TRL 323, anyone get a reply from their MP? I did..
Discussion
This is long, but interesting.
First off, the letter from my MP, Mr Brian Wilson Esq, MP for Cunningham North.
Shock Horror, an MP who earns their ENORMOUS salary 
This is the letter which the Department for Transport sent to Brian Wilson, dated 19/12/02.
Notice, that I said that 7% are CAUSED by speed. He said the biggest factor is speed. Obviously this is to favor his side of the argument
We all know that speed (of any kind) must be a factor, large or small, otherwise the accident wouldn't happen in the first place.
Always the same bulshit, time after time after time...
>>> Edited by tvradict on Saturday 11th January 01:33
First off, the letter from my MP, Mr Brian Wilson Esq, MP for Cunningham North.
Dear Mr Brindle
I took up with the authorities to matter which you raised with me. I have now recieved a reply, which I enclose.
Your Sincerely
Brian Wilson
Shock Horror, an MP who earns their ENORMOUS salary This is the letter which the Department for Transport sent to Brian Wilson, dated 19/12/02.
Dear Brian,
Thank you for you letter to Alistair Darling enclosing a letter from your constituent, Stuart Brindle of ** ****** Avenue, West Kilbride, concerning the issue of excessive speeding. I am replying as I have ministerial responsibility for road safety policy.
Firstly and contary to recent press reports, the Government has no plans to introduce mandatory speed limit reductions. Work is however progressing on revising the Department's guidance to local authorities on the setting of appropriate speed limits. Other work is being progressed on the particular problem of inappropriate and excessive speed particularly prevalent in rural areas.
Mr Brindle goes on to state that only 7% of accidents are caused by speed. I am afraid, I have to disagree with this statement. Copious research exists which clearly shows excessive and inappropriate speed to be the biggest factor in road accidents
Notice, that I said that 7% are CAUSED by speed. He said the biggest factor is speed. Obviously this is to favor his side of the argument
We all know that speed (of any kind) must be a factor, large or small, otherwise the accident wouldn't happen in the first place.
My Department occasionally hears from individuals who do not accept the clear evidence about the dangers of speeding and often misquote TRL Report 323 "A New system for recording contributary factors in road accidents". The report is about identifying contributary factors in accidents in the context of a new accident data recording system brought into STATS 19, the police form used at the scene of a road accident.
Speed as a separate factor in its own right was present in 15% of accidents. When allowances are made for all other speed related factors, for example, adverse weather conditions where inappropriate speed is clearly a factor, we believe the contribution is much greater. Indeed further research has directly examined the relationship between speed and accidents. These show clearly that the risk of an accident the faster the driver travels. For example, at 25% above the average speed, a driver is 6 times more likely to be involved in an accident. The full results can be found in TRL Reports 421 and 511
Mr Brindle also raised the issue of driver training and re-testing. The Government has no plans to re-test drivers in this way. Fortunately, the great majority of motorists in this country drive responsibly. Our statistics show that experienced drivers have a much lower accident rate than inexperienced young drivers.
The Government believes in driver education and retraining but considers that the focus should be on those drivers who commit offences. In addition to the powers the courts have to require re-testing of offenders, many police forces are now offering driver improvement courses to those who would otherwise be prosecuted for driving without due care and attention. Drivers who, in the opinion of the police, would benefit from training rather than prosecution, spend at their own expense, one and a half days confronting their own failings in front of others in classroom based group discussions, and being assessed on their driving skills. Discussion sessions cover hazard recognition and avoidance, how accidents happen and might be avoided and knowledge of traffic rules. Our research has demonstrated that rates of re-offending are reduced and that many participants gain from this experience. The Government is now considering how such courses could become part of the range of penalties the courts might order in respect of road traffic offences.
Ultimately though we firmly believe that speed is a significant factor in over a third of all deaths and serious injuries and we are fully commited to achieving our targets of a 40% reduction (50% for children) in the number of people killed and seriously injured on our roads by 2010
I hope this is helpful
David Jamieson.
Always the same bulshit, time after time after time...
>>> Edited by tvradict on Saturday 11th January 01:33
"Fortunately, the great majority of motorists in this country drive responsibly."
I think the writer should have a quiet word in the ear of one Inspector Collis, Thames Valley Police, who tells us there are 3,650,000,000 speeding offences each year.
Alternatively, Inspector Collis should have a word in the ear of said writer...........
I think the writer should have a quiet word in the ear of one Inspector Collis, Thames Valley Police, who tells us there are 3,650,000,000 speeding offences each year.
Alternatively, Inspector Collis should have a word in the ear of said writer...........
Funny, about 6 months ago I wrote to my MP, Michael Ancram who passed on my letter to our good friend Mr. Darling.
The main thrust of my letter was urging the government to concentrate on bad driving instead of solely speed, and to increase the number of patrols on our roads rather than replace them with cameras as they are currently doing. I briefly mentioned the TRL document, but the majority of my letter was about promoting road safety and awareness instead of just measuring speed. I believe that speed cameras may well make the population as a whole drive slower where they are placed, but it will not change people's perception of their own driving safety and therefore have no impact on overall accident figures.
Guess which bit Captain Darling chose to address - the one sentence mentioning the TRL document, totally ignoring the rest of the letter - and the text was identical to what was posted above. At that point I gave up - there is no point in asking reasoned questions about the government's policy on road safety, where they have no policy they will simply point to speed reduction.
The main thrust of my letter was urging the government to concentrate on bad driving instead of solely speed, and to increase the number of patrols on our roads rather than replace them with cameras as they are currently doing. I briefly mentioned the TRL document, but the majority of my letter was about promoting road safety and awareness instead of just measuring speed. I believe that speed cameras may well make the population as a whole drive slower where they are placed, but it will not change people's perception of their own driving safety and therefore have no impact on overall accident figures.
Guess which bit Captain Darling chose to address - the one sentence mentioning the TRL document, totally ignoring the rest of the letter - and the text was identical to what was posted above. At that point I gave up - there is no point in asking reasoned questions about the government's policy on road safety, where they have no policy they will simply point to speed reduction.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff