Vulnerable road users must ‘become a priority’

08.24 | 11 October | | 5 comments

The needs of vulnerable road users must become a priority in local planning processes if the road deaths and serious injuries are to be reduced, according to a new strategy.

Published today (11 October), the RoSPA National Accident Prevention Strategy calls for lower speeds in built-up areas, and the promotion of active travel as a positive option.

The strategy aims to achieve a ‘step-change in the delivery of evidence-based accident prevention programmes across England’, promote safe and active lives and reduce the burden of serious accidental injury on society’.

The strategy also calls for:

  • Pedestrian training for children at Key Stages 1 and 2
  • The collection of work-related road accident statistics
  • Help for employers to manage occupational road risk
  • Self-assessment tools to enable older drivers to stay on the road safely for longer
  • Action on young driver safety.

Errol Taylor, RoSPA’s chief executive, said: “Other areas of accident prevention have much to learn from road safety, which has had nationally-led strategic approaches to injury reduction.

“In recent years, however, the decline in road deaths and injuries that we saw over previous decades has stagnated, meaning we need to also take new and more effective approaches to accident prevention on the roads.

“The strategy clearly sets out how Government departments and other stakeholders, such as local authorities, developers, businesses and schools, can harness principles of good engineering and safety education to play their part in protecting life and limb on the country’s roads, while promoting active travel.”


 

Comments

Comment on this story

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Report a reader comment

Order by Latest first | Oldest first | Highest rated | Lowest rated

    Perhaps we shouldn’t put tailgating under the umbrella of driving without due care and attention or without reasonable consideration. There is no doubt it will fit under one of these headings but instead make it a stand alone offence of “Tailgating.”

    Punishable, where considered suitable ie. not serious no injuries, little damage and no other evidence of bad driving but merely a rear end shunt. Deal with it either by a FPT. straight forward fine without penalty points or in serious cases more in line with S. 3 RTA then deal with it by way of summons and possible Court Action with a fine and penalty points.

    What do others think – agree or disagree?


    R.Craven
    Agree (1) | Disagree (1)
    0

    R Craven -agree on AM with a change in the law to make falling short automatically “careless driving”.


    Paul Luton, Teddington
    Agree (1) | Disagree (1)
    0

    I agree Hugh But sometimes there is “an elephant in the room” and that means that there is a problem that is staring us in the face but nobody is acknowledging it.


    R.Craven
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)
    0

    ..and maintaining safe distances from pedestrians and cyclists as well etc. Bob i.e the vulnerable road users – the essential cocoon of safety shouldn’t just apply to vehicles following vehicles.


    Hugh Jones
    Agree (2) | Disagree (0)
    +2

    I am quite surprised that they are still talking in terms of accidents and not incidents or collisions. That said I wish them well.

    Dare I say that a new initiative to keep vehicles as far apart from each other would be a good start. If they can do just that one thing where it appears no one else can I for one will be well pleased.

    Perhaps we should train all road users in Advanced Motoring techniques and therefore that would include safe road positioning ie. not tailgating.


    R.Craven
    Agree (2) | Disagree (0)
    +2