Will lowering the speed limits make Britain’s roads safer? – ask BADDIA driving instructors in Bedford

THE GOVERNMENT says that it will save 1,000 lives.

YES
Kevin Clinton
Head of road safety, Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents

There is plenty of evidence that deaths and serious injuries are significantly reduced when 30mph zones are brought down to 20mph. It has also been proved that in zones with a 50mph speed limit rather than 60mph, the lower speeds result in fewer crashes and fewer serious crashes.

The case for reducing speed limits from 60mph to 50mph is mainly about rural roads where the design of the roads means that 60mph is too fast. They are the most dangerous roads, with the most people killed. Drivers going at 60mph may not be exceeding the speed limit but it is still too fast for conditions. Some rural roads are as safe as motorways, so not every road needs a 50mph limit. The Government is asking local authorities to review speed limits and strongly recommending reductions where the casualty rate is higher than on other types of roads. It is up to local authorities to look at where crashes happen and the nature of the roads.

In the past few years we have had a large increase in the number of 20mph roads. In areas where children are present there is a strong case for reducing the limit. Pedestrians who are hit at 20mph are less likely to be killed than at 30mph, and they are less likely to be hit in the first place.

Britain has a good record on road safety but deaths are not being reduced as fast as in other countries. We do not fully understand this; however, it is partly due to an increase in motorcycling, which is higher risk. Also, we still have a minority of drivers who behave outrageously badly.

Driver education and training is crucial and we should do more of it. Road safety education has not dropped off but speed limits and speed enforcement are an important part of the overall picture.

It is not true that drivers get distracted if they have to drive more slowly. Sometimes drivers will say that they find it difficult to concentrate on their speedometer, but a basic part of driving is knowing what speed you are doing. If you cannot drive using your speedometer and your observation, then you need to get some training.

There are ways to enforce speed limits. Traffic calming measures make it difficult for drivers to speed and, more recently, there have been attempts made with signs and road user education to persuade drivers to stick to the limits voluntarily. Of course, speed cameras and physical enforcement play an important role.

Local authorities should explain the reasons for reducing limits. That is something we do not do enough. We are not doing it for the sake of it – we are doing it to save lives.

 

NO
Brian Gregory
Chairman, Association of British Drivers

These proposals ignore the primary cause of road accidents, which is inattention. The Government’s answer to every road safety problem in the past few years has been installing speed cameras and reducing speed limits, when the answer to the majority of road safety problems is getting the road user to pay more attention and engineering the roads so that users do not have false perceptions. For example, the country is littered with transitional bends, and they are death traps – they are not allowed in the United States.

People assume that slower drivers are safer. Wrong. The very slow and very fast drivers are the most dangerous. The safest are those who travel at the 80th to 90th percentile of the speed of the traffic flow. Eighty years of evidence supports this. They are relatively fast but safe. Traditionally, speed limits have been set at the 85th percentile because it promotes normal free-flow conditions. The Government is talking about setting the speed limit at the 50th percentile.

The case for lowering limits is a false calculation based on a piece of research on 20mph limits in urban areas, in certain conditions. It does not have any relevance to free-flow conditions on high-speed roads.

The main body that advises the Department for Transport on road safety is the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety, which receives some funding from the manufacturers of road safety equipment, such as speed cameras and motorway barriers. What sort of policy do you believe it will promote?

Britain is dropping down the league table of road safety because enforcement has overtaken engineering and education. When was the last time you heard about the “two-second rule”? The countries that are succeeding in bringing down the death rate have an aggressive policy of investing in road safety through engineering. They have high-class roads, good education programmes and use enforcement where necessary.

We are doing the opposite. Engineering is predicated on using speed cameras instead of ironing out accident blackspots. Congestion and journey times will increase with lower speed limits. Drivers will be more tired. If a speed limit is not fast enough, people get distracted. People will spend more time looking at their speedometers than keeping their eyes on the road. It is possible that pedestrian accidents will increase and casualties will get worse. If you analyse the data, pedestrians are at fault in 60 per cent of cases by stepping on to the road without looking. Where is the education there?

Source: Timesonline website

Driving instructors in Bedford who are BADDIA members, what do YOU think?