DfT confirms road death increase in 2011

12.00 | 27 September 2012 | | 7 comments

The DfT has confirmed that road deaths increased in 2011 for the first time since 2003.

The increase is confirmed in the DfT’s annual road casualty report, ‘Reported Road Casualties in Great Britain: 2011 Annual Report’, published today (27 September). The final figures are in line with provisional figures released by the DfT in June.

The report shows that road deaths in 2011 rose by 3%, from 1,850 in 2010 to 1,901. It also reveals that child deaths increased from 55 in 2010 to 60 in 2011; collisions resulting in serious injuries increased by 2%; pedestrian deaths rose by 12%; and the number of seriously injured pedestrians increased by 5%.

In contrast, total casualties of all severity were 2% lower than in 2010, while motor vehicle traffic increased slightly, by 0.2% over the period.

The number of cyclists killed fell from 111 to 107, despite an increase in the number of cyclists on the road. However, seriously injured cyclists increased by 16%, to 3,085.

The report also revealed a fall in the number of motorcycle deaths, which decreased by 10%, to 362. However, this was accompanied by 10% and 8% increases in motorcycle serious injuries and overall casualties.

Robert Gifford, executive director of PACTS, said “Of particular concern are the rise of 6% in car occupants and 10% in deaths on built-up roads. It is on these roads where vulnerable road users are most at risk. After years of progress in improving pedestrian safety in our towns and cities, we do not want to see this group suffer through cuts in road engineering or enforcement.
“It is also concerning to note the increase of 10% in casualties among cyclists going to and from work. Cycling casualties between 7am and 10am and 4pm and 7pm on Monday to Thursday have risen from 6,249 to 6,932. We must continue to make the commute to work a safer journey for cyclists, especially since this form of road use is rising.
“The new Secretary of State has identified that road safety remains a key priority for his department and for the government. These figures show him clearly why this should be so. For deaths to rise in the time of a recession and when traffic levels have remained broadly static suggests that our roads are becoming more dangerous for citizens rather than safer.”

Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at RoSPA, said: “These figures must be taken as an opportunity to revise the way we work to make roads safer. It is a chance for road safety professionals and the new ministerial team at the DfT to come together and discuss the way forward. While we appreciate that the Government has tough funding decisions to make, we must now do more to arrest and reverse the number of people being killed or hurt on our roads.

“Now is the time to drop the proposal to increase the motorway speed limit to 80mph, and the decision not to set casualty reduction targets in the Government’s ‘Strategic Framework for Road Safety’. The drink-drive limit should be lowered from 80mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood to 50mg (in line with the proposed changes in Scotland & Northern Ireland), and Government, the insurance industry and road safety bodies should work together to make the best use of black box technology in vehicles, especially to help young drivers and at-work drivers.”

Neil Greig, IAM director of policy and research, focused on the increase in casualties attributed to drink driving. He said: “The increase in deaths and serious injuries because of drink driving is absolutely shocking. It accounts for more than half of the increase in road deaths. In 2013, we must see a drink driving education campaign, backed up with enforcement, to put an end to these completely unnecessary deaths.

“With last year’s surprising increase in deaths and early indications from 2012 that a trend could be developing, the IAM urges the new road safety minister to make road safety his absolute priority.

“Britain has been at the top of the world road safety league, but a combination of public spending cuts and lack of central targets may be putting this in jeopardy.  The 2011 figures show that saving lives on our roads can never be taken for granted and with human error still the top cause of crashes, education and training must take centre stage in the future.”

Click here to read the DfT report in full.


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

    a ‘blip’!

    58% of the total increase in road fatalities in 2011 were drink drive related. With these figures confirming drink drive fatalities have risen for the first time in a decade…how can this be ‘blip’?

    There is no excuse for drink driving and young people/pre-drivers need to be informed about the dangers before they learn to drive.

    30 more fatalities in 2011, due to drink driving, is 30 fatalities that didn’t have to happen and could have easily been avoided if alcohol wasn’t involved…

    Mike, from http://dontbethatsomeone.co.uk (London)
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    What is there to dislike about my providing graphs of the official figures, to put 2011 in context? Or pointing out that 1 year’s data is not enough to confirm a trend? Yet 6 people apparently prefer not to see that factual information. Or was it perhaps my point about unproved assumptions and foregone conclusions hit a nerve? In response to Adam, I think traffic volume in 2011 increased very slightly, reversing the trend of the previous 2 or 3 years.

    Idris Francis Petersfield
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    This rise is coupled with a decline in traffic, which could indicate this ‘blip’ is even worse than it would appear. Or could a drop in traffic levels increase flow, and therefore speeds, which could lead to more collisions?

    Adam, Hants
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    Carlos, the blip, if indeed it is a blip, will only be confirmed in another two years!

    Right Road NW
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    Well said Idris. It is simply a blip.

    Carlos, Westminster
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    I agree with Bob Craven whose remarks remind me of the police motorcycle officer who told me at services on the M6 that “Every time they put up a camera, they cut one of our patrols.”

    As for all the breast-beating about the 3% rise in fatalities, tragic though it was for those involved. put in context (http://www.fightbackwithfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/GB-1972-2011-K-SI-SLIGHT.pdf) it will surely turn out to be just the 9th such minor increase since 1972, superimposed on a long-term downward trend, in other words a blip, not an indicator of a change in trend. As the experts you quote cannot fail to know, a minimum of 3 years’ data is needed to be statistically significant, why do they read into the numbers significance they do not have?

    Once more I have to point out that what passes for analysis amounts to little more than drawing straight lines between unproved assumptions and foregone conclusions.

    Idris Francis Peterfield
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    It hss always been said that safety cameras don’t catch drunk drivers and it’s true. With the present financial cutbacks that have seen police and in particular traffic departments reduced or axed there is a greater danger that more anti-social driving will, or rather is, occuring.

    Whilst governments try to legislate in order to control this anti-social behaviour it is necessary to have a police service of sufficient strength and the capacity to administer that legislation.

    CPOs are not the answer. A greater active police presence on the streets is necessary otherwise legislation like the proposed alcohol limit reduction will mean absolutely nothing.

    bob craven Lancs
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.