|
Abstract
|
Every time a politician cuts a ribbon at a road upgrade or opens a road safety conference we are told of our wonderful progress in reducing deaths from road crashes. But let's not blame the politicians - we write the speeches for them!
And the claims are, in a narrow sense, accurate, albeit misleading. In Australia, in 1970, almost 50 persons were killed in road crashes for every billion kilometres driven. Forty years later the rate was below six; an almost 90% reduction. Moreover, despite the enormous growth in road use the absolute number of deaths had fallen from close to 3,800 in 1970 to under 1,200 in 2013. The latest official federal government statistical summary states: "Over the last decade (to 2013), national annual fatalities decreased by 25 per cent, fatalities per population decreased by 35 per cent, and annual fatal crashes decreased by 23 per cent. In short, we tell the public of our continuous incremental gains and they are real. What is misleading is the implication being that the problem is under control and that there is no cause for public concern. Would the public remain complacent if they saw things from the perspective of the level of trauma they are being asked to accept? The current national road safety strategy has a target of reducing serious injuries and deaths by 30% by 2020 (over its 10 year life). Since the total annual number of serious injuries and deaths in the baseline period was over 30,000 the target implies that we plan to accept that some 20,000 persons will be seriously injured or killed in 2020. Further, suppose the 30% reduction was achieved in year one of the strategy (which it wasn't) and then maintained for the decade (which it can't be) the minimum total of serious injuries and deaths that we are planning to accept over the decade is over 200,000. No other daily activity demands such a level of trauma. If we stop and reflect on the timing of the introduction of our most effective (traditional) countermeasure packages we notice that each followed a publicly perceived road trauma crisis. The following figure illustrates this for Victoria. Deaths climbed steadily from the post-war motorisation boom through to the early 1970's when the 1000 deaths barrier was breached. There was a huge public outcry which culminated in the introduction of legislation to make the wearing of seat belts compulsory. There was an immediate reduction, sustained for a few years. When an aberrantly low number in the mid-70's was followed by a return to the prevailing trend a second crisis was perceived, largely because the media and public commentators focus on the year to year "scoreboard". Random Breath Testing (RBT) dramatically impacted alcohol-related crashes and a new "normal" was established until another apparent crisis occurred. The next "normal" in Victoria was around 400 deaths a year until yet another spike led to the speed enforcement packages of the 2000's. I grant my interpretation is speculative, but I am in no doubt that governments respond to public concern and that that concern is driven by media coverage. Unfortunately, media coverage is (largely) confined to fatal crashes, especially those involving blameworthy behaviour....
Language: en |