Political Commentary
Page 49
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Apartheid
By JANUS
SOMEBODY recently criticized road-safety publicity on the grounds that it dramatized the subject and added the spice of adventure to what should be a sad and cautionary tale. I do not .share this view. The lively and continuous propaganda of such organizations as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents has greatly helped to develop traffic consciousness, particularly among children, and even the notorious and far-from-merry widow contributed her mite to the general effect.
It is possible to understand what the critic had in mind. Naturally, the approach to the public emphasizes such practical points as kerb drill and the scrupulous and courteous observance of pedestrian crossings. An attempt to draw attention to the fundamental causes of
road accidents would merely distract. Many people have therefore come to feel that as soon as they leave the manifold dangers of their own home—dangers Which •they can at least understand—they are exposed to a, diabolical and incomprehensible threat that can best be averted by going through a ritual.
The praiseworthy public emotion aroused by the alarming number Of road accidents hinders an objective approach to the problem. The motorist tends to blame the pedestrian and the pedestrian the motorist. There is a good deal of unkind comment about speed in the abstract. Any suggestion of an increase of the present speed limits is censured as indicating a callous disregard for human life. The experts have frequently stated that the increase from 20 to 30 m.p.h. of the limit for heavy goods vehicles, which is yet again being put forward by its dour proponents, will have no harmful effect upon road safety. The renewed proposal will certainly, however, provoke the usual opposition from people who have, added speed to the list of the deadly sins.
Not Fast Enough
Little hope exists of turning back the speedometer. Modern life is geared to the speed of 'modern traffic, and as it is there is a danger, notably in large towns, that vehicles are not travelling fast enough. The number of buses at peak periods using the main routes in central London has reached saturation point, whereas the number of passengers may still be increasing. A reduced speed limit at such times would result in longer queues and further congestion. It might increase rather than diminish the danger of accidents.
The root cause of road accidents is so simple that it is sometimes forgotten. Unlike the railway train, the motor vehicle from the very first found itself at home on the same permanent way as the pedestrian used. If the consequences of this apparently advantageous juxtaposition could have been completely foreseen 50 years ago, a determined attempt might have been made to keep the two classes of road user apart. As it is, apart from the genius who invented the pavement, nobody has tackled the problem systematically.
Possibly without laying any claim to originality, the House of Lords committee on the prevention of road accidents put the matter in a nutshell in its report published in 1939: " Segregation of drivers, cyclists and pedestrians on the main roads must come and the attainment of this ideal is essential if road safety is to be ensured. Owing, however, to many obstacles, the chief of which is that the cost of segregation would be almost prohibitive, this ideal cannot be attained for many years. In the meantime much can be done to reduce the toll of the roads and to lay the foundations of ultimate segregation of road users."
Unfortunately, this challenge was made only a few months before the outbreak of war and almost literally nothing has been done to meet it. Each year that passes without action adds to the urgency of the problem. The beginning of 1952 is an appropriate time for reconsideration A new Government has taken office and as yet is moving a little cautiously. On the road question as a whole it should encounter little opposition from the other side in Parliament. Had circumstances been more favourable, the Socialists when in power would have been pleased to make a beginning, even to "lay the foundations."
Confronted with the menace of the rising number of road accidents, the Government in 1946 announced a 10-year plan of road construction and reconstruction. The first two years were to be devoted to repairs and to the completion of certain schemes interrupted by the war. During the next three years, all repairs were to be brought up to date and new road works would be started, including a limited number of motorways. The last five of the 10 glorious years were set aside for a comprehensive reconstruction of the principal national routes. Entirely new roads reserved exclusively for motor traffic would be built where necessary.
Putting Up Cash
In the Special Roads Act, Parliament gladly gave the Minister of Transport all the powers he needed. Unfortunately, nobody was at hand to put up the cash, and even if it had been available authority to embark on large-scale road works -would no doubt have been difficult to obtain.
The Conservatives have no need to elaborate a plan of their own. The proposals of their predecessors are sound and adequate in principle. All that is needed is to translate good resolutions from the abstract to the actual. Lord Leathers from his seat in the Cabinet can press the case for improved communications with a power that was not at the disposal of Mr. Alfred Barnes. In the early stages of the 10-year plan, it was intended to concentrate on improving danger spots known te have particularly bad accident records. These spoh have been painstakingly charted. The cost of improv. ing each one is known. The Government might de worse than set aside a certain amount of money each year until they have all been dealt with.
Once the public can be made to see that the growth of road accidents is being tackled from the root, there will be greater enthusiasm to accept what will then be regarded as temporary restrictions on road users. The Government would also be wise at least to keep alive the hope that other items in the 10-year plan, particularly the more urgently needed motorways such as that between South Wales and the Midlands, will have an early claim whenever it becomes possible to spare the money.