R
Rod King
Guest
Hi
I regularly attend Warrington Police Forum representing both Warrington
Cycle Campaign and Living Streets. Crime figures are presented ar each
quarterly meeting. Usually the sole reference to accident statistics is the
KSI for the quarter compared to the previous year. As this normally is less
than 100 any figures are statistically meaningless due to the low numbers
reported.
For several sessions I have been pointing out that more people meet violent
deaths on the roads than by murder, and more people are greviously harmed
bodily by vehicles than by fist, knives, boots, etc. Therefore road
accidents should not figure so low on police reporting and crime statistics.
Perhaps as a comparison it is useful to note that whilst in the past 3 years
100 British service men have been killed in Iraq, over 10,000 British
citizens have been killed by vehicles on our roads!!! In fact more British
people have been killed on British pavements in that time than in Iraq.
Finally, the Police Forum Chairman has agreed with my perspective and asked
me exactly what figures I would like reporting.
I am favouring two sets of statistics.
The first should indicate the total amount of loss to society as a result of
road accidents. In a recent Warrington Borough Council report it indicated
that the total cost of road collisions in Cheshire in 2002 was £254M. This
takes the total range of accidents and proportions a cost based upon the
severity of the accident, loss of life etc. Blunt it is, but it does put a
monetary cost on accidents and also a value on their avoidance for society.
The second should show the amount of low level crime that does not
necessarily result in an accident but does consitute anti-social and
threatening behaviour of the sort that persuades parents and adults not to
cycle on the roads. This would therfore be related to speeding levels (not
necessarily prosecutions), mobile phone usage, other traffic violations and
minor collisions.
Only through tracking both the cost to society in real monetary terms and
the damage that is done to enabling people to have a choice of cycling or
walking instead of the car, can we guage the period on period improvement in
management of and discipline on our roads.
Before asking for particular statistics from the Police Forum, I would like
to canvas ideas from other cycle campaigners as to whether they have
identified any better statistics to ask for, or whether there is a standard
that we should be looking to report on throughout the country.
I look forward to any responses or debate on what I consider to be a very
important area for developing policy.
Many thanks
Rod King
Warrington Cycle Campaign
Warrington Living Streets
I regularly attend Warrington Police Forum representing both Warrington
Cycle Campaign and Living Streets. Crime figures are presented ar each
quarterly meeting. Usually the sole reference to accident statistics is the
KSI for the quarter compared to the previous year. As this normally is less
than 100 any figures are statistically meaningless due to the low numbers
reported.
For several sessions I have been pointing out that more people meet violent
deaths on the roads than by murder, and more people are greviously harmed
bodily by vehicles than by fist, knives, boots, etc. Therefore road
accidents should not figure so low on police reporting and crime statistics.
Perhaps as a comparison it is useful to note that whilst in the past 3 years
100 British service men have been killed in Iraq, over 10,000 British
citizens have been killed by vehicles on our roads!!! In fact more British
people have been killed on British pavements in that time than in Iraq.
Finally, the Police Forum Chairman has agreed with my perspective and asked
me exactly what figures I would like reporting.
I am favouring two sets of statistics.
The first should indicate the total amount of loss to society as a result of
road accidents. In a recent Warrington Borough Council report it indicated
that the total cost of road collisions in Cheshire in 2002 was £254M. This
takes the total range of accidents and proportions a cost based upon the
severity of the accident, loss of life etc. Blunt it is, but it does put a
monetary cost on accidents and also a value on their avoidance for society.
The second should show the amount of low level crime that does not
necessarily result in an accident but does consitute anti-social and
threatening behaviour of the sort that persuades parents and adults not to
cycle on the roads. This would therfore be related to speeding levels (not
necessarily prosecutions), mobile phone usage, other traffic violations and
minor collisions.
Only through tracking both the cost to society in real monetary terms and
the damage that is done to enabling people to have a choice of cycling or
walking instead of the car, can we guage the period on period improvement in
management of and discipline on our roads.
Before asking for particular statistics from the Police Forum, I would like
to canvas ideas from other cycle campaigners as to whether they have
identified any better statistics to ask for, or whether there is a standard
that we should be looking to report on throughout the country.
I look forward to any responses or debate on what I consider to be a very
important area for developing policy.
Many thanks
Rod King
Warrington Cycle Campaign
Warrington Living Streets