Put driving speeds in context

WHILE any attempt at cutting the number of road deaths is to be applauded, we must not allow ourselves to be carried away with the idea that excessive speed alone is to blame.

The Road Safety Authority notes that “speed is a significant factor in four out of 10 collisions.”.

This vague pronouncement requires clarification.

What, for instance, is meant by “speed”? Is it speed inappropriate to the conditions or speed in excess of the limit?

What other “significant factors” are involved? And if these are removed, just how big a part does excessive speed play in the accident rate?

We might also ask how the causes of accidents are decided and in what way is blame apportioned to these “significant factors”.

Glib assertions from the authorities can be unhelpful in trying to arrive at a sensible analysis of road accidents, which is what is required in trying to formulate a policy for reducing casualties.

The British government used a casualty figure of 33% to justify speed traps until its own survey showed that excess speed was a factor in only 4.5% of accidents.

This reckless enthusiasm to indict speeding raises the fear that the motivation for the mass installation of speed cameras is more politically or financially motivated than safety-led.

Speed cameras will only catch vehicles travelling in excess of the limit, not going too fast for the prevailing conditions.

A speed of 140km/h may be quite safe on a dry motorway but even 30km/h can be lethal on a wet day in town.

So a modicum of commonsense should be called for rather than the blanket persecution and mass fining of motorists, which, I fear, is the real intention.

Justin Roberts

Ballynagleragh

Lattin

Co Tipperary