22 January 2007

Transport Select Committee
Motorcycle Strategy Enquiry
RoadPeace Response

Summary

As the national charity for road crash victims, RoadPeace represents both those who have suffered while motorcycling as well as those who have bereaved and injured by motorcyclists. We work to ensure lessons are learned from these tragedies in order to spare others suffering. Our key points on the DfT's Motorcycle Strategy are:

• Insufficient reference is given to reducing the risk of motorcycling, especially to other road users (not even mentioned)., despite the well-known over-involvement of motorcycles in collisions with pedestrians and cyclists.
• The DfT's Motorcycle strategy should be rewritten to properly reflect the risks involved in motorcycling, including those posed to others, particularly those walking and cycling. The present strategy reads like a promotional publication produced by the motorcycle industry.
• It relies too much on education, an unproven strategy, and fails to tackle speeding seriously.

RoadPeace Motorcycle Safety consultation response dedication

This response is dedicated to:

John Living who was killed in 2005 while riding his motorcycle when an uninsured driver decided to turn right across John's path. The driver pleaded guilty to careless driving and received a fine of £80, 200 hours community service and a two year driving ban.

Adam Wall who was killed in 2002 when a car driver with defective glasses turned in front of him. The driver was convicted of careless driving, fined £180 and received 6 penalty points.

Chris Baxter whose son was seriously injured by a motorcyclist in 2003. Chris and his wife discovered that the speed calculations conducted by the police were based on the default assumption that a car had been involved and had not been adjusted for the lighter mass of motorcycles. His efforts, including FOI requests to all police forces, resulted in the Home Office Minister requesting ACPO to review their training policy and procedures on estimating motorcycle impact speeds.

Craig Duncan who was crossing the road when he was hit by a motorcyclist in 2006. He suffered serious injuries, almost lost his leg and contracted MRSA in hospital. His recovery has been hampered by the slow progress of the police investigation, including waiting over four months for CCTV footage to be viewed.

Introduction

As the national charity for road crash victims, RoadPeace represents both those who have had loved ones killed while riding motorcycles as well as those who have been bereaved or injured by motorcyclists. RoadPeace was established after the founder's son was killed while riding his motorcycle by a serial red light offender. Thus we are keenly aware of the vulnerability of motorcyclists as well as the risk they pose to pedestrians and cyclists.

We comment on three main areas:

1. Progress of Motorcycle Strategy.

We do not believe the Motorcycle Strategy will have much effect on the risk of motorcycling due to the following reasons:

Risk. While the strategy makes brief reference to the over-representation of motorcyclists in fatal collisions, there is no mention of the risk and intimidation they pose to others, especially those walking and cycling. In 2005, motorcycles killed 3.7 times as many pedestrians and twice as many cyclists as cars did, per distance travelled. We cannot fathom how this was ever approved. Its aim should be revised to include minimising the risk of motorcycling to other road users.

Under-estimation of speeding. Speeding is a leading cause of crashes, particularly so with motorcycle crashes. Yet there is very little reference to speeding in the strategy-virtually no acknowledgement of it being a problem nor how to tackle it. The press has reported the Road Safety Minister's promise that motorcycles will not be subject to speed control technology.

Over-reliance on training. The strategy includes much reference to training and makes incorrect assumptions of the effectiveness of training. DfT funded research has found drivers are more likely to speed after attending a Driver Improvement Scheme. Given the problem motorcyclists already have with speeding, the Driver Improvement Programme should not be recommended.

2. Specific measures

Daylight running lights. RoadPeace supports the campaign to restrict daylight running lights to motorcycles.

Passive safety. RoadPeace supports the increased use of passive safety features to reduce the risk to road users, particularly motorcyclists.

Vehicle design research. We support the focus on the windscreen design and the priority given to minimising any 'blind spot'. For too long, 'blind spots' have been tolerated and used as a defence in bad driving cases instead of being eliminated.

Bus lanes. RoadPeace does not support the use of bus lanes by motorcyclists due to potential conflict with cyclists, pedestrians and bus passengers who perceive this as a safer part of the road. However RoadPeace does not object to the use by motorcyclists of bus lanes on motorways.

3.Post crash response omission.

In addition, we would like to highlight the lack of reference to the post crash stage, particularly the insufficient priority assigned to collision investigation and prosecution.

Collision investigation. Despite the recent improvements made in fatal collision investigation, there still remains much more to be done, including standard post crash checks on eyesight and mobile phone records. The Road Death Investigation Manual is also recommended for serious injury collisions, especially those involving life threatening or life changing injuries.

In 2003, a young teenager crossing the road was hit by a motorcyclist. The collision investigator estimated the impact speed of the motorcyclist as if it was a motor car, thus underestimating its speed (it would have to be going faster to be able to throw a pedestrian as far as a car would). His father did a freedom of information request to all police forces before raising it with the Minister responsible for Criminal Justice.

This does not appear to be a unique incident and we are concerned about the apparent regular under-estimation of motorcycle speed in pedestrian collisions. According to TRL Report 492 'An Analysis of Police Reports of Fatal Accidents involving motorcycles', excessive speed was involved in 32% of motorcycle only crashes, 26% of crashes between motorcycles and four wheel motor vehicles but only 13% of collisions between motorcycles and pedestrians, which seems unusually low.

Criminal prosecution. A common cause of motorcycle collisions is drivers looking but not seeing and turning across the motorcyclist's path. This is only considered to be 'careless driving' although we believe it would qualify as a serious error which would fail a driver on their driving test, and the CPS and police should also treat it as 'dangerous driving'.

Civil compensation. RoadPeace supports 'driver liability' whereby motorists, including motorcyclists, are liable for civil compensation for injuries to pedestrians and cyclists. We are not aware of any country where this extends to motorcyclists, i.e. four wheel motor vehicle drivers held responsible for any injuries to motorcyclists. Given the problem with drivers looking but not seeing motorcyclists, we believe this is a logical extension of driver liability that should be considered.

Summary

To have a motorcycle strategy that 'aims to mainstream' the most dangerous road user mode without even mentioning the risk it poses to others is inexcusable.