Safe Speed Forums

from Jo Edwards, the county council's senior road safety engineer

"We invite any feedback from our communities, which will of course be taken into account by the county councillors when choosing which schemes should be prioritised.

"We are very happy with the way in which the review is progressing."

The proposals include changing the speed limit on the bypass from 70mph to 50mph.

This seems to give the most detail:

http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/speedlimitreview

Every year between 500 - 1000 people are killed or injured in Warwickshire as a direct result of being in a crash where speed was the major contributory factor.

Speed is a familiar problem....

TOTAL KSI for 2006 = 400

I was dismayed to read of the speed limit reviews in the Tribune the other day.

Not dismayed because some limits are being amended, it may well be the case that there are unsuitable limits which should be addressed.

No, I was dismayed because of the lack of justification for these changes and because of the sensationalist and disingenuous way the council have chosen to publicise this review. The council should be performing “safety” reviews, not a narrow minded “speed” review. “Speed kills” is one of the most dangerous policies every brought out, giving the impression that to always travel at the posted limit is always safe.

The “Speed Management Strategy” (1) published on the Councils website starts with the horrifying “Every year between 500 – 1000 people are killed or injured in Warwickshire as a direct result of being in a crash where speed was the major contributory factor”.

This is a grossly misleading statement. Referring to the 2006 road traffic statistics (2) for Warwickshire, I note that the TOTAL “Killed and Seriously Injured” for all causes was 400 in the whole county.

Unlike national statistics, Warwickshire seems to have chosen not to publish contributory factors, however it’s not unreasonable to suppose that accidents in the county are caused by similar factors to the national average.

The national statistics (3) show that “exceeding the speed limit” is a contributory cause in only 5% of accidents and this includes accidents where the major factor was for other reasons. Applying that percentage to the Warwickshire figures show that the “500 – 1000” is more like 20.

I also note there are no justifications given for any of the proposed changes. Is there any real justification for these or is it a “because I think so” decision by civil servants?

Furthermore on reading further through the strategy document I note that the “Engineering” policies all seem to imply policies to reduce speed, does this I wonder mean that we can expect to see further destruction of our roads with chicanes, speed bumps and other such obstructions designed to make driving unpleasant? Do they not understand that these distractions are no better than illegal distractions such as using mobile phones, eating whilst driving etc, and can in fact CAUSE accidents?

It’s my view that the Council is addressing transport in completely the wrong way. Speed should NOT be tackled as an issue in isolation. The roads exist to get people from A to B and the aim of any review should be to “allow travel in the safest and fastest way possible”. It should not be an objective in itself to slow traffic down to a crawl.

Where speed is an issue, limits or cameras are not the way to resolve this. Traffic police on the roads are – and then they might stop some of the millions of dangerous, banned or not insured drivers on our roads, instead of a motorist doing 33 in a 30 (and finding out about it by post 2 weeks later).

From Coventry Evening Telegraph

Under the plans safety improvements will be made to more than 90 roads across Warwickshire.

The huge scheme will cost about £1.2 million.