evening/night anyway becuase of factors such as tiredness, bad light etc? It is then a coincidence that at these times there are more people that have had a drink or 2, than at other times of the day.

Quote:
A spokesman for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents said: "We would be delighted if the drink-drive limit was lowered. Between 50mg and 80mg, you are six times more likely to be involved in a fatal accident than someone with no alcohol. Reducing the limit from 80mg to 50mg would save around 65 lives and 230 serious injuries on the roads each year."


So ROSPA say "change the limit and fewer people die". Sounds like the anti-speed mantra to me.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 09:02 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
Quote:
A spokesman for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents said: "We would be delighted if the drink-drive limit was lowered. Between 50mg and 80mg, you are six times more likely to be involved in a fatal accident than someone with no alcohol. Reducing the limit from 80mg to 50mg would save around 65 lives and 230 serious injuries on the roads each year."

So, are they saying that the 65/230 above represents people INVOLVED in accidents and having blood alcohol levels between 50 and 80mg? Did all these people CAUSE the accidents or were they just driving along safely and legally when someone else (over the limit?) hit them?

If you think about it, this statistic could mean that a coach load of people just coming back from a dinner where they each had a glass of wine was forced off the road by a drugged driver and they were all killed.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:29 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:27
Posts: 361
France and the UK have roughly the same population but France had 8162 deaths in 2001 and reduced that to 5318 last year.

Well done France.

Meanwhile we had 3598 reducing to 3337 and the newspaper report is titled 'UK roads no longer the safest in Europe'?

I despair sometimes. :roll:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:41 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 16:04
Posts: 816
This will help explain it :roll:

Daily Wail

Quote:
Britain is the speed camera capital of Europe but is fast losing the battle to reduce road deaths.
The number of roadside cameras has trebled in six years while mobile speed traps set up across the country have increased 14-fold.

Yet despite an unrelenting war on the motorist, Britain's record for saving lives and reducing accidents is much worse than other countries.

An over-reliance on cameras - at a time when fewer traffic police are patrolling the roads - has led to an alarming relative rise in drink-drive deaths.

As a result, Britain has plummeted in Europe's road-safety league table.

Critics say this is proof that the speed-camera policy has failed.

According to the latest figures, there are now 5,562 roadside speed cameras in Britain. That compares to 1,935 back in 2000.

Over the same period, mobile speed traps have increased from just 173 to 2,373.

The latest figures confirming Britain as having the highest number of speed cameras in Europe were revealed in a Parliamentary written answer to Tory transport spokesman Owen Paterson.

Scroll down for more...
Image

It came as Britain was shown to no longer have the safest roads in Europe, thanks largely to the failure to tackle drink-driving.

It has lost its top-ranking position in the European road safety league because progress on reducing the number of road deaths has been slower than other countries.

Britain now has 54 road deaths per million of population, according to the European Transport Safety Council's first road safety report.

This is more than the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, Norway and Malta.

The report shows that between 2001 and 2005 there was a mere seven per cent reduction in the number of road deaths in Britain compared to a 25 per cent drop in Sweden and the Netherlands and 35 per cent in France.

Drink driving deaths have risen by two per cent in Great Britain and by one per cent in Northern Ireland, compared to a drop of 11 per cent in the Czech republic, nine per cent in Belgium and six per cent in Germany.

"The country has made little progress on reducing road deaths between 2001 and 2005," the council's report says.

"Numbers of drink-driving deaths in Great Britain have remained high over the last decade. They have actually risen in relation to other deaths, so this has slowed down the overall reduction in road deaths."

Yesterday, separate research from the speed camera alert system Wayfinder also showed Britain topping the European league table for cameras.

Wayfinder, which used statistics compiled at an earlier date, found 4,875 cameras in Britain, followed by Germany (3,108), Italy (1,945), Holland (1,594), Belgium (1,180) and France (973).

In addition, for every 620 miles of road, there are 20 cameras in Britain, nine in Germany, six in Italy, two in France and just one in Spain.

A Wayfinder spokesman said: "Britain is undoubtedly the speed camera capital of Europe.

"Until now, ministers and police have insisted they are there to save lives, not to raise revenue, which is why the locations are made known - on road safety grounds. But in future there could instead be a hidden mobile speed camera on every corner."

Wayfinder has unveiled a mobile-phone based "Speed Alert" to warn drivers of speed limits and camera locations throughout Western Europe.

A separate report by insurers swiftcover.com, prepared by Datamonitor, reveals that cameras now cost motorists £145million a year in fines and increased premiums.

In all, fixed penalties rose from 1,898,320 in 2004-2005 to 1,910,474 in 2005-2006.

Yesterday Transport minister Stephen Ladyman insisted Britain still has some of the safest roads in the world.

At a private meeting of road safety experts, he was accused of trying to deflect the blame for Labour's "failed policy" to the police.

The allegation followed the leaking of a critical letter he has written to police chiefs, ordering them to put greater emphasis on drink and drugdriving offences and traffic patrols.

But police blame ministers for failing to make roads policing a high enough priority.

Tory transport spokesman Mr Paterson said: "It's ludicrous to try and police 30 million motorists with automated machines. We need real living people, not roadside robots."

_________________
Prepare to be Judged


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:47 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:27
Posts: 361
R1Nut wrote:
This will help explain it

Doesn't really explain why the Daily Prole has titled the piece 'UK roads no longer the safest in Europe' does it?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:54 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 16:04
Posts: 816
Icandoit wrote:
R1Nut wrote:
This will help explain it

Doesn't really explain why the Daily Prole has titled the piece 'UK roads no longer the safest in Europe' does it?


I think they're referring to the Road deaths per million population figure in the right hand column of the picture. Bad conclusion to reach I agree but nothing worse than the conclusions the Government arrive at.

_________________
Prepare to be Judged


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:57 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:27
Posts: 361
R1Nut wrote:
I think they're referring to the Road deaths per million population figure in the right hand column of the picture. Bad conclusion to reach I agree but nothing worse than the conclusions the Government arrive at.

I've just been searching for the source of those figures from the ETSC but without success. Anyone know where they came from?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 11:10 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
http://www.etsc.be/documents/PIN_Report.pdf

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 11:12 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2004 20:14
Posts: 252
Location: Hampshire
malcolmw wrote:
Quote:
A spokesman for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents said: "We would be delighted if the drink-drive limit was lowered. Between 50mg and 80mg, you are six times more likely to be involved in a fatal accident than someone with no alcohol. Reducing the limit from 80mg to 50mg would save around 65 lives and 230 serious injuries on the roads each year."

So, are they saying that the 65/230 above represents people INVOLVED in accidents and having blood alcohol levels between 50 and 80mg? Did all these people CAUSE the accidents or were they just driving along safely and legally when someone else (over the limit?) hit them?

If you think about it, this statistic could mean that a coach load of people just coming back from a dinner where they each had a glass of wine was forced off the road by a drugged driver and they were all killed.


Exactly, it is the misuse of statistics to further some campaign that concerns me. Someone sober (but tired/boy racer) could hit a person in the 50 to 80mg range and yet drink would be blamed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 11:49 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 12:27
Posts: 361
anton wrote:
http://www.etsc.be/documents/PIN_Report.pdf

I can find that one, but don't see that there are any figures in it as to 'Road Deaths per Million of Population' (as mentioned in the Dail Mail article) year on year which would be required to say with confidence that 'UK roads no longer the safest in Europe'.

The only information in that relating to 'deaths per million' in that report (pg13) suggests that the UK is behind Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland but not that it has 'got worse'.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 21:33 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
We (UK) prided ourselves on our safe record. We no longer have this. I decided to focus attention on 4 regional papers beyond Cumbria. I read of true traumatic tragedy each day. I report each one to show up each one. I sometimes report on muppet but by and large - each one seems to show hit.run/drunk/illiterate chav illegal.

We are still very safe overall. We do need more BIB to "make it so" :wink: all the same. Less focus on speed and more on correcting driver error as in the past. We will win through if we box clever :wink:

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !

But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 00:39 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
Mad Moggie wrote:
...illiterate...


Glass houses mate :D ;)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 00:44 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
RobinXe wrote:
Mad Moggie wrote:
...illiterate...

Glass houses mate :D ;)

He seems to have spelt that word right to me :P

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 151 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.021s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]