Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun Sep 15, 2019 23:59

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 59 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Road deaths fall by 14%
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 09:58 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/da ... esults2008

Quote:
The Department for Transport has published statistics on road casualties in accidents reported to the police in Great Britain in 2008, according to the arrangements approved by the UK Statistics Authority.

The number of people killed in road accidents reported to the police, fell by 14 per cent from 2,946 in 2007 to 2,538 in 2008. 28,567 people were killed or seriously injured in 2008, 7 per cent fewer than in 2007. There were just under 231,000 road casualties in Great Britain in 2008, 7 per cent less than in 2007.

A very encouraging result by any standards that is too much to be dismissed as a statistical blip. However, part of the drop must be attributed to the very high fuel prices that prevailed during much of 2008 and the reduction in traffic caused by the recession.

Also, in 2007 and 2008 there's a lot of anecdotal evidence that the intensity of speed enforcement activity has been considerably reduced compared with earlier in the decade when the notorious hypothecation scheme was in operation.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:02 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
Indeed, rta per unit of traffic volume would be more telling, wouldn't it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 10:10 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Johnnytheboy wrote:
Indeed, rta per unit of traffic volume would be more telling, wouldn't it?

I don't think traffic volumes dropped overall by more than a couple of percentage points, though.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:33 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
PeterE wrote:
I don't think traffic volumes dropped overall by more than a couple of percentage points, though.

A drop of a couple of points (or even none at all) would be quite significant against what was a prior trend of a constant rise of many points.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 13:39 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
The economic slowdown has also curtaild the excessive drinking of drivers and pedestrians.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 14:41 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 09:18
Posts: 181
To be honest, I thought this was most encouraging:

Quote:
The Department for Transport is currently consulting road users, emergency services, local authorities and interest groups on a new strategy aimed at making UK roads the world's safest.


Actually doing things like improving junctions and such would make huge differences.

Quote:
The economic slowdown has also curtaild the excessive drinking of drivers and pedestrians.


Sorry, I can't agree to that without some solid proof. While more people might drink at home, there will most likely be more people that don't want to pay for a taxi, thus drive. And the sort of people that get completely bladdered tend to be able to afford drink whatever the circumstances in my expirence.

_________________
If you think everyone else around you is driving badly, perhaps it's time to examine your own driving.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 14:45 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Oh dear! Fatals down, well you can't argue that's not god news.

How about a few more unsupported random reasons why this may be:
    Lots of aunties have died in 2008 so fewer people are driving to visit them
    Maybe the increase in obesity is is reducing the number of people who can fit in their cars
    Swallows have migrated to Algeria
    Wet leaves on the track
    The Olympics in Beijing
    More funding awarded to the museum in Bletchley Park
    I saw a girl driving a brown 206
    There was more flowers planted on roundabouts in 2008
    An increase in the use of moss-killer on lawns
I don't know if any of these things have had an effect or indeed are true but they have the same basis in fact as the crap you guys have posted above...stop making it up and acknowledge that which has made this difference.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 14:50 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Pratnership wrote:
To be honest, I thought this was most encouraging:

Quote:
The Department for Transport is currently consulting road users, emergency services, local authorities and interest groups on a new strategy aimed at making UK roads the world's safest.


Actually doing things like improving junctions and such would make huge differences.

Quote:
The economic slowdown has also curtaild the excessive drinking of drivers and pedestrians.


Sorry, I can't agree to that without some solid proof. While more people might drink at home, there will most likely be more people that don't want to pay for a taxi, thus drive. And the sort of people that get completely bladdered tend to be able to afford drink whatever the circumstances in my expirence.

Come on, the regulars don't have to post proof if it agrees with their assumptions; only what is in opposition to the Safespeed view requires that.

Just a couple of posts before RTTM...Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 15:12 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
The proof that drinking is down is in the numbers of pubs closing. If people are drinking at home then they are unlikly to stagger on the road to reach thier bed. It could also be proved by the quantity or revenue recieved by customs and excise in taxes.
Talking to my colleages thier plans for the weekend are scaled down as most seam to be repaying thier credit card. Big weekends seam to start saturday, not friday
Also if you visit a pub or resturant mid week at the moment it is like a ghost town!... are your eyes shut?

If speed cameras are responsible for 7% reductions there would need to have been a huge roll out of new cameras this year and the counties with the biggest roll out program would show bigger reductions than those reducing speed cameras????

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Last edited by anton on Thu Jun 25, 2009 15:21, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 15:18 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 09:18
Posts: 181
anton wrote:
The proof that drinking is down is in the numbers of pubs closing. If people are drinking at home then they are unlikly to stagger on the road to reach thier bed. It could also be proved by the quantity or revenue recieved by customs and excise in taxes.
Talking to my colleages thier plans for the weekend are scaled down as most seam to be repaying thier credit card. Big weekends seam to start saturday, not friday
Also if you visit a pub or resturant mid week at the moment it is like a ghost town!... are your eyes shut?


But is that decreasing the number of drink drivers?

Btw, mine are open, and I see the clubs around here as busy as ever. Weather or not more/less people are drink driving I couldn't guess (or assume, ahem :wink: ) either way.

The people I talk to are just not having meals when they go out - they are still drinking the same. It seems the way a lot of people are cutting down is mainly avoiding meals when they go out.

Either way, it's a bit too much to say DD numbers have gone down based on the fact we are in a recession, though I haven't seen much evidence of that around here (which is a nice thing).

Isn't there some recent DD statistics around somewhere? That would surely settle the guesswork.

_________________
If you think everyone else around you is driving badly, perhaps it's time to examine your own driving.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 15:23 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
It is not the drink drivers alone, it is drunk pedestrians .

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 15:31 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:38
Posts: 105
Location: Sydney, Australia
Economic downturns are closely correlated with reductions in crashes. They are usually a leading indicator (ie the effect shows up before the downturn is noted in the statistics). The likely mechanism is due to the myriad of things we no longer do - nights out are fewer and shorter, business trips are less as are private trips. The world has seen a double whammy with high fuel prices and then a severe economic decline. The big (14% is huge) drop in fatalities over a short term can only be explained by the economic effects as there were no new "silver bullets" (ie effective major new activities)

Most jurisdictions in Australia showed a similar decrease in 2008; most are now showing a rise back to the expected level which is good news for the economy but bad news for the road user. Even worse it is likely to lead to yet more restrictions imposed by politicians who will face media howls about the increase in the road toll and who will need to be seen to be doing things.

_________________
The only thing that should be prohibited is prohibition.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 15:44 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 09:18
Posts: 181
anton wrote:
It is not the drink drivers alone, it is drunk pedestrians .


And theres not going to be people out of work that are drinking? Is there actually less drunk people about the roads?

I am not disagreeing, just saying that there should be some substance to random claims, otherwise the naysayers (as already made clear) will say wheres the evidence. Quite rightly so I suppose.

_________________
If you think everyone else around you is driving badly, perhaps it's time to examine your own driving.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 16:05 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
GreenShed wrote:
Oh dear! Fatals down, well you can't argue that's not god news.

Of course it's good news. The issue here is what caused this shift.

GreenShed wrote:
How about a few more unsupported random reasons why this may be:
    Lots of aunties have died in 2008 so fewer people are driving to visit them
    Maybe the increase in obesity is is reducing the number of people who can fit in their cars
    Swallows have migrated to Algeria
    Wet leaves on the track
    The Olympics in Beijing
    More funding awarded to the museum in Bletchley Park
    I saw a girl driving a brown 206
    There was more flowers planted on roundabouts in 2008
    An increase in the use of moss-killer on lawns
I don't know if any of these things have had an effect or indeed are true but they have the same basis in fact as the crap you guys have posted above...stop making it up and acknowledge that which has made this difference.

How childish!

What has made the difference:
Is it just the speed camera policy?

Or do these other factors have to be considered:
- The continued road engineering?
- More effective police crackdowns?
- The reduced amount of travel (fuel costs and recession)
- Better car design (the average UK car is getting safer every year)
- Better post crash response and care?
- Pushed traffic displacement to safer roads?

Surely we can all agree all these other factors can result with a reduction of fatalities at a national level, so let's not get carried away and say it's because of the speed or speed camera policy. Afterall, the KSI rate was falling disproportionately faster for many years before cameras were used (and when traffic levels were increasing much faster too).

We don't need evidence to support these other factors, a reasoned argument will do. Like I've already said to you: Isn't an logical argument, which as yet remains unrefuted despite ample opportunity for scrutiny, not strong support for my charges? If not then why not?

GreenShed wrote:
Just a couple of posts before RTTM...

RTTM won't apply at this national level, there hasn't been an unrelated recent deviation from trend to capitalise on.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 17:54 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:19
Posts: 1795
I'm probably going to cause controversy with this but...... what about the reduction in the number of Eastern European workers around? Overseas drivers don't have the culture or attitude towards road safety that a lot of UK and western european drivers have. A reduction in the number of immigrants, asylum seekers or enforcement against these groups could cause quite a blip assuming they are over represented in accident statistics which would make logical sense. It is hard to make this point without sounding like one of those bnp numpties though... Couple this with a large drop in traffic levels (HGV traffic has fallen 7% between Q4 2007 & Q4 2008 for example) and you can see where a good chunk of this reduction has come from. Also weather plays a large part. A good summer = more leisure travel and more deaths. A bad one leads to more people staying at home. Also with the driving test getting harder and money tighter fewer young people will be learning to drive or be on the roads generally and again these are over represented in the accidents statistics.

I actually the speed enforcement variation argument is a non starter as it doesn't do anything as excessive speed accidents are only a small percentage of all accidents and I'd wager those that have excessive speed as a causal factor also involve criminal activity or inexperience neither of which the camera enforcement tackles.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 18:17 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
I would assume that a recession/ the current situation would cause the following trends

reasons for the accident rate to fall
reduced commuting,
reduced drinking, eating out,
reduced social trips
reduction in forign drivers
ongoing car improvements
more 50 limits,
more 50 everywhere drivers

reasons for the rate to rise
more uk hollidays
less maintanance on older cars
higher crime rates during recession

reasons that are fairly static
probobly about the same number of cameras as previous years

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 18:47 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
"The number of people killed in road accidents reported to the police, fell by 14 per cent from 2,946 in 2007 to 2,538 in 2008. 28,567 people were killed or seriously injured in 2008, 7 per cent fewer than in 2007. There were just under 231,000 road casualties in Great Britain in 2008, 7 per cent less than in 2007."

Funny how they're happy to quote only "Ks" in the headline when it suits them eh?! I remember being told that was just "superficial amateur analysis" though, so I doubt they'd want to only discuss Ks in isolation. :lol: If we go to the (normally preferred) "KSI" measure, the second sentence gives us a 7% drop - or in other words, "business as usual since long before camera enforcement was even dreamed of".

Greenshed, perhaps we can go back to my little graph of Ks in Cumbria on the other thread now? (or is "KSI" still the preferred unit of measure up here?) :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 18:50 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
GreenShed wrote:
...stop making it up and acknowledge that which has made this difference.


and that is????


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 19:41 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
Pratnership wrote:
To be honest, I thought this was most encouraging:

Quote:
The Department for Transport is currently consulting road users, emergency services, local authorities and interest groups on a new strategy aimed at making UK roads the world's safest.


Actually doing things like improving junctions and such would make huge differences.

Wouldn't it just, but as my post about the Today Programme report this AM shows, those in power only appear to have one tool in their road safety toolbox nowadays: speed limits.

:x

It's like that old Far Side cartoon with the vet looking at a book of ailments suffered by horses, and their treatment, which in every case is "shoot"...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 22:02 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 14:47
Posts: 1659
Location: A Dark Desert Highway
GreenShed wrote:
...stop making it up and acknowledge that which has made this difference.


Speed cameras are the answer, as is expensive fuel. If you think I am paying £1 for 30p worth of petrol to drive on roads policed by grey boxes run buy, well I won't say, you are very much mistaken. I'll stop at home ta, where I can't be taxed, and if my car is locked on my drive, it won't crash.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 59 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.517s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]