Safe Speed Forums

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4070135.stm

Last Updated: Monday, 6 December, 2004, 00:35 GMT

Cutting school run 'saves lives'

Reducing the number of children being driven to school would save hundreds of lives on the roads, a study says.

Motor accidents during peak periods cause almost 7,000 deaths and injuries each year, including 200 child deaths, the insurance firm More Than claimed.

Its study found that "school runs" have risen by 20% in the past decade.

More Than said cutting their number by 10% would prevent 190 deaths, adding that government plans to stagger school start times could also cut road deaths.

Researchers said government plans to spread the school run from 7am to 10am instead of 8am to 9am would prevent up to 300 deaths and serious injuries a year.

Currently more than 12% of drivers travelling during the 8am to 9am rush hour period are taking children to school; about 40% of primary school children and 20% of secondary school pupils are driven to school every day.

David Pitt, head of motor insurance at More Than, said: "The school run has taken over the rush hour, creating congestion and increasing the chances of having an accident.

"It's easy to understand why more children are being driven to school.

"Today's parents are busier than ever, and concerned about the safety of their children yet the resulting increase in traffic may actually be making the situation more dangerous.

"The key is to encourage travelling to schools by bus or on foot rather than relying on the car.

Reduce congestion

Mr Pitt added that the School Transport Bill, which was unveiled by the government in October, was an "innovative" way of tackling the problem.

The bill aims to encourage children to cycle or walk to school and reduce road congestion by staggering school start times.

Councils would also be allowed to charge for home-to-school transport.

The research was carried out in accordance with the Centre for Economic and Business Research, which analysed Department of Transport figures.
===================================

This story is completely absurd, and Safe Speed issued the following PR at 05:00 on 6th December 2004:

PR153: School run saves lives says Safe Speed

NEWS: for immediate release

Contrary to claims reported today that: "Reducing the number of
children being driven to school would save hundreds of lives on the
roads", Safe Speed says that the School run is responsible for a
highly significant reduction in road deaths amongst child pedestrians.

20 years ago, the average annual number of child pedestrians killed in
built up areas was 349. [1] Yet in 2003, this most important figure
had reduced to just 61. [2] Safe Speed is absolutely certain that part
of this excellent reduction is due to transferring school journeys
from pavements and road crossings to the safer environment in parents'
cars.

But perhaps there has been a huge increase in child deaths in motor
vehicles to offset this obvious benefit? Looking again at the same
source documents we find:

All roads, children killed
==========================

category, 1981 to 1985 average [1], 2003 figures [2]
Pedestrians, 349, 74
Cyclists, 98, 18
Pedestrian and cyclists combined: 447, 92
All, 563, 171
Other (including car occupants), 116, 79

The BBC web site reports: "Motor accidents during peak periods cause
almost 7,000 deaths and injuries each year, including 200 child
deaths, the insurance firm More Than claimed." [3]

With a total of 171 children killed on the roads in 2003 this is
clearly an absurd claim.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "It's dangerous to publish and distribute
false and misleading road safety information. Green Flag and the BBC
should be ashamed of themselves. I hope and pray that parents are not
influenced towards more dangerous transport choices by this nonsense.
Modern road safety in the UK is infected with knee jerk reactions and
inadequate science. Only good research and accurate information will
save lives."

Paul concludes: "The school run is a significant life saver. Over last
20 years we have seen child road deaths reduce by almost 70%. Other
factors have been important too, but the school run is highly likely
to be responsible for well over a quarter of this improvement."

<ends>


Notes for editors:
==================

[1] 1981 to 1985 average figure from Table 24b in official publication
RAGB 1999. (not available on line)

[2] 2003 figure from table 24, RCGB 2003
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... 031375.pdf

[3] BBC News web site:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4070135.stm

======================
Note that the PR incorrectly refers to "Green Flag" when the culprits in this case are "More Than".

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

While I agree with the sentiment about making daft claims - I don't think the solution is for us all to drive our kids to school.

what about supervised walking or school buses.

Having seen the school run chaos, I think road safety could be improved with school run mums paying more attention to where they park for example (e.g. not on zig zags by the ped crossing)

What this is however, is the devide and conquor approach to tackling road users.

first its speeders, then motorcyclists, then 4x4 owners now the school run mum. each time the authorities nip away and the motorist.

I think you are almost there with your take on the ulterior motive, diy.

What it looks like to me is using the tried-and-tested 'killing children' emotive language to villify another group of motorists, or at least pro-motorists.

At the moment people who campaign against speed cameras, road humps and forever reduced limits are branded by some as 'child killers'. Now they want to add the busy mums who use cars to the list.

Stretching the point just a little, methinks.

Whichever side of the argument you see the numbers game supporting, one thing is certain. A "School Run Saves Lives" claim is as unlikely to be met with enthusiasm by non-parents caught up in the morning snarlups as "School Run Costs Lives" will be by people who undertake this epitmoy of modern overprotective parenting.
People will behave in whichever way they see is right and proper, and if that means ferrying kiddykins to school in the family Ford Focus, whether carrying on to work or turning around and driving 1/2 a mile back home, thats what they'll do.
I personally wonder just how inconvenient using a car would have to become before people even contemplated changing their usage of it.

IMO the vast majority of school runs are over very short distances with most of that being on side roads (at least in Australia) so I cannot see how this proposal has any merit whatsoever.

I'm sure that there are also many who travel longer distances but over here the majority just take their kids to the local school through the back roads and only use the main roads occasionally.

_________________
Ross

Yes I'm a hoon, but only on the track!!!!

My nipper goes to the child minders by push chair or bicycle. Another parent who lives closer drops her's off in an M-class

I set off walking to school with my two (500 metre walk through a cut, but a 1 mile drive) at the same time as my neighbour packs her four into the Disco. I'm always there before her, likewise the return trip.

I'm sure that the net benefit to my kids of the walk and talk to and from school will be apparent in the long term.

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian

And I'm sure that if anyone even dared to suggest to your neighbour that she was engaging in a harmful activity both to her children and to the local environemnt and economy, she would have a whole battalion of excuses armed and ready

My 4 yr old likes to race one of our neighbours who is in the same class. Us on foot, they by car.

It's about a half mile walk, taking the same route as by car. With loading, parking, unloading, getting baby into pushchair (we also have a toddler in pushchair along for the trip) we can usually beat them both ways.

But it is her decision and I am sure she gets as much exercise as me with all the lifting of pushchairs.

My main reason for walking - it would take longer by car because I would have to *shock horror* get it out of the garage

I always walk my daughter to school when i'm off work or on nights, just under a mile. My wife nearly always drives. Excuses range from: "got up too late" to "it might rain" or "need to pop to Tesco's on the way back." The short of it is, it's just lazy. My daughter is now getting the message and enjoys walking, and as has already been said, we enjoy the chat. She used to come out of school and say: where's the car? My response "at home where it should be. Apart from anything else the traffic chaos outside the school would drive me mad. Constantly jostling for position, no courtesy, dangerous parking ets etc. We are fortunate that we have good walking access (Large pavements with a good separating grass verge) and only have to cross the road twice. But I can understand the 'it's not safe' for some schools and routes. The solution must be to make it safer. The school try and do their bit by having walk to school day, it works for a day!

Max

_________________
Tailgaters - Please Pass
You have an Accident to go to!