Go Safe on Scotland's Roads: road safety framework to 2020

Chapter Eight
Reducing risk on the roads

As previously mentioned, there is more risk of death and serious injury on the roads than in any other area of domestic life. Certain behaviours, actions and conditions increase the risk. The most common of these are discussed in this chapter.

8.1 Rural Roads

"Drivers, especially younger and inexperienced ones, drive with less care on rural roads than they do on urban roads. They think these roads are safer because they are quieter. Unfortunately, they do not realise that rural roads present many unforeseen hazards, such as blind bends, hidden dips, animals and mud on the road."
(Safety Organisation)

The Issues

While a number of the matters relating to rural roads are covered in other sections of this document (e.g. Sections 8.4 and 9.2), the high number of fatalities and serious injuries which occur on rural roads demand a specific section of the Framework devoted to examining safety issues on rural roads. In spite of many such roads having relatively low traffic volumes, seven out of ten fatal crashes occur in rural locations. Additionally, over half of all serious injuries occur on rural roads. There are also a disproportionately high numbers of deaths and serious injuries involving under 25 year old drivers occurring on rural roads.

Rural roads have many hazards:

• Some drivers do not realise that the speed limit is often not the most appropriate speed for the road conditions.
• Wet surfaces, mud and leaves can contribute to skidding.
• Blind summits, tight bends and dips on the road.
• Dazzle and distraction caused by oncoming vehicle headlamps.
• Slower road users - agricultural vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, etc.
• Concealed side junctions, exits from fields, etc.
• Livestock or other animals on the road.
• Sun dazzle, particularly on east-west roads.

Research in 2007 by the IAM ³⁵ found that, on Scottish rural roads, about 75% of all fatal and serious accidents are accounted for by four main crash types: head-on collisions (12%), running off the road (24%), junctions (24%) and pedestrian/cyclist (15%).

Scottish Government research ³⁶ found the following:

• Only around half the drivers surveyed (51%) knew that the National Speed Limit sign meant a maximum of 60 mph for car driving.
• Survey respondents saw driving on rural roads as low risk, due to fewer vehicles and pedestrians, and lower police presence. Risky driving was not perceived as likely to have negative consequences.
• Fatalities on Scottish non built-up roads comprise 67% car occupants, 16% motorcyclists and 17% others.

What we do now

RSS has been developing a publicity campaign strategy as part of the 'Don't risk it' brand to improve safety on rural roads which will address different driver and rider behaviours. The initial phase raised awareness that open roads are not as safe as some think, and this was followed up in 2008 with the launch of a cinema advert which highlighted the effects that a simple distraction could have when driving on rural roads.

The Scottish Government research document Rural Road Safety: Drivers and Driving, referred to previously, recommended future publicity should focus on young drivers and male drivers and should not include statistics which the focus groups viewed with mistrust. It should, however, include helpful information regarding specific messages and issues relevant to rural roads, such as: "driving too fast for the road conditions is the biggest cause of death on Scotland's roads".

Targeted Police Enforcement Campaigns are run in addition to routine enforcement activities on rural roads. The police carry out such enforcement campaigns to raise public awareness of specific issues on rural roads.

There are a variety of engineering initiatives relevant to road safety on rural roads, these are discussed in Chapter Nine.

What we need to do next

We want to reduce the high incidence of fatalities and serious injuries on rural roads. We want to ensure that drivers are aware of the risks and drive with due care and attention to the road and weather conditions. We believe that this should be part of the driver training and testing regime. We also want to discuss and encourage engineering solutions, where appropriate, on rural roads. This is explored more fully in Chapter Nine.

Commitments

In Government, and in partnership with other stakeholders, we will:

• Continue to publicise the risks associated with driving and riding on rural roads and warn all road users of potential dangers.
• Consider what further actions to take from current research on rural roads.
• Encourage any proposal by the Driving Standards Agency ( DSA) to include specific pre-test training on rural roads.
• Support targeted police enforcement campaigns on rural roads.

What we all can do:

• Take extra care when driving or riding on rural roads - especially in poor weather conditions.
• Be aware that, in certain circumstances, it will be safer to drive at a much lower speed than the speed limit.

8.2 Impairment

The Issues

Driving a vehicle is a complex task requiring a high level of concentration and alertness. It is imperative, therefore, that drivers and riders do not use their vehicles when their performance is likely to be impaired through alcohol, drugs or fatigue.

Unsurprisingly, the issue of drink driving attracted a high degree of response from the public consultation.

"Set level (of the drink drive limit) low enough to discourage anyone thinking that even having one drink is appropriate."
(Safety Organisation)

Figures have fluctuated but, since 1995, the estimated number of fatal accidents in Scotland involving drivers with illegal alcohol levels has declined by around 25%. The overall number of drink drive injury accidents has reduced by around 16%. During the same period the estimated number of deaths in Scotland from drink drive accidents fell by around 40%. Nevertheless, an estimated 1 in 9 road deaths continues to be the result of drink driving. ³⁷

Drink Drive Limit The current prescribed limit in the UK is set out in section 11 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and is 35 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath, 80 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood or 107 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of urine. A person who, when driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle on a road or other public place, is unfit to drive through drink or drugs, is guilty of an offence.

The Scottish Government published a report in March 2008 ³⁸ that provides an insight into behaviour and attitudes relating to drink driving. Some of the key findings included:

• Men, people aged 30 to 59, and people in higher social grades were more likely to have driven after drinking.
• Drivers often said they thought they were under the legal limit and their driving ability was unaffected.
• There was confusion as to how the number of drinks or units related to legal limits.

Two of the key recommendations from the research were:

• There should be action to increase the perceived level of risk, in order to change the attitude that people who are caught are 'unlucky' (e.g. by publicising the number of drivers breathalysed, rather than those caught and introducing random testing).
• Lowering the legal drink drive limit to a less ambiguous level, as it is clear that people are confused about the relationship between units, drinks and the legal limit.

Drivers can still be over the limit the following morning if they have been drinking heavily or late at night. While the study found that few people admitted to driving the morning after drinking, there was confusion about how quickly alcohol left the system.

Regarding drug driving, DfT research published in 2001 ³⁹ found that 18% of people killed in road accidents in Great Britain had traces of illegal drugs in their bodies. On this basis it is estimated that around 49 adults killed in road accidents in Scotland in 2007 had illegal drugs in their system.

Research on drug driving among 17-39 year olds, published by the Scottish Government in 2006, ⁴⁰ found that cannabis was the most common drug to have been used by drug drivers and there was a perception that drug drivers will not be caught by the police. DfT is currently working with the police on new ways to enforce the existing law and the possibility of introducing new laws. We strongly support them in these endeavours.

Drug Driving Unlike drink driving there is no prescribed limit for drugs. When police suspect a motorist of drug driving they need to demonstrate impairment which is why they carry out the roadside "FIT" test (Field Impairment Test). There are a number of different aspects to the FIT test - a measurement of pupil size, being able to estimate a timespan of 30 seconds with eyes closed, walking along an imaginary line, touching nose with forefinger with eyes closed, etc. If the driver fails the FIT test then that provides sufficient evidence to allow the police to arrest and take the driver back to the police station where further tests to corroborate the roadside tests are carried out. A doctor must certify that the person is, in their opinion, impaired to the extent that they are unfit to drive. The driver is then required to provide further sample (usually blood) which is then sent for testing for the presence of drugs that would cause impairment to drive. The level of the drugs in the sample is not measured against a limit as such limits have not been established in legislation.

DfT advises that public attitude surveys indicate there is growing concern about people who are unfit to drive after taking prescription, or over the counter, drugs. A DfT report on prescription drugs and unwanted drowsiness ⁴¹ identified over the counter drugs used to treat various ailments including nausea, coughs and colds which had the potential to cause drowsiness and could therefore be particularly hazardous to drivers and other road users.

Fatigue in general is also a safety concern. Research published in 2001 found that fatigue and sleepiness were deemed to have been a major cause ⁴² in around 10% of all road accidents and up to 20% of accidents which occurred on motorways or trunk roads.

What we do now

There is a widespread and growing consensus in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK that the blood alcohol limit should be reduced from 80mg per 100ml of blood to 50mg, as part of ongoing efforts to combat the problem of drink driving. The current UK drink drive limit was introduced in 1967 and is one of the highest in Europe. Powers to vary the limit are currently reserved to UK Ministers under the terms of the Scotland Act 1998.

Since late 2007, ACPOS, the British Medical Association ( BMA), and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents ( RoSPA), have called consistently for a reduction in the blood alcohol limit. The Automobile Association ( AA) announced earlier in 2008 that 70% of 14,000 members polled favoured a reduction.

On 13 February 2009 the Cabinet Secretary for Justice wrote to the Secretary of State for Transport reiterating the Scottish Government's support for a lower drink drive limit. If the UK Government is unwilling to commit to bringing forward a reduction in the limit, the Scottish Government has requested that the powers to set the limit be transferred to the Scottish Ministers. Scottish Ministers are of the opinion that lowering the limit will bring us into line with most of the rest of Europe, reduce any doubt regarding the amount of alcohol it is safe to drink and then drive and, most importantly, save lives.

The Scottish Government also supports calls for the police to be able to stop and breath test drivers anytime, anywhere and has written asking the UK Government to introduce these powers. Similar powers are in place in all EU countries except the UK and Denmark.

The Department of the Environment in Northern Ireland is currently consulting on the blood alcohol limit, penalties and police powers. A report on the consultation is expected later in 2009.

Data enabled roadside breath testing equipment is being used by some of the police forces in England for drink driving. These are essentially the same as "breathalysers" that store all the results of the tests that are being carried out. The greatest benefit of the data enabled roadside screening devices is that they record all measurements taken by the device, including the negative results. This information can then be downloaded onto a central database and the results analysed to provide a comparison of positive/negative tests. A year on year comparison of these figures would give an indication if the incidence of drink driving was increasing, decreasing or remaining the same. This in turn could be used to inform enforcement and campaign activity.

Australia - Booze Bus for Roadside Testing An informative example for police forces to consider is the booze bus. In Australia, a booze bus is a mobile truck designed for rapidly assessing the blood alcohol concentration of motor vehicle drivers in large numbers. Operated by various police services in Australia, it allows main arterial roads, such as freeways, to be blocked, with all or most drivers sampled for compliance with drink driving laws. They are commonly used outside popular nightspots to help identify drivers who might illegally drive home drunk. The vehicle itself is not used to test all drivers. Multiple test points are set up on the highway and drivers are breath tested in their own vehicles. Drivers failing this test will be taken to the bus for their cases to be processed. In Victoria, as of 2007, the concept has been extended by making all booze buses also 'drug buses', capable of testing drivers for a number of illicit drugs such as cannabis.

Drink Drive Campaigns are run by RSS and ACPOS who are committed to a joint approach in tackling the drink drive problem. Although it is routine business for road policing officers to be ever vigilant against drink driving, ACPOS also organises two targeted campaigns, one in early summer and the other over the festive season. During these periods, RSS supports the enforcement activity using paid-for media and generating further coverage through PR activity. Such activity is intended to increase awareness of being caught. Research has informed this approach, advising that while people know that killing themselves or others is the worst thing that can happen, they do not believe that it will happen to them and, therefore, it is not a credible risk. People are more likely to change behaviour if the risk is real and credible and makes them feel personally vulnerable or threatened. Recent research published by RSS ⁴³ confirms that the risk and consequences of being caught are still the most appropriate deterrents.

Morning after Drink Driving is becoming more common as people now socialise more in their own homes than they have done in the past and some drinks measures have increased in size. It is a concern of many within Scotland that the intake of alcohol is increasing. Many people do not intend to drink drive but the fact that drinking and driving are both part of their lifestyles means that the two do coincide. 'Unmeasured' drinking can mean that people are unaware of the amount of alcohol they have consumed and this obviously has an effect on their ability to drive and may still be an issue the next day. In order to raise awareness, RSS has adopted a new approach in recent years, focusing on the 'morning after' message. The rationale is twofold: if people believe they can still be over the limit the next day, they will reconsider driving; in addition they may also reflect on their consumption the night before if they have to drive the following morning.

Two technological innovations are also worth highlighting. The first is alcohol ignition interlocks. They prevent a vehicle engine from starting until a clean sample of breath is provided. Powers exist for the courts to refer convicted drink drivers disqualified for at least two years to a rehabilitation programme involving the use of an alcohol ignition interlock. Secondly, the UK Government is working towards the development of a specification for a roadside drug screening device. Such a device would require to be approved by the Secretary of State (Home Office Type Approval or HOTA) before it could be brought into operational use by the police and used in a court for prosecution. Screening devices will only detect the presence of drugs and will not remove the need for the police to form a judgment about impairment.

The 'Getinlane' website developed by RSS for new drivers includes information and advice about fatigue. This includes the dangers, what to do if you are feeling sleepy whilst driving and an online game which tests reaction time and can be played over and over again to show how reaction time changes depending upon how we are feeling.

What we need to do next

We want the UK Government to lower the drink drive limit to 50mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood and to introduce anytime, anywhere breath testing. We believe the evidence to support this is clear and the support for this is very strong.

We want to promote the view that driving is a skill which requires full concentration - the consequences of anything less can be deadly. The impairment of performance is potentially dangerous and must be acknowledged as unacceptable risk taking. We want to raise awareness and support and educate, but we also want to put enforcement measures in place which deter drivers from offending.

Commitments

In Government, and in partnership with other stakeholders, we will:

• Continue to press the UK Government for a reduction in the drink drive limit and for powers for the police to carry out breath testing anytime, anywhere.
• Give greater prominence to the 'Don't risk it' message throughout the year through the targeting of more road policing officers to carry out increased enforcement and raise the perceived risk of being caught.
• Promote the use of data enabled roadside breath screening devices by Scottish police forces.
• Raise awareness of the dangers of fatigue among drivers.
• Raise public awareness of the possible effects on driving after taking some prescription or over the counter drugs and illegal drugs.
• Continue to work in partnership with ACPOS and other partners, including the private sector, to provide publicity in support of enforcement initiatives by Scottish police forces.
• Introduce, in liaison with the Scottish Government Marketing Unit, drink drive publicity campaigns outside of the traditional summer and festive seasons.
• Press the UK Government to quickly ensure Home Office type approval of roadside drug testing devices.

What we all can do:

• Don't guess how much we have had to drink - if in doubt don't drink or don't drive.
• Be aware that you may still be over the limit after a good night's sleep.
• Don't get in a car where you suspect the driver is over the limit.
• Don't take drugs and drive - including some prescription drugs which may cause drowsiness.
• Don't drive if you are tired.

8.3 Seatbelts

The Issues

In Great Britain in 2006, just over one-third of car occupants killed in road accidents were not wearing seatbelts. This would suggest around 60 fatalities in Scotland that year were not wearing seatbelts. ⁴⁴

The legislation currently in force on seatbelts has been introduced over a number of years since 1983, when it became compulsory for front seat occupants to wear them. The law, as it stands today, requires drivers and passengers to use seatbelts when travelling in vehicles, with very few exemptions.

While it is important to stop accidents happening, it is also critical to mitigate their impact on vehicle occupants. Seatbelts are vital to this and, according to the European Transport Safety Council; seatbelt usage reduces the risk of fatal injury by about 50%, describing them as "the single most effective feature in the car to fulfil this role". ⁴⁵

According to DfT, wearing rates for car occupants in Great Britain in August 2007 ⁴⁶ were:

• Drivers 94%
• Front seat passengers 93%
• Rear seat adults 70%
• Rear seat children 93%

However, wearing rates for van occupants are much lower:

• Drivers 69%
• Front seat passengers 58%

The last compliance study in Scotland was carried out in 2002. ⁴⁷ At that time, the results were not dissimilar to those above, with 95% of car drivers, 91% of front seat passengers, but only 78% of rear seat passengers appropriately restrained. As with the GB study, however, just under two-thirds of van occupants used seatbelts.

Children are particularly at risk in cars when they are not properly restrained. Over 35% of child casualties took place in cars. Many of these casualties could have been avoided or injuries made less severe if the children had been properly restrained.

Since September 2006, it is illegal to carry a child who is below the height of 4ft 5ins (135cm) or under the age of 12, in a car without an appropriate car seat. For failing to comply with this law, there is a fixed penalty of £30 or a maximum fine of £500 if the case goes to court. Further guidance is available at: www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/child/newrulesforuseofchildcarseat4635

What we do now

Police forces around Scotland have targeted seatbelt campaigns where motorists will be stopped and checked to ensure that both they and their passengers are wearing seatbelts.

The 'Good-Egg' In-Car Safety Campaign aims to ensure that all child passengers are carried safely in cars. RSS is a key partner, along with the police, local authority Road Safety Units, RoSPA and the Arnold Clark Group. The Campaign features the 'Good Egg Guide', which provides advice to parents about appropriate child restraints, car seat clinics, media advertising and the www.protectchild.co.uk website.

Seatbelt wearing for all passengers aged 14 years and above in buses/coaches where seatbelts are fitted has been a legal requirement since September 2006. It has been a legal requirement for all passengers in minibuses since 1993. In the case of minibuses, as with cars, the law states it is an offence to drive with unrestrained child passengers. Liability for ensuring seatbelts are worn is placed on the driver, not the child. EU Directive 2003/20/ EC requires Member States to implement the requirement that all children aged 3 and over use safety systems (where fitted) on buses and coaches.

In Scotland, the terms of contracts for the provision of school transport are matters for individual local authorities and their contractors. The Scottish Government encourages, through guidance, local authorities to specify within their contracts with bus operators that only vehicles fitted with seatbelts, where available, should be used.

Vehicles can be fitted with audible warning devices to remind occupants to fasten their seatbelts. The Scottish Government welcomes greater use of these devices and any other means to remind and encourage wearing of seatbelts.

What we need to do next

We want to find out the extent of non-compliance in Scotland, the reasons why people do not wear seatbelts and explore innovative ways of encouraging all car and van occupants to use them at all times.

We need to carry out research to find out if non-compliance is greater in particular areas of the country or particular sections of the community, and seek ways to address this if found to be an issue.

DfT is currently proposing to raise the fine for non-compliance to £60. Whilst the Scottish Government welcomes this, along with partners such as ACPOS, we would support the view that non-compliance should be an offence which attracts licence penalty points in addition to the current fine.

Commitments

In Government, and in partnership with other stakeholders, we will:

• Conduct research into seatbelt compliance in Scotland and act on the research findings.
• Raise awareness of the importance of seatbelts, including via TV and radio advertisement, with a view to creating future generations who will automatically use seatbelts whenever they travel in a vehicle.
• Seek ways of bringing attention to seatbelt wearing, for example, through the use of seatbelt accessories that are highly visible.
• Continue to educate and encourage drivers to ensure that children are properly restrained in cars and vans.
• Support the introduction of a requirement for children aged between 3 and 14 to wear seatbelts on buses and coaches, where fitted.
• Press the case with the UK Government to make non-seatbelt wearing an endorsable offence (i.e. one which attracts licence penalty points in addition to the current fine).

What we all can do:

• Always wear a seatbelt when travelling as a passenger or driver in a motor vehicle.
• Where they are provided, always wear a seatbelt as a passenger on a bus.
• Ensure that children are correctly strapped in and use the appropriate restraint for their weight, age and size.

8.4 Speed

The Issues

"Speed may not be identified as a factor for all crash causations but it will affect the severity of all casualties and crashes."
(Charity Organisation)

Speed limits are set to indicate to drivers the maximum speed permitted on a particular road. Unfortunately, a number of motorists drive above the speed limit or at an inappropriate speed for the conditions. In Scotland in 2006-07 a total of 163,826 speeding offences were recorded by the police.

There is overwhelming evidence that the frequency of accidents rises disproportionately with speed. A study in 2000 ⁴⁸ found that for every 1 mph reduction in average speed there is a 5% reduction in accident frequency. On urban roads a 21% increase in collisions could result from a 10% increase in mean speeds. The probability of serious injury to a belted front seat car occupant is three times greater at an impact speed of 30 mph than at 20 mph. Research in 1979 ⁴⁹ showed that for pedestrians, around 95% who are struck at speeds below 20 mph will survive, while at speeds between 20 mph and 40 mph nine out of ten people will die.

Research published in 2003 ⁵⁰ provided a profile of drivers most involved in speeding as well as highlighting the higher crash involvement of speeders. It also found that speeding is not perceived to be a 'real crime' and that knowledge of speed limits is poor, other than for motorways and urban streets. A table showing national speed limits for different types of roads and vehicles is at Annex E.

What we do now

Guidance to local authorities on setting local speed limits was issued in 2006. www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/08/14134225/0 The guidance stressed the importance of consistency and transparency in setting speed limits, in order to encourage greater compliance by drivers. Local authorities were asked to review the speed limits on all A and B Class roads in their areas by 2011. The Society of Chief Officers of Transportation in Scotland ( SCOTS) Road Safety and Traffic Management Group has developed further guidance in addition to ETLLD Circular 1/2006 to assist authorities
to review the speed limits. ⁵¹

For people who continually break the law and knowingly put themselves and others at risk, it is entirely appropriate to be faced with the threat or reality of attracting penalties through the points system. We want to encourage a culture where a speeding conviction has the same type of public disapproval as drink driving. There may also be circumstances where remediation could be a particularly effective deterrent as a means of changing behaviour. This is already a feature of the justice system in England and Wales and we want to explore it further.

Speed Awareness courses - an Alternative to Prosecution As an alternative to prosecution some local authorities and police forces in England offer Speed Awareness courses to some offenders. A recent study from the University of Reading, 52 'Speed Awareness: The effect of education versus punishment on driver attitudes' concluded that those who had gone through the Thames Valley course had been, in the most part, positively influenced. There was clear evidence that attendance was significantly associated with more positive attitudes to existing speed control. Those who attended mainly: Gave approval for significantly higher camera numbers than all groups of drivers who had been punished with a fixed penalty. Considered a speed limit breach of 35 mph in a 30 mph limit significantly more unacceptable than those groups receiving punishment. Were more in favour of stricter speed control in the future. All of these differences were sustained across a period of six months. The report also considered that these newly formed beliefs would help improve public acceptability of future speed enforcement.

We support the Scottish Safety Camera Programme which is an initiative that is designed to influence driver behaviour, particularly by the targeted enforcement of speed limits.

The Programme is operated by eight Safety Camera Partnerships that cover all of mainland Scotland - see Chapter Three and Annex A. Cameras established under the Programme are only located at sites where there is a history of fatal and serious road accidents and where there is an identified problem with speeding. In addition all Partner members must agree that there are no other viable options available for addressing the road safety problem. Details of the Scottish Safety Camera Programme can be accessed at www.scottishsafetycameras.com

The existing safety camera network is a mixture of fixed, mobile and red light cameras.

• Fixed cameras use radar to measure the speed of vehicles. Once a vehicle has been detected exceeding the limit, the camera confirms the offence by taking two photographs 0.5 seconds apart. The road markings at fixed camera sites are at a fixed distance (two metres) and therefore can be used to confirm the speed of the vehicle that has been photographed.
• Mobile cameras use a laser to measure the speed of vehicles. The laser device is linked to a video camera that records details of the offence.
• Red light cameras are controlled through underground cables. The cables only become energised after the lights turn to red. Any vehicle travelling through the red traffic light activates the camera which takes a photograph. The camera then takes another photograph one second later to confirm that the driver has continued through the junction or crossing.

All safety camera sites have advance signing to alert drivers to their presence. The camera housings have high visibility red and yellow markings and the mobile enforcement vehicles have been fitted with a standard high visibility livery, similar to that used by police, to alert drivers to their presence. The aim is to get people to slow down - not catch them.

Hand-held devices are exclusively used by the police. They are among a range of speed detection devices the police have at their disposal to detect the speed of vehicles.

A relatively new method of detection is by means of average speed cameras. The average speed camera systems work by calculating the time taken for a vehicle to travel between two fixed cameras which are a known distance apart. When a vehicle passes the first camera Automatic Number Plate Recognition ( ANPR) technology reads the number plate of the vehicle. The second camera also reads the number plate as the vehicle passes and calculates the average speed from the time taken to travel from the first camera.

A77 Average Speed Camera Trial Transport Scotland and Strathclyde Safety Camera Partnership combined resources to implement Scotland's first average speed camera enforcement system. The system, known as SPECS, was installed in July 2005 and stretches over a 32 mile zone from Bogend Toll south of Kilmarnock to Ardwell Bay south of Girvan. Since the system was installed there has been a huge drop in the numbers of vehicles travelling at excessive speeds. The three-year data published on the Safety Group's website, www.a77safetygroup.co.uk , shows a significant reduction not only in casualties but also in accident numbers. This means that, in the three years since the implementation of the system, around 24 people have avoided death or serious injury. Overall, this has led to a reduction in the most serious accidents, including fatal, of 37%. SPECS has been a successful element of a co-ordinated route strategy on the A77, but it is important that these figures are now properly assessed to inform how best to design future schemes. We also look forward to Home Office Type Approval being given to the next generation of Average Speed Cameras in order to assess their future use on the Scottish road network.

SPECS has also been used to protect workers and road users at a number of road work sites in Scotland. The primary aim of a speed management strategy at roads works is improved safety through reduction of risk for both road users and road workers alike. Road workers in Britain have one of the highest workplace mortality rates.

The Safety Camera network in Scotland is now fairly mature. However, the accident and speeding profile of the road network is dynamic and therefore to achieve the maximum road safety benefit, the Safety Camera Programme has to develop to meet the challenges that these new conditions present.

Very often road traffic accidents occur over a length of road or route rather than at a single location. The causes of accidents on these routes are often diverse, though problems with excessive or inappropriate speed are recurring major contributory factors. The deployment of safety cameras alone will not fully address the accident problems on these routes. The optimum road safety benefit can, however, be achieved by all the partner agencies working together to develop and deliver a co-ordinated approach to each particular situation.

The accident levels and traffic speeds at established camera sites are collected on an ongoing basis to help assess the effectiveness of cameras in influencing driver behaviour and to monitor the level of road accidents. This data is currently collected and held locally. However, from mid 2009, a new national web-based database will be introduced that will allow this information to be held centrally and allow all Partnerships to view each others' data. Additionally, a new national system for administering detected speeding and red light offences is being introduced. Together these systems will allow the Partnerships to better target their enforcement and communications strategies to ensure that the maximum road safety benefit is achieved.

Vehicle Activated Signs ( VAS) are in use and can be useful tools in reminding drivers of the speed limit and in encouraging compliance. VAS are activated by vehicles exceeding a pre-set threshold. They display the speed limit and sometimes the message 'Slow Down'. In trials, they have been found to be very effective in reducing speeds. ⁵³

Intelligent Speed Adaptation ( ISA) is a system in which vehicles are fitted with a digital map which contains details of the various speed limits. A global positioning system compares the vehicle's position with the speed limit applicable on the road. An on-board computer then takes the appropriate action depending on the category of system that is being used. The three ISA categories are:

• Advisory ISA where the driver is informed of the speed limit and then needs to make a decision on how to adjust his/her behaviour.
• Voluntary ISA where the driver is informed of the speed limit and an on-board computer restricts the vehicle's speed to ensure that the limit cannot be exceeded. The driver can choose to override the system.
• Mandatory ISA where the driver is informed of the speed limit and an on-board computer restricts the vehicle's speed to ensure that the limit cannot be exceeded. The driver cannot override the system.

Research published by the UK Government in September 2008 ⁵⁴ found that voluntary (i.e. overridable) ISA reduced the amount of speeding in almost every category of user. The study concluded that this technology can deliver substantial reductions in excessive speed and consequently considerable safety benefits. To assess the potential effectiveness of this system and to encourage others to adopt the system, we are considering the feasibility of a pilot of ISA in Scotland.

In addition to the above initiatives, RSS and the Scottish Safety Camera Programme work closely with the police in anti-speeding campaigns and support the various focus days which have become a feature of the ACPOS annual programme of events. Speeding is an issue which the police are addressing all year round but the focus days are used to highlight the problems caused by speeding and raise awareness of the devastating effects it can have on victims, their families and offenders.

The Scottish Government is working with the Energy Saving Trust to promote simple measures people can take to drive more efficiently, which also help to improve safety. The measures include driving at lower speeds, planning journeys, checking tyre pressures and anticipating road conditions. Further information on practical steps to reduce emissions and improve efficiency is available from the Energy Saving Trust website www.ecodrivescotland.com

In addition to increased safety, lower vehicle speeds can have financial and other benefits. In general, fuel efficiency tends to fall at higher speeds, so reducing speeds may reduce carbon emissions. Fuel consumption factors from the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory speed emission curves suggest that there will be a 4% to 8% fuel consumption saving (and therefore the same saving in CO ₂ emissions) per kilometre from driving at
60 mph instead of 70 mph in a modern car. Conversely, exceeding the speed limit by driving at 80 mph rather than 70 mph uses 10% to 15% more fuel.

The Scottish Government will shortly publish a Delivery Plan on Climate Change that will require significant changes in driving practice (i.e. reduced speed, eco-driving and fewer journeys) as well as encouraging a shift to sustainable and active travel. The Scottish Government have also committed, through the Energy Pledges announced in February 2009, to promote the development, uptake and use of electric and other low carbon vehicles. These measures will not only help us meet our emissions reduction targets but will have a positive impact on road safety in Scotland. More information on eco driving and fuel-saving tips can be found in Chapter Four of the document 'Transport and Climate Change' which can be accessed at: www.cfit.gov.uk/docs/2007/climatechange/pdf/2007/climatechange.pdf

What we need to do next

We need to make drivers more aware of the dangers of speed and the safer, greener and economical advantages of driving at lower speeds. We need to foster a culture of abiding by the law and seeing speeding as a 'real crime' through both education and awareness, pointing to the increased likelihood that speeders will be caught, or worse, cause injury to themselves, their passengers or other road users. We want to use technology, where proven effective, to help drivers stay within the speed limit and we want to support drivers to be aware of both speed limits and appropriate speeds.

Commitments

In Government, and in partnership with other stakeholders, we will:

• Promote the voluntary use of Intelligent Speed Adaptation ( ISA).
• Consider a pilot in Scotland to test out the effectiveness of voluntary ISA in road safety.
• Continue to publicise and educate people about the risks associated with speeding.
• Encourage local authorities to implement any changes indicated by their review of speed limits.
• Continue to raise awareness of speed limits, including those that apply to different types of vehicle on the different categories of roads.
• Continue to support the Safety Camera Programme.
• Support the development and implementation of the new viewing and administration system for the Safety Camera Partnerships.
• Consider if the introduction of a Speed Awareness Scheme focused on speeding would be an appropriate contribution to road safety in Scotland.
• Increase awareness of the benefits of lower speed driving in relation to fuel efficiency, health impacts and road safety.
• Publish a Delivery Plan on Climate Change that will require significant changes in driving practice.

What we all can do:

• Ensure we are aware of the speed limits that apply on different types of road and to different types of vehicles.
• Stay within the law by staying within the speed limit.
• Drive at speeds lower than the limit when appropriate to the conditions.

8.5 Distraction

The Issues

Although mobile phones are an obvious distraction, any activity which takes the driver's concentration away from the road is potentially dangerous. These can include eating, drinking, loud music and smoking whilst driving.

Evidence suggests that a driver cannot help but be distracted by a mobile phone call or a text message as sending or receiving these requires the driver to process the information contained within that call or message.

Research from 2003 ⁵⁵ showed that, while over 90% of respondents said it should be illegal to use a hand-held mobile phone whilst driving, more than 25% of drivers admit to doing so. This research also showed that using a mobile phone whilst driving means you are four times more likely to be involved in an accident.

Research carried out in 2002 ⁵⁶ indicated that reaction times for drivers using a hand-held phone were 30% worse than for driving under the influence of alcohol at the legal limit. The reaction times were nearly 50% worse than when driving under normal conditions.

An extensive research programme commissioned by the RAC in 2007 ⁵⁷ indicated that 22% of motorists questioned said they were distracted by a hand-held mobile phone. Seventy-four percent of those who took part in the study regarded using a hand-held mobile phone as a very serious distraction.

Scottish Government research carried out in 2008 ⁵⁸ explored the views of young people aged 16-25 towards road safety. It highlighted the fact that, despite evidence to the contrary, many young people believed that speaking to a passenger is just as distracting as speaking on the phone. There was, however, general agreement that texting was unacceptable. Most of the young people said that, if a friend was trying to text whilst driving, they would take the phone away from them.

What we do now

One Distraction Cinema Advert RSS created a cinema advert in 2008 that followed young male car occupants travelling on a rural road: the driver is distracted and, by the time his eyes return to the road, it is too late to avoid becoming involved in an accident. Although the issues of young male car occupants and inappropriate speed are highlighted, distraction was the key element, chosen to make the advert more credible in the eyes of the target audience. Distraction was also the focus of online and Bluetooth activity that supported the advert.

Distracting drivers, both of cars and buses, and distractions to pedestrians are issues that are discussed in depth within RSS's 'Crash Magnets' educational resource www.crashmagnets.com . There are 'vox pop' clips of young people talking about their experiences of, and attitudes to, distracting influences. Extension material is provided within the Crash Magnet toolbox for classroom activity which develops the theme that the brain cannot concentrate on two things that require the same senses. A new RSS S1 to S3 educational resource 'Your Call', launched in late Spring 2009, also has distraction as one of its principal themes throughout.

Legislation was introduced in 2006 making it illegal to use a hand-held mobile phone or similar device whilst driving. There is a fixed penalty of £60 and three penalty points. If the case goes to court, the maximum fine is £1,000 (or £2,500 if driving a bus, coach or heavy goods vehicle), discretionary disqualification and three points.

It is also an offence to "cause or permit" a driver to use a hand-held mobile phone whilst driving. Therefore, employers can be held liable as well as the individual driver if they require employees to use a hand-held phone whilst driving.

New careless driving laws, which came into force on 18 August 2008, allow courts to imprison drivers who cause death or serious injury by not paying due care and attention to the road or other road users. The avoidable distractions, as they are termed, include: using a mobile phone (calling or texting); drinking and eating; smoking; changing a CD/radio station; applying make-up and anything else which takes the driver's attention away from the road and which a court judges to be an avoidable distraction.

What we need to do next

We want drivers to be aware of the risks and consequences associated with in-vehicle distraction and recognise the skill and concentration needed for driving as they would any other potentially dangerous activity.

Commitments

In Government, and in partnership with other stakeholders, we will:

• Continue to raise awareness through targeted campaigns of the dangers of driver distraction.
• Encourage everyone to acknowledge driving as a skill which requires concentration and judgement.

What we all can do:

• Never use a hand-held mobile phone whilst driving.
• Pay full attention to the road and do not allow ourselves to be distracted.