Its the DfTs job to know car accident stats - but it doesnt



Are the roads getting safer or more dangerous? Mike Rutherford wants to know - but the DfT doesn't seem to

2016-02-19 19:00
Before attempting anything in life, its not a bad idea to be aware of the risks involved. With this in mind, how many people were killed or injured in traffic accidents on the roads, cycle lanes and pavements over the last 12 months or so?
Year on year and all things considered, are they getting safer or more dangerous? We deserve to know. And its the job of the Governments Department for Transport to know. But it, er, doesnt. True, the DfT has a rough idea of accident stats. Thats why it has just quietly published provisional estimates for reported road casualties in Britain. Yet its very precise, when it concludes:
There were 1,780 road deaths in the [full] year ending September 2015. A total of 23,700 people were killed or seriously injured. And there were 188,830 casualties of all severities.
• What to do after an accident
Really? How can this arm of Government arrive at such exact conclusions when it admits that data from several police forces has gone missing - a word the DfT uses to describe casualty figures that have gone AWOL, apparently?
Another contentious issue is that pedestrians, drivers and car occupants killed or injured when a plane crashed on to a Shorearm highway last summer has led the DfT and other agencies to conveniently exclude any road casualties from the [Shoreham] statistics. In other words, the innocent folk killed or wounded in cars or on foot at Shoreham on that dreadful day are not being classed as road accident victimes - thereby keeping casualty figures for road users/pedestrians artificially low. After all, road accident stats cant be seen to increase under the Conservative Government as Labour would cash in on such an unwelcome development.
• Safest cars on sale now
Another major flaw with the DfTs data is that in its road user type charts, it correctly includes cars and car occupants, motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians - yet it inexplicably excludes buses, coaches, taxis, lorries, vans and trams. Also absent are other accident-prone road-based machines such as construction, agricultural and road-sweeping vehicles, refuse trucks and more. And left-hand-drive HGVs deserve a category of their on on the grounds that, arguably, theyre the most lethal vehicles on Britains increasingly hazardous roads. Arent they? Im tempted to ask the DfT. But I suspect it doesnt know... or care.
Should the DfT know more about the casualties on Britains roads? Let us know what you think in the comments below...

Mike Rutherford

Helpful?
Its the DfTs job to know car accident stats - but it doesnt
Stats Overview
5.0 (1 Rate)
5
100%
rates
4
0%
rates
3
0%
rates
2
0%
rates
1
0%
rates
Add Your Rate:
Reviews (1):
Its the DfTs job to know car accident stats - but it doesnt
4 years ago

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/94475/its-the-dfts-job-to-know-car-accident-stats-but-it-doesnt

Are the roads getting safer or more dangerous? Mike Rutherford wants to know - but the DfT doesn't seem to

2016-02-19 19:00
Before attempting anything in life, its not a bad idea to be aware of the risks involved. With this in mind, how many people were killed or injured in traffic accidents on the roads, cycle lanes and pavements over the last 12 months or so?
Year on year and all things considered, are they getting safer or more dangerous? We deserve to know. And its the job of the Governments Department for Transport to know. But it, er, doesnt. True, the DfT has a rough idea of accident stats. Thats why it has just quietly published provisional estimates for reported road casualties in Britain. Yet its very precise, when it concludes:
There were 1,780 road deaths in the [full] year ending September 2015. A total of 23,700 people were killed or seriously injured. And there were 188,830 casualties of all severities.
• What to do after an accident
Really? How can this arm of Government arrive at such exact conclusions when it admits that data from several police forces has gone missing - a word the DfT uses to describe casualty figures that have gone AWOL, apparently?
Another contentious issue is that pedestrians, drivers and car occupants killed or injured when a plane crashed on to a Shorearm highway last summer has led the DfT and other agencies to conveniently exclude any road casualties from the [Shoreham] statistics. In other words, the innocent folk killed or wounded in cars or on foot at Shoreham on that dreadful day are not being classed as road accident victimes - thereby keeping casualty figures for road users/pedestrians artificially low. After all, road accident stats cant be seen to increase under the Conservative Government as Labour would cash in on such an unwelcome development.
• Safest cars on sale now
Another major flaw with the DfTs data is that in its road user type charts, it correctly includes cars and car occupants, motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians - yet it inexplicably excludes buses, coaches, taxis, lorries, vans and trams. Also absent are other accident-prone road-based machines such as construction, agricultural and road-sweeping vehicles, refuse trucks and more. And left-hand-drive HGVs deserve a category of their on on the grounds that, arguably, theyre the most lethal vehicles on Britains increasingly hazardous roads. Arent they? Im tempted to ask the DfT. But I suspect it doesnt know... or care.
Should the DfT know more about the casualties on Britains roads? Let us know what you think in the comments below...

Mike Rutherford

Reply
Helpful?
User Image