THE WRONG SORT OF SPEED...
02 May 2006 - Safe Speed

Calling today for a major reform of our failing road safety policy the Safe Speed campaign explained that the failure is mainly caused by too much emphasis on ''the wrong sort of speed''.

Safe Speed agrees that it is most important that people do not drive too fast, but warns that the speed limit does not provide a useful definition of what ''too fast'' is.

Of the 200,000 injury crashes each year, about 24,000 have ''excessive speed'' listed as a contributory factor. Of the total some 7,000 involve exceeding a speed limit. Yet countless millions of ''speeding offences'' are committed every single day with no adverse consequence.

With literally billions speeding offences committed each year on British roads resulting in just 7,000 injury crashes it should be obvious that the attempt to ''stamp out speeding'' is extremely misguided.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign (www.safespeed.org.uk) said: ''In the UK ''speeding'' - exceeding the speed limit - is endemic, yet crashes are quite rare and crashes involving exceeding a speed limit are very rare.''

''The problem has arisen'', explains Paul ''because we have taken an oversimplified view of speed. The sort of speed that affects safety is relative to immediate conditions. We often call this sort of speed ''appropriate'' or ''inappropriate'' - but this is not the same sort of speed that the law seeks to enforce. Speed limits are set and enforced in absolute terms. But drivers must manage relative speed continuously. Drivers soon become skilled at setting safe and appropriate speeds. Asking them to drive at absolute speeds laid down in law has become a distracting obsession.''

''There''s nothing wrong with sticking to the speed limit unless it detracts from something else that was more important - but unfortunately that''s exactly what''s happening. A excessive focus on the wrong sort of speed is distracting and de-skilling our drivers and we''re paying a heavy price in blood.''

''Safe driving isn''t a behaviour to be controlled. It is instead a skill to be nurtured.''

Time to react
=============

One of the dreams of speed enforcement is that it will give drivers more time to react. But time to react isn''t something that can be ''given''. Drivers make time to react for themselves by adequate observation and adjusting speed to suit the conditions. Consider these points:

* If you have your eyes shut you have zero time to react at any speed.

* Risky places with high hazard density require us to slow far below the speed limit. We do this routinely - almost without noticing - and we do it to ensure that we have time to react.

Speed is under-represented in the crash stats by 10:1
=====================================================

DfT figures suggest that over 50% of us are speeding in free flowing conditions at sample sites, yet other DfT figures suggest that only around 1 in 8 crashes involve ''excessive speed'' and perhaps one third of those actually involve
exceeding a speed limit. Taken at face value it appears that ''speeding'' is
around ten times safer than not speeding. Of course it isn''t so simple. The
reality is that most speeding takes place where there are fewest hazards and
most crashes take place where there are most hazards. Unfortunately most speed
enforcement takes place in low hazard environments where higher speeds are
perfectly safe and appropriate.

Contrast this with drink driving where under 2% of drivers are drunk but 25% of
all crashes involve drunks. Drunk driving is over-represented in the crash
stats by 10:1

Average crash severities are FAR below those that we would expect from free
travelling speeds.
==============================================================

The government - correctly - tells us that a child pedestrian struck at 30mph
has a 20% chance of survival.

In the real world of the 14,000 or so child pedestrians struck and recorded as
injured in built up areas each year only about 0.4% are killed.

Clearly we are NOT hitting them at free travelling speeds of 30mph or more. If
we were we would expect some 2,800 deaths, not 60 or so.

The main factor that saved about 2,800 from death is appropriate driver
behaviour - slowing down in areas of danger and attempting to avoid impact. We
need to build on these strengths.

Urgent reforms required:
========================

* Scrap the speed camera programme - speed cameras are greater in distraction
than benefit

* Restore early 1990''s levels of Traffic Police. Instruct them to use their
judgement to identify risky behaviours.

* Ensure that policies are ''psychologically sound'' and value safe practices. It
is not sound to make responsible drivers feel persecuted - it reduces their
performance.

* End the use of misleading road safety statistics. Appoint a ''statistics
auditor'' to ensure highly accurate information.

* Emphasize the important safe driving skills - concentration, observation,
anticipation, planning and risk assessment / hazard perception.

* Create standards for higher level driver training to increase aspiration.

* Ensure that system-level effects of policy are properly considered.

* Recognise that legal behaviours and safe behaviours can frequently be
different. Ensure that the emphasis is on safe behaviours; not behaviours that
are merely legal.

www.safespeed.org.uk

More News
  For May 2006
  From Safe Speed
  For Safety
  Driver247.com Home Page