AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

INEQUALITY

19th May 1961, Page 70
19th May 1961
Page 70
Page 70, 19th May 1961 — INEQUALITY
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

IN SPITE of some rough treatment during the discussions in the committee stage, the Road Traffic Bill appears to be leaving the House of Lords for the House of Commons very little changed from its original form. There are substantial signs of public approval, or what is nearly as bad, public indifference, to the provisions that are causing so much concern to commercial vehicle operators. In particular, the suggestion that their drivers are being. unduly victimized is not kindling much indignation. If a driver is to lose his licence following three convictions for speeding within the space of three years, the general opinion remains that he ought not to be allowed to plead hardship and that the law is no respecter of persons. Similarly, the magistrate who imposes the penalty ought not to be swayed by the knowledge that the effect may be harsher in some cases than in others. This is the popular opinion.

A considerable revolution in thought is needed to accept the opposing view that operators are putting forward. However ingrained the popular ideas may be, they should be attacked and loosened. It must be made plain that the basic legal principles cannot be made to apply to road traffic rules and regulations without violating common sense. All men may be equal before the law, but they are not equal behind the steering wheel.

The problem is to make this point without calling the law into contempt. The Highway Code is an excellent document, if every driver kept to it religiously there would be . fewer road accidents. It would be going too far to say there would be no accidents at all. Continually there are unexpected events that lead to a tragic end on the road although the behaviour of the driver concerned is blameless. There are other motorists whose knowledge of the code may be profound but who are far from being good drivers. They may be penalized at the outset by failing to pass a driving test. The Highway Code is a kind of common denominator. Even the man who has just scraped through a test may justifiably consider he is not a menace to other road users if he scrupulously observes every provision of the code. Human nature being what it is, an increase in skill leads him to a somewhat less rigid view. He finds that in certain circumstances he can ignore some of the rules with impunity and apparently without danger.

THIS is a regrettable development. It is only right that there should be some penalty for transgression. The question remains whether the punishment ought to be prescribed on the lines proposed in the new Bill, or whether the skill and experience of the driver ought to be taken into account in cases where there has been no accident and where it is not suggested that the offender was driving dangerously. Skill is taken into account at the lowest level, in that the man who cannot reach a certain standard is not given a licence. Why should it not apply throughout the scale? The man who on his first solo drive rushes down the High Street at 40 m.p.h. deserves nothing better than to lose his licence on the same day as he is given it. His first offence should :ae his last. Another driver who does the same thing and has a previously unblemished record for 25 years at least deserves the benefit of the doubt.

The transport associations may be wise to concentrate their attack upon the plan to impose more serious penalties for speeding. The inclination in some quarters is to assume

(.31 that speed, and speed alone, is responsible for the increa in the number of accidents on the road. The argument presumably that speed represents the only essential cliff( ence between the motor and the horse-drawn vehicle. horses could run at 60 m.p.h., there would have been need to invent the internal combustion engine.

IT IS obvious, however, that speed and safety are variat factors. There are times in busy streets when it would not only dangerous but impossible for a motor vehicle travel at the normal speed of a horse and cart. There a other occasions when a driver has a wide road .to himst and within reason can go perfectly safely at whatever spe he chooses. The choice even in these circumstances mt depend upon the skill of the driver. If he is driving commercial vehicle, the law narrows his choice to f range up to 30 m.p.h. A genuine attempt to keep strict within the law when driving an up-to-date lorry or coal may make him more rather than less dangerous. By co centrating on his lack of speed, he must be giving less atte tion to other things. His slow progress makes him a serio hazard to other road users who do not have to observe t same limits.

The moving vehicle is unique. There is no other basis f comparison. Most other machines have the advantage, fro the point of view of safety, that they always stay in t' same place. The observance of one or two straightforwa rules, such as the proper use of a guard, may make a facto machine completely foolproof. Failure to observe the rul may well be treated as gross negligence and punish, accordingly, for their observance brings a degree of safe that has no reference to the skill of the operator. On the necessary precautions have been taken, he is neith more nor less safe than the apprentice. His ability lies the speed at which he works and in the quality of the pr duct he turns out.

BY WAY of contrast, the skill of the driver lies mainly safety. Although there are many devices to help him, 1 must essentially be his own guard. Unlike the facto machine, no vehicle can be guaranteed completely sal Even when stationary it is a potential danger to other ra users. Practically every manceuvre must be performed accordance with a complicated set of rules. If they we expected to give perfect safety, the rules would have to ; augmented to such an extent that no vehicle would ever able to start on its journey without the law being broke

Operators may suspect that the new Bill is a step towar the devising of some such set of rules. They might w have the opposite effect to what is intended. The virtue the Highway Code is that it offers a relatively small numb of clear instructions and does not dwell too much penalties. In fact, not every infringement of the code is breach of the law. The more injunctions and threats th are added, the more confused is the driver likely to g As it is, the average journey on a heavy vehicle is a co siderable feat of muscular and mental co-ordination. T driver who has reached the degree of skill that makes t operation second nature should not have to worry that few offences against the letter rather than the spirit of t code may bring his driving career effectively to a close.

Tags


comments powered by Disqus