Agenda item

To receive a report by the relevant Cabinet Members and Corporate Director Growth, Environment and Transport  on the road casualty trends and the actions being undertaken to improve road safety in line with the Kent Casualty Reduction Strategy approved by this Cabinet Committee in 2014.

1.            The Head of Transportation, Mr Read, introduced a report that updated Members on the road casualty trends and the action being undertaken to improve road safety in line with the Kent Casualty Reduction Strategy approved by this Cabinet Committee in 2014.

2.            Mr Read introduced Members of his Team; the newly appointed Casualty Reduction Manager, Mr Horton, the Manager of the Kent and Medway Safety Partnership, Mrs Penny; and the Transport Intelligence Manager, Mr Burchill.

3.            Mr Read advised that in Kent the number of people killed or seriously injured in road crashes fell by 50% between 2000 and 2010.  Whilst the long term trend in Kent was down, 49 people died and 609 people were seriously injured on roads in Kent, including those managed by Highways England in 2014, which represented an11% increase over the figures for 2013.  A similar increase was seen in 2013 compared to 2012 data.  Mr Read advised that this was happening because three quarters of accidents were solely out of human behaviour, driver error.  In Kent there had been a rise in crashes recording impairment by drink and drugs, mobile phone use and inappropriate speed.  Kent had particular high traffic density in its rural road network.  This Cabinet Committee approved the new Kent Casualty Reduction Strategy and as part of this a wider range of data would be drawn on to better define risk and adopt a safer systems approach.

4.            Mr Read highlighted ongoing projects over the last year that included:

·         Pilot of a “damage only” crash database where evidence of crashes could be entered on a county database.  This would quantify and identify risk factors on the road side and on the road.

·         Piloting of an iRAP/VIDA assessment tool which would be carried out alongside the existing assessment.

·         The upgrading of existing safety cameras sites from wet film to digital operation.  That work would begin in 2016.

·         Delivery of Driver Diversionary Scheme (DDS) courses including National Speed Awareness for 34,194 clients on behalf of the Kent Police.

·         Launching of a new road safety web resource for parents and primary schools.

·         Expansion of the popular Licence to Kill initiative which was run for students in years 12-13.

5.            Mr Balfour advised Members if they wanted to see Licence to Kill they should contact Mr Horton.  He then welcomed Mrs Penny and congratulated her on the work that she had undertaken and the newly appointed Mr Horton.

6.            Mr Read noted comments and responded to questions by Members as follows:

a)    A suggestion was made that it would be better to have a longer timescale to show the trend in accidents over a longer period had decreased and flat lined since the1960s.

b)    It was suggested that KSI should be split up and fatalities should be recorded separately as any changes in one could mask changes in another.

c)    If casualties were stated by kilometres travelled so that the context is there that the accidents are expressed in the total mileage travelled. This would indicate how low the chances of being in an accident were.

d)    The resent activities over the past two years reflected economic activity.  The economic recession took drivers off the roads and resulted in few accidents.

e)    It was suggested that speed awareness courses were not the answer.  The DFT produced a top ten causation factor list.  Since 2005 the first cause on the list was; failure to look properly and the second was failure to correctly judge the speed of an approaching vehicle, this was 60% of all accidents although the focus was on speed.

f)     A further suggestion was made for a driver training course set up to reward drivers who undertake further driving courses in return for a reduced car insurance premium.

g)    A comment was made that there was a need to pay more attention to rural roads and addressing the behaviour of drives on those roads.

h)   The initiative to improve the data collection on nonfatal injuries was welcomed.

i)     A comment was made regarding the cost of a death or serious injury on the roads was £1.9 million. This money was spent by the Kent Police, NHS, KCC, Kent and Medway Fire Brigade.  It was suggested that the NHS should make a contribution to prevention measures.  Mr Read advised that there was an act of Parliament that the NHS can claim back the cost of medical treatment from insurers where there was proven negligence, in terms of driver behaviour.  He then gave the example of a child receiving a serious head injury in a road accident cost fell upon a local authority, through social care and educational needs for a lifetime.  Mr Balfour added that he understood this cost to be £50 million.

j)      A comment was made that there was a need to source additional funding to further reduce the casualty figures again.

k)    A comment was made that the graphs on page 115 of the report did not reflect the national publicity regarding elderly being involved in accidents.  Mr Horton advised that the graph took into account population in terms of national research the graph did not take into account trips that those elderly drivers were taking although this gives an indication in terms of population level it did not differentiate between ages.

l)     A comment was made that this report was optimistic and that there was a sea change in road safety.

m)  A Member advised that the next Local Transport Plan which was due for consultation in 2016 would include road safety as a top priority.

n)   A Member stated that people who drove into obstacle to commit suicide were also included in the statistics and some of those seriously injured formed part of those numbers but did not admit to this. 100% of those pedestrians hit by a car in the road was wholly or partially responsible for their own position because they were in the road.  A percentage of those adults hit by a car were above the drink drive limit.  It was not about speed but education.  People needed to be taught how to use the roads correctly.

o)    A Member referred to the graph Figure 3 in the report suggesting that Driver/Rider injudicious and driver/rider error could be partly tackled by the white lines in the roads being maintained.

p)    It was suggested that data collection of minor incidents on the roads needed to be collated.

q)    A Member highlighted the issue of motor cyclists speeding on Romney Marsh road and the need for road signs to be changed to “Motor Cyclists Think.”

r)     It was highlighted that there were no statistics regarding HGV motorists mentioned within the report.

s)    It was suggested that we may want to look at zero alcohol and drugs or phone, reducing speed limits

t)     A further comment was made that you cannot eliminate speed reduction totally there needed to be a suite of measures.

u)   Mr McDowall requested to work with officers on how to set speed limits correctly to be submitted to this Cabinet Committee at a future meeting.

7.            The Chairman requested that Mr Read speak with Mr Baldock and Mr McDowall outside the meeting.

8.            RESOLVED that the comments and responses to questions by Members and the information set out in the report on the key trend data and the forward strategy be noted.