“This would send a powerful signal to the outside world that government supports the use of the new systems”

Employers have a major part to play in improving road safety and speed management, with “black boxes” set to perform an instrumental role with their fitment to fleet vehicles recommended in a new report by the influential Motorists’ Forum. The report, which has been sent to the Department for Transport, is designed to help the government further develop its road safety strategy following a request from Transport Secretary Alistair Darling for a more detailed investigation of speed management. Not surprisingly the report, called Road Safety and Speed Management, concludes that speed is a contributory factor in crashes and that the management of speed is an important element in any successful effort to reduce deaths and injuries on the roads.

Equally unsurprisingly, the report says there is no straightforward solution and that effective action involves numerous organisations and individuals. All parties, it says, must commit to programmes of co-ordinated action in a whole range of areas, including engineering, technology, training, communication, regulation and enforcement. The Motorists’ Forum report labels its action call “The Road Safety Deal”, with the parties key to its success being: government, drivers, highway authorities, enforcement authorities, the motor industry, insurance industry, motoring organisations and employers. The government has yet to give its formal response to the report, which was delivered to Mr Darling in the autumn. However, the report’s authors say in it that if “The Road Safety Deal” approach is accepted, government must take leadership and be instrumental in bringing together representatives of all the organisations highlighted to discuss their commitment. A co-ordinated programme could then be compiled and monitored regularly.

The report contains more than 50 recommendations and suggestions that must be acted upon individually by the different organisations and drivers. While many relate to stimulating innovation, disseminating best practice, improved road signage – including the phasing out of the “ambiguous” national speed limit sign (a white disk with a diagonal black bar through it) and its replacement with signs showing actual speed limits – road engineering improvements, speed limit reviews, increasing resources for road safety measures and communication and calling on drivers to take pride in their driving, to undergo voluntary further training, and to drive at an appropriate speed for road and traffic conditions, other recommendations are more controversial.

These include that fleet operators, company fleets and rental companies should take the lead in the fitment of “black boxes” to vehicles and that the motor industry should continue to support the development of in-car information technology systems and the development of devices for collision avoidance and damage minimisation. The government, says the report, should take a lead by ensuring that its own car fleet, including those operated by agencies, are equipped with intelligent speed adaptation (ISA) technology, which has been trialled in Leeds and can slow vehicles down in response to external signals as on-board sensors interpret speed limits and the speed of other vehicles (see panel overleaf).

“This would send a powerful signal to the outside world that government supports the use of the new systems,” says the report. With work currently taking place to establish an e-database of speed limits – no launch date has been set – drivers will be able to know the speed limit at all times without having to look for road signs, as a result of dashboard information and audible and visual commands. The technology also comes with a “driver over-ride option”. “We recognise that there are costs attached to the fitting of the equipment on the vehicle, but we believe this facility is one which some drivers will value and be prepared to pay for,” says the report. In relation to “black boxes”, which are already on the market and, like those in aircraft, record information that in the event of a crash can be a valuable source of data, the report says: “Government should facilitate the development of specifications for “black boxes” and implement regulations to require the fitting of such equipment in new vehicles.We hope the motor industry will work with government as it moves to agree specifications for “black boxes” and the fitting of such equipment in new vehicles.” While there have been concerns at the introduction of “black boxes” from a civil liberties’ perspective, the report says that there is “justification” for its call, which offers “advantages to the law-abiding motorist”.

Drivers must pay attention to speed limits

“Rental vehicles would be a powerful way of demonstrating new things to multiple users”

It adds: “Our view is that drivers may be encouraged to drive safely and well where they know that their good driving is being recorded and can be demonstrated in the event of an accident, including proving innocence. The information recorded on the “black boxes” should also provide valuable information on accident causation and give a better understanding on why accidents happen.” Market penetration of in-car information systems is crucial if the technology is to become mainstream and the Forum, in a separate report, called on businesses to do more to improve their work-related road safety performance (RoadSafe: summer: 2005). Therefore, concludes the latest report: “We recommend fleet operators and company fleets should take up the new technology opportunities.

“We recommend that vehicle rental operators should consider equipping their vehicles with such technology. Rental vehicles would be a powerful way of demonstrating new things to multiple users. Doing so could act as a powerful incentive for people to use the services of those companies who fit this technology into their rental vehicles.” Additionally, the report calls on employers to:

• Have a health and safety policy in place dealing with the risks of work-related driving
• Have a top-level commitment to work-related road safety in their organisation
• Have a clear line of accountability
• Have adequate systems in place for carrying out risk assessments and delivering training
• Monitor performance to ensure that a work-related road safety policy is effective

The report also calls on the insurance industry to encourage the new developments to reduce collision risk by rewarding organisations and individual drivers who use such systems. On average nine people die on the UK’s roads every day and a further 85 are seriously injured, with around half the fatalities occurring on rural roads. While speed is a contributory factor in up to a third of crashes, most accidents have multiple causes. Excessive speed, which is calculated to be a contributory factor in 12% of all collisions, 18% of those involving serious injury and 28% of fatal crashes, can also exacerbate the consequences of other bad driving practices, such as following too close and lack of attention, says the report.

Also highlighted is an association between fast driving and involvement in accidents. It suggests that 21% of drivers who have been stopped for speeding in the last three years have been involved in a road traffic collision. That is said to be almost double the 11% of drivers who have not been detected speeding. The report says: “Despite the evidence, many drivers do not see speeding as risky or dangerous.” In promoting “The Road Safety Deal”, the Forum says: “The intellectual, moral and practical case for the management of speed is clear. Much can be done through continued improvements in vehicle and road engineering. But human factors are present in all accidents, and drivers must play their full part by driving more considerately, more attentively and more skilfully. Measures to change driver behaviour will not work without public acceptance.

“The management of speed is an important element in any successful effort to reduce death and injuries on the roads. We think it is time for a new initiative.” Meanwhile, as the government continues to promote road pricing as a mechanism for reducing traffic congestion, the report warns: “One possible effect of road pricing could be a shift of traffic from safer to less safe roads. This is an issue which the government must consider.”

“A large proportion of the motoring public still rejects the speed message and feels victimised in relation to prosecution as a result of speeding”

Speeding must be made as socially unacceptable as drink-driving, according to RoadSafe director Adrian Walsh. RoadSafe has published its own policy on speed and in it the organisation says: “The drink-driving campaign was successful in changing public perception; its success was attributable to good public education, accompanied by effective enforcement. The campaign achieved a change in psyche of the general population that was not a direct consequence of enforcement methods alone. The campaign needs to continue as the drink-drive message still needs to be conveyed to younger individuals who may have missed the message first time round.

“The same re-framing needs to take place with excessive speed to convey to the public that this behaviour is not acceptable. The challenge is for speeding to be seen as equally anti-social as drink-driving. Safety campaigns with the same intensity as the successful drink-driving and use of seatbelts should be undertaken aimed at changing attitudes to speed.” In welcoming the Motorists’ Forum’s report, Mr Walsh says: “I hope the government takes on board the report’s recommendations and works with the motor industry and other partners to produce results.” Driving too fast kills more people than any other traffic law violation and RoadSafe believes that eliminating excessive speed will save lives. Extensive research reveals that higher speeds mean more accidents, more severe accidents, and more deaths.

But, says the organisation, a large proportion of the motoring public still rejects the speed message and while agreeing to drink-driving concepts, feels victimised in relation to prosecution as a result of speeding. Therefore, says RoadSafe: “Attitudes to speeding behaviour must become the focus of educational initiatives to inform the public to the dangers and anti-social tendencies of speeding behaviour.”

Research by TRL (Transport Research Laboratory) shows that:

• When exceeding the average speed by 25%, a driver is about six times as likely to be involved in an incident in comparison with a driver adopting the average speed. This is similar to the risk associated with alcohol at the legal limit of 80mg/100ml blood alcohol content
• Studies of road sections show that for roads of each type, the number of crashes and collisions increases with increasing average speed – the effect varies on different road types and is strongest for the slowest roads. A ballpark figure is that each one mph reduction in average speed is accompanied by a 5% reduction in accidents
• Traffic calming measures (for example, road humps and chicanes) in 20mph zones have reduced average speeds by about 10mph and resulted in a 50% reduction in collisions. Measures adopted in rural villages have reduced average speeds by about five mph and resulted in at least 20% fewer collisions

In addition, research at Napier University shows that individuals are aware that speeds they normally adopt when alone are actually unsafe. For example, participants described situations in which they would slow down, such as the presence of a speed camera or a child in the car. This suggests that individuals know that if they see a camera they would need to slow down because they would be exceeding the limit. In calling for an extensive education campaign, RoadSafe says it is vital to influence tomorrow’s drivers and calls for driving education to be included as part of the school syllabus, with an emphasis on speeding. RoadSafe says that it is vital to “educate as well as punish” and says that the link between enforcement and revenue, as is currently the case with safety camera partnerships, should be broken.

The policy document suggests: “Rather than funding camera operations as a separate entity, they should be brought within the general road safety portfolio. Instead of returning the revenue raised for the continued operation of cameras, it should be applied much more widely to include road user education within schools.” It also says that driver training should place greater emphasis on the effect of speed on the control of the car and the dangers caused by excessive speed. It adds: “Those who drive in the course of their work, whether in a company-supplied vehicle or not, are proven to be at higher risk possibly because of the pressure they are under to get their destinations quickly, often through poor time management or badly-planned work schedules.” Under health and safety regulations, employers have a duty to ensure that their drivers remain competent and, while many schemes are now being successfully used, there is, says RoadSafe, a need for further development using risk-based techniques.

It adds: “Persistent speeding offenders (more than three speeding offences within one year or five within three years) should have to undertake a retraining course at their own expense. Minimum agreed standards should be set for these courses across the country, they should include both theoretical and practical elements and the results should be monitored so that the courses can be modified as necessary.” Highlighted within the policy document is support for a number of measures outlined by the government in the Road Safety Bill, which is expected to become law next year. These include: graduated speeding penalties with lesser penalties for motorists caught narrowly breaking the speed limit and speed awareness courses (a measure which the Association of Chief Police Officers has taken on board and is to roll out nationwide).

“RoadSafe places great emphasis on vehicle manufacturers taking a greater responsibility to make it easier for drivers to conform to safe speeds”

RoadSafe also wants to see painted speed limit roundels on roads, more signs placed on or near cameras and camera warning signs to signal to motorists what the limit is that is being enforced, thereby making compliance with limits easier for the individual. It also advocates: a review of national speed limits to ensure they are appropriate to road design and layout; careful consideration of the introduction of an 80mph limit on roads specifically engineered for the purpose; a greater emphasis placed on road design to encourage drivers to maintain an appropriate speed and engineering out problem areas where excessive speed leads to a high incidence of crashes and collisions; and greater use made of vehicle-activated speed signs.

Like the Motorists’ Forum report, RoadSafe places great emphasis on vehicle manufacturers taking a greater responsibility to make it easier for drivers to conform to safe speeds. It wants to see interactive technology, which controls vehicle speed according to the speed limit and external conditions, introduced as soon as it has been properly tested and evaluated. In addition, speedometers, says the policy, should be calibrated in line with speed limits which tend to be at 30,50,70 mph rather than at 20,40, 60 mph as is sometimes the case now, thus making it harder to judge when the vehicle is at the correct speed limit.

RoadSafe also wants the government to regulate the provision of vehicles with top speeds substantially in excess of maximum speed limits.

RoadSafe’s speed policy document can be accessed at www.roadsafe.com