Bournemouth Council rapped over road fatalities
Discussion
From tonights local paper "Bournemouth Council has been rapped by the Audit Commission for not meeting it's targets for reducing the number of people killed and injured on the borough's roads.
The number of people killed or seriously injured in road accidents in the borough fell by just one between 2004/2005 to 2005/2006 and remains more than 20 above the target".
The Enginering Manager for Bournemouth Council said " the figures for 2006/2007 show 68 people killed or seriously injured when the target was 62. We have prioritised our resources towards accident cluster sites to maximise accident reductionin partnership with Dorset Police and Dorset Safety Camera Partnership".
It would appear that the additional cameras and mobile enforcement sites introduced in the Borough since 2004 have had no effect whatsover. Perhaps they should have asked for advise from the CC of Durham who, I think, said only 6% of accidents involve a car being driven above the speed limit.
The number of people killed or seriously injured in road accidents in the borough fell by just one between 2004/2005 to 2005/2006 and remains more than 20 above the target".
The Enginering Manager for Bournemouth Council said " the figures for 2006/2007 show 68 people killed or seriously injured when the target was 62. We have prioritised our resources towards accident cluster sites to maximise accident reductionin partnership with Dorset Police and Dorset Safety Camera Partnership".
It would appear that the additional cameras and mobile enforcement sites introduced in the Borough since 2004 have had no effect whatsover. Perhaps they should have asked for advise from the CC of Durham who, I think, said only 6% of accidents involve a car being driven above the speed limit.
I'm sure the SCP will be along shortly to explain that all the accidents took place on the roads where they don't run cameras.
Gloriously ignoring the fact that with cameras accidents were not improved, and of course cameras are only sited at accident blackspots, so there must be an awful lot of new accident blackspots appearing and upsetting those figures.
Gloriously ignoring the fact that with cameras accidents were not improved, and of course cameras are only sited at accident blackspots, so there must be an awful lot of new accident blackspots appearing and upsetting those figures.
Most of the crinklies in Bournemouth don't drive fast enough to trip a speed camera. It's spotting bus queues of bystanders they have problems with.
Seriously though, this "criticism" of failure to meet targets raises questions in my mind about whether the targets themselves are attainable, and on what basis the target was even calculated.
I say this because Bournemouth Council haven't exactly been sparing in thier installation of speed cameras during the past 2-3 years, and both they and Poole council have been busy "dumbing down" traffic light crossings (by removing crossing streams of traffic and replacing with them with 'one at a time' schemes).
It could well be that one of the best ways to reduce KSI's in the town would be to shut down the towns late night bars and clubs and stop the pissheads falling all over the streets at weekends? I expect that all we'll get is even more 20-zones and bloody cameras though...
Seriously though, this "criticism" of failure to meet targets raises questions in my mind about whether the targets themselves are attainable, and on what basis the target was even calculated.
I say this because Bournemouth Council haven't exactly been sparing in thier installation of speed cameras during the past 2-3 years, and both they and Poole council have been busy "dumbing down" traffic light crossings (by removing crossing streams of traffic and replacing with them with 'one at a time' schemes).
It could well be that one of the best ways to reduce KSI's in the town would be to shut down the towns late night bars and clubs and stop the pissheads falling all over the streets at weekends? I expect that all we'll get is even more 20-zones and bloody cameras though...
corozin said:
Most of the crinklies in Bournemouth don't drive fast enough to trip a speed camera. It's spotting bus queues of bystanders they have problems with.
Seriously though, this "criticism" of failure to meet targets raises questions in my mind about whether the targets themselves are attainable, and on what basis the target was even calculated.
I say this because Bournemouth Council haven't exactly been sparing in thier installation of speed cameras during the past 2-3 years, and both they and Poole council have been busy "dumbing down" traffic light crossings (by removing crossing streams of traffic and replacing with them with 'one at a time' schemes).
It could well be that one of the best ways to reduce KSI's in the town would be to shut down the towns late night bars and clubs and stop the pissheads falling all over the streets at weekends? I expect that all we'll get is even more 20-zones and bloody cameras though...
Seriously though, this "criticism" of failure to meet targets raises questions in my mind about whether the targets themselves are attainable, and on what basis the target was even calculated.
I say this because Bournemouth Council haven't exactly been sparing in thier installation of speed cameras during the past 2-3 years, and both they and Poole council have been busy "dumbing down" traffic light crossings (by removing crossing streams of traffic and replacing with them with 'one at a time' schemes).
It could well be that one of the best ways to reduce KSI's in the town would be to shut down the towns late night bars and clubs and stop the pissheads falling all over the streets at weekends? I expect that all we'll get is even more 20-zones and bloody cameras though...
I havd a manifesto from the local torys for the littledown area and one of the things that they are proposing (should theuy beat the lib-dems) is more use of speed warning signs instead of speed cameras!
They are also proposing that the bus lane on holdenhurst road be made part time and the addition of a slip road onto the wessex way at kings park. Both schemes will massively reduce commuter time congestion...
www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/lat
Authority rapped over road fatalities
By Lynn Morris
BOURNEMOUTH council has been rapped for its record on reducing road accidents.
The annual audit and inspection letter from the Audit Commission criticised the council for not meeting targets for reducing the number of people killed and injured on the borough's roads.
The number of people killed or seriously injured in road accidents in the borough fell by just one between 2004/5 to 2005/6 and remains more than 20 above the target.
In the letter from the commission, Martin Robinson said: "The number of people killed or seriously injured in road traffic collisions in the borough fell only slightly, from 86 in 2004/5 to 85 in 2005/6, compared with a target for the year of 64. The number of people slightly injured fell from 772 to 758, compared with a target of 716."
This put Bournemouth in the bottom quarter when compared with other unitary authorities and county councils over the last three years.
Residents of Charminster Road will not be surprised. After three accidents in 10 days on a short stretch of road, they are furious that the council will not prevent what they claim is dangerous parking.
Mark Edwards, of Charminster Road, said: "If nothing is done there could be 70 or 80 accidents in a year. Soon enough someone is going to get killed."
On Thursday morning the road was blocked by a collision near Charminster Library between a purple Cherokee Jeep, a silver Lexus and a silver Peugeot.
On Monday a silver Nissan Micra collided with a parked car in Charminster Road and last Monday a woman was taken to hospital after a crash, which closed the same road.
Geoff Turnbull, engineering services manager for Bournemouth council, said the figures for 2006/7 show 68 people killed or seriously injured when the target was 62.
He said: "We have prioritised our resources towards accident cluster sites to maximise accident reduction. Successful partnering with Dorset Police and the Dorset Safety Camera Partnership, safety audits, road safety education and joint road safety and highway maintenance schemes have led to marked reduction in the numbers of people injured.
"We are aware of the residents' concerns about safety on Charminster Road and we are looking into the possibility of introducing waiting restrictions on one side of the road. We will see whether the installation of traffic signals at the junction with Charminster Road is necessary to calm traffic speeds further.”
All the issues addressed by the Audit Commission will be discussed by councillors later this month.
The commission gave the council three stars and found it to be improving adequately in most areas.
Authority rapped over road fatalities
By Lynn Morris
BOURNEMOUTH council has been rapped for its record on reducing road accidents.
The annual audit and inspection letter from the Audit Commission criticised the council for not meeting targets for reducing the number of people killed and injured on the borough's roads.
The number of people killed or seriously injured in road accidents in the borough fell by just one between 2004/5 to 2005/6 and remains more than 20 above the target.
In the letter from the commission, Martin Robinson said: "The number of people killed or seriously injured in road traffic collisions in the borough fell only slightly, from 86 in 2004/5 to 85 in 2005/6, compared with a target for the year of 64. The number of people slightly injured fell from 772 to 758, compared with a target of 716."
This put Bournemouth in the bottom quarter when compared with other unitary authorities and county councils over the last three years.
Residents of Charminster Road will not be surprised. After three accidents in 10 days on a short stretch of road, they are furious that the council will not prevent what they claim is dangerous parking.
Mark Edwards, of Charminster Road, said: "If nothing is done there could be 70 or 80 accidents in a year. Soon enough someone is going to get killed."
On Thursday morning the road was blocked by a collision near Charminster Library between a purple Cherokee Jeep, a silver Lexus and a silver Peugeot.
On Monday a silver Nissan Micra collided with a parked car in Charminster Road and last Monday a woman was taken to hospital after a crash, which closed the same road.
Geoff Turnbull, engineering services manager for Bournemouth council, said the figures for 2006/7 show 68 people killed or seriously injured when the target was 62.
He said: "We have prioritised our resources towards accident cluster sites to maximise accident reduction. Successful partnering with Dorset Police and the Dorset Safety Camera Partnership, safety audits, road safety education and joint road safety and highway maintenance schemes have led to marked reduction in the numbers of people injured.
"We are aware of the residents' concerns about safety on Charminster Road and we are looking into the possibility of introducing waiting restrictions on one side of the road. We will see whether the installation of traffic signals at the junction with Charminster Road is necessary to calm traffic speeds further.”
All the issues addressed by the Audit Commission will be discussed by councillors later this month.
The commission gave the council three stars and found it to be improving adequately in most areas.
Gerry Breen said:
Why do we never see reasons behind the numbers. So in this case 61 people die in bournemouth, "well done you've exceeded your target have a medal", 63 dead, "whats going on give the medal back". I've seen enough p*ssed people late at night to understand why the figure would go up.
That’s a good question Gerry. I’d like to see real accident reports made available to the public so we can learn from them. Every local paper should be reporting the summary and detail of the investigation that is apparently carried out into every injury incident in their area. Such information is not even available online for any single incident as far as I am aware.
Gerry Breen said:
Why do we never see reasons behind the numbers. So in this case 61 people die in bournemouth, "well done you've exceeded your target have a medal", 63 dead, "whats going on give the medal back". I've seen enough p*ssed people late at night to understand why the figure would go up.
Well the whole country is run like this now isn't it? Our (Labour) Government can only think in terms of primary colour statistics and targets. Understanding is no longer necessary.
Even 62 KSI's are 62 too many, but Government-by-speadsheet dictates that it's only the attainment of the target that's important. Understanding the causes and thinking about the problem is secondary to worshipping (and occasionally manipulating) the statistics.
I'm pretty sure the Dorset Council Transport website has the breakdown of the KSI causes by now. However to put them in perspective other factors need to be considered, including the volume of traffic on Bournemouth's roads. For example when the target was set 2-3 years ago I bet no-one considered the impact of the 11,000 Polish immigrants who've now settled in the town, most of whom seem to drive cars for this the term "death-trap" would be a kind description.
corozin said:
Gerry Breen said:
Why do we never see reasons behind the numbers. So in this case 61 people die in bournemouth, "well done you've exceeded your target have a medal", 63 dead, "whats going on give the medal back". I've seen enough p*ssed people late at night to understand why the figure would go up.
Well the whole country is run like this now isn't it? Our (Labour) Government can only think in terms of primary colour statistics and targets. Understanding is no longer necessary.
Even 62 KSI's are 62 too many, but Government-by-speadsheet dictates that it's only the attainment of the target that's important. Understanding the causes and thinking about the problem is secondary to worshipping (and occasionally manipulating) the statistics.
I'm pretty sure the Dorset Council Transport website has the breakdown of the KSI causes by now. However to put them in perspective other factors need to be considered, including the volume of traffic on Bournemouth's roads. For example when the target was set 2-3 years ago I bet no-one considered the impact of the 11,000 Polish immigrants who've now settled in the town, most of whom seem to drive cars for this the term "death-trap" would be a kind description.
i would be interested in seeing how many of the vehicles involved had:
1 - No tax
2 - No MOT
3 - No Insurance
4 - Stolen
5 - Drunk Drivers
6 - Drugged Drivers
As opposed to the usual one third were speeding
jesusbuiltmycar said:
corozin said:
Gerry Breen said:
Why do we never see reasons behind the numbers. So in this case 61 people die in bournemouth, "well done you've exceeded your target have a medal", 63 dead, "whats going on give the medal back". I've seen enough p*ssed people late at night to understand why the figure would go up.
Well the whole country is run like this now isn't it? Our (Labour) Government can only think in terms of primary colour statistics and targets. Understanding is no longer necessary.
Even 62 KSI's are 62 too many, but Government-by-speadsheet dictates that it's only the attainment of the target that's important. Understanding the causes and thinking about the problem is secondary to worshipping (and occasionally manipulating) the statistics.
I'm pretty sure the Dorset Council Transport website has the breakdown of the KSI causes by now. However to put them in perspective other factors need to be considered, including the volume of traffic on Bournemouth's roads. For example when the target was set 2-3 years ago I bet no-one considered the impact of the 11,000 Polish immigrants who've now settled in the town, most of whom seem to drive cars for this the term "death-trap" would be a kind description.
i would be interested in seeing how many of the vehicles involved had:
1 - No tax
2 - No MOT
3 - No Insurance
4 - Stolen
5 - Drunk Drivers
6 - Drugged Drivers
As opposed to the usual one third were speeding
Yes quite. When one is stupid enough to pretend to address fatalities by seemingly to concentrate on speed alone and the initiation of congention-creation tricks, it's hardly surprising that fatality reduction isn't achieved. When will they learn?
lostusernamedamn said:
jesusbuiltmycar said:
corozin said:
Gerry Breen said:
Why do we never see reasons behind the numbers. So in this case 61 people die in bournemouth, "well done you've exceeded your target have a medal", 63 dead, "whats going on give the medal back". I've seen enough p*ssed people late at night to understand why the figure would go up.
Well the whole country is run like this now isn't it? Our (Labour) Government can only think in terms of primary colour statistics and targets. Understanding is no longer necessary.
Even 62 KSI's are 62 too many, but Government-by-speadsheet dictates that it's only the attainment of the target that's important. Understanding the causes and thinking about the problem is secondary to worshipping (and occasionally manipulating) the statistics.
I'm pretty sure the Dorset Council Transport website has the breakdown of the KSI causes by now. However to put them in perspective other factors need to be considered, including the volume of traffic on Bournemouth's roads. For example when the target was set 2-3 years ago I bet no-one considered the impact of the 11,000 Polish immigrants who've now settled in the town, most of whom seem to drive cars for this the term "death-trap" would be a kind description.
i would be interested in seeing how many of the vehicles involved had:
1 - No tax
2 - No MOT
3 - No Insurance
4 - Stolen
5 - Drunk Drivers
6 - Drugged Drivers
As opposed to the usual one third were speeding
Yes quite. When one is stupid enough to pretend to address fatalities by seemingly to concentrate on speed alone and the initiation of congention-creation tricks, it's hardly surprising that fatality reduction isn't achieved. When will they learn?
Thirded. They are blind.
If we're talking about 60-odd fatalities, surely the number is too small to draw any statistically valid conclusion? While targets may be valid, it doesn't make sense to drive them down to ever smaller units where, for example, one accident could easily make a 5% difference to the statistics.
saxmund said:
If we're talking about 60-odd fatalities, surely the number is too small to draw any statistically valid conclusion? While targets may be valid, it doesn't make sense to drive them down to ever smaller units where, for example, one accident could easily make a 5% difference to the statistics.
Edzachery - the population of Bournemouth is about 100k IIRC, add in the ubiquitous Polish immigrants (queue rivers of blood type Enoch style speech), and the commuters from Poole, Ringwood et al, plus the fact we get mob handed by London weekenders whoi clog up the new forest, I'd say that it is probably, roughly 0% of a lot of vehicles - certainly not enough to justify mobile speed traps on 50mph dual carriageways that used to be a 70, until some PISSED people died (both driving and staggering drunk across the carriageway).
What is the definition of 'seriously injured'?
Seems that by lumping the injuries with the fatalaties the figures are skewed, may have only been 1 fatality
Why are they not documented seperately??
Seems that by lumping the injuries with the fatalaties the figures are skewed, may have only been 1 fatality
Why are they not documented seperately??
Edited by freedman on Tuesday 17th April 15:00
Edited by freedman on Tuesday 17th April 15:00
freedman said:
What is the definition of 'seriously injured'?
Seems that by lumping the injuries with the fatalaties the figures are skewed, may have only been 1 fatality
Why are they not documented seperately??
Seems that by lumping the injuries with the fatalaties the figures are skewed, may have only been 1 fatality
Why are they not documented seperately??
You noticed! KSI is a convenient term because it makes things sound worse.
I believe that a "serious injury" refers to someone who had to spend the night in hospital. I'm surprised that a broken leg didn't come under that category, but perhaps if you're in an out in a day it escapes that definition.
There is some concern that serious injuries are migrating to slight injuries because of things like this, and because of better roadside treatment. Not that this isn't good in itself, but that it then lets the government claim that KSIs are down.
Tonight's paper has an article claiming road casualties in neighbouring Poole are well in line with the casualty reduction targets. Of course the Police are claiming that their actions and those of the Dorset camera Partnership are the main cause. Strange really as they never claimed responsibility for the Bournemouth figures.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff