WE ALL have a responsibility to improve road safety standards, by our behaviour as drivers, pedestrians or motorcyclists, or as representatives of the various authorities tasked with ensuring that the number of people who die on our roads continues to decline. Last year, 279 people were killed, the lowest number since records began. But it still represents an unacceptable level of family loss, trauma and suffering.
An increase in the level of policing has probably been the most influential factor in bringing about a change in motorists’ behaviour, particularly in relation to drunk driving. Fear of being caught is the single most important element in altering bad behaviour. It is unfortunate when drunk driving is treated leniently in court. Solicitors successfully plead with judges that extraneous events, following the arrest of a drunk driver, should lead to dismissal of charges. And technical issues are frequently used by clever lawyers in defence of wealthy clients. Drunk driving is a serious criminal offence, not a social misdemeanour.
Some local authorities are also failing in their responsibilities to ensure road safety. Too often, cautionary road signage is left in place long after road works are completed. This lackadaisical behaviour encourages motorists to ignore other warning signs.
But perhaps the greatest failing is in relation to speed limits. Broad, newly built national roads carry speed limits of 80km in parts of Mayo while, across the county, “100km” signs appear within spitting distance of hairpin bends. It is as if the signs were ordered and must be used, no matter how inappropriate the location. For management to argue that the signs represent an upper limit, rather than a target speed, is simply unacceptable. Boy racers need no encouragement to behave in a dangerous fashion. Inappropriate signage should be removed.
The establishment of rational, countrywide speed limits has been under discussion between the National Roads Authority and local councils for some time. Such a development is of particular importance if the introduction of new speed cameras, later this year, is to be trouble-free. Already, there is concern that private sector cameras may be used as a revenue-raising device. Such a claim is questionable because offences will only be committed where speed limits are broken. It is important, however, that cameras are only installed on Garda advice, in collision-prone zones and where the speed limit reflects the quality of the road.