IAM RoadSmart makes a valuable contribution to the road risk debate. We produce a range of policy and research documents on topics key to the conversation. We inform and influence to ensure road safety remains a policy and investment priority.
IAM RoadSmart often gives evidence to governmental bodies, including the Transport Select Committee. Our staff also provide expertise on key committees at National Highways, Road Safety Scotland, Transport Focus and PACTS. We also contribute to the international road safety debate as members of the Federation Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA).
Our eighth annual report on the opinions, attitudes and behaviour of British drivers, the Driving Safety Culture Survey shows that the main worries of British drivers have remained remarkably consistent over time – even during the recent pandemic. With 2000 respondents this is one of the biggest annual opinion surveys on road safety run in the UK.
Drug-Driving
Drug-driving collisions and casualties have gone up by over 260% in 10 years, and convictions are increasing every year. The impact is devastating, far-reaching, and only getting worse.
Infotainment
Worrying results from our recent research show that the latest in-vehicle infotainment systems impair reactions times behind the wheel more than alcohol and cannabis use.
Drink-Drive
IAM RoadSmart has calculated the true cost of your drink. Should it take you over the drink drive limit, the financial impact following a conviction could be as high as £70,000.
You can read the latest IAM RoadSmart Manifesto here.
Current Policy Issues:
E-scooters may have a role to play in the future transport mix, but this can only happen once their legal status has been made completely clear. IAM RoadSmart have welcomed the numerous pilot studies involving hire e-scooters in cities across the UK.
However, waiting for the results of these studies have delayed a final decision on key elements of e-scooter construction and use that must be clarified before progress can be made. In the meantime, the completely uncontrolled private use of personally purchased e-scooters goes on, leading to more and more incidents and injuries on our roads and pavements. The latest government figures suggest a 900% increase in fatalities between 2020 and 2021*.
The Government had promised a new Transport Bill would be laid before parliament in late 2022 which would have clarified the law on e-scooters. This has now been further delayed by the new administration with no firm guarantees of a Bill anytime soon. This is unacceptable given the daily risk that e-scooters are now causing to their riders and the general public.
E-scooters are simply not safe enough to be on our roads alongside motorised vehicles or mixed in with vulnerable pedestrians. Research using crash tests dummies shows how vulnerable scooter owners are, and the complete lack of protection offered by these fast moving machines.** IAM RoadSmart support a ban on all e-scooters on public roads or on pavements with use restricted to private land or cycle lanes only.
IAM RoadSmart supports immediate action to deal with dangerous and illegal private e-scooter use. This must start with a clear information campaign explaining that private e-scooters cannot be used on the roads or pavements. The campaign can then move on to explain the consequences of illegal use setting out the substantial fines and driving bans available. IAM RoadSmart fully supports the police in taking enforcement action against illegal and unsafe use of e-scooters. We also call for action to be taken against retailers who fail to properly inform customers of the illegality in using them and the risks involved.
Additional research is required on casualty numbers, the causes of fatal and serious crashes and the additional fire risk caused by e-scooters.
IAM RoadSmart believes the Transport Bill must urgently set minimum standards for e-scooters including:
The future for e-scooters can be bright if it is based around continuously monitored, well managed and geo fenced hire schemes, plus limited and tightly regulated private use. Whatever legislation is proposed, action is needed now with no more delays.
Notes;
*https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-e-scooter-factsheet-2021
The number of casualties in crashes where a driver was using a mobile phone is difficult to establish. But, research in simulators has shown drivers who use hands-free phones are up to four times more likely to be involved in a crash. Texting or smartphone use whilst driving increases reaction times by up to 35%.
IAM RoadSmart recommendations:
“The Department of Transport have confirmed (April 2023) that no new smart motorways will be built in England. Existing smart motorways will continue to be upgraded and two almost complete schemes finished. At least five years’ worth of data will be collected to give a full evaluation of their impact and safety performance. IAM RoadSmart have welcomed this decision with feedback from its members stating that they feel unsafe on smart motorways and would like the hard shoulder reinstated.
IAM RoadSmart Policy:
All IAM RoadSmart Policies:
E-scooters may have a role to play in the future transport mix, but this can only happen once their legal status has been made completely clear. IAM RoadSmart have welcomed the numerous pilot studies involving hire e-scooters in cities across the UK.
However, waiting for the results of these studies have delayed a final decision on key elements of e-scooter construction and use that must be clarified before progress can be made. In the meantime, the completely uncontrolled private use of personally purchased e-scooters goes on, leading to more and more incidents and injuries on our roads and pavements. The latest government figures suggest a 900% increase in fatalities between 2020 and 2021*.
The Government had promised a new Transport Bill would be laid before parliament in late 2022 which would have clarified the law on e-scooters. This has now been further delayed by the new administration with no firm guarantees of a Bill anytime soon. This is unacceptable given the daily risk that e-scooters are now causing to their riders and the general public.
E-scooters are simply not safe enough to be on our roads alongside motorised vehicles or mixed in with vulnerable pedestrians. Research using crash tests dummies shows how vulnerable scooter owners are, and the complete lack of protection offered by these fast moving machines.** IAM RoadSmart support a ban on all e-scooters on public roads or on pavements with use restricted to private land or cycle lanes only.
IAM RoadSmart supports immediate action to deal with dangerous and illegal private e-scooter use. This must start with a clear information campaign explaining that private e-scooters cannot be used on the roads or pavements. The campaign can then move on to explain the consequences of illegal use setting out the substantial fines and driving bans available. IAM RoadSmart fully supports the police in taking enforcement action against illegal and unsafe use of e-scooters. We also call for action to be taken against retailers who fail to properly inform customers of the illegality in using them and the risks involved.
Additional research is required on casualty numbers, the causes of fatal and serious crashes and the additional fire risk caused by e-scooters.
IAM RoadSmart believes the Transport Bill must urgently set minimum standards for e-scooters including:
The future for e-scooters can be bright if it is based around continuously monitored, well managed and geo fenced hire schemes, plus limited and tightly regulated private use. Whatever legislation is proposed, action is needed now with no more delays.
Notes;
*https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-e-scooter-factsheet-2021
ISA uses global satellite positioning (GPS), a digital map to establish a car’s location and sign recognition cameras to identify what the speed limit is at any point on the road.
This information can be used to:
Once controlling ISA has identified the speed limit, it does not allow the driver to accelerate beyond it. The promise that speeding fines, penalty points and subsequent loss of licence will become things of the past is an attractive proposition. In the UK alone, millions of motorists are fined and given penalty points for speeding every year. A team from the University of Leeds and the Motor Industry Research Association (MIRA) has found that the system could achieve significant reductions in road crash deaths and injuries. This was confirmed in a 2017 report by TRL for the EU that recommended ISA, and a range of other vehicle technologies, as a positive benefit for road safety. This led to the introduction of the GSR2 (General Safety Regualtion2) which will lead to the installation of advisory ISA in all new cars in the EU from 2022.
IAM RoadSmart recommendations
Information on the UK ISA trials can be found here.
The number of casualties in crashes where a driver was using a mobile phone is difficult to establish. But, research in simulators has shown drivers who use hands-free phones are up to four times more likely to be involved in a crash. Texting or smartphone use whilst driving increases reaction times by up to 35%.
IAM RoadSmart recommendations:
But if drivers don’t believe motorway services are attractive places to take a break, many won’t stop and they will exercise their consumer choice and continue driving, or leave the motorway to seek out alternative facilities.
From petrol to polo mints, MSA customers pay significantly higher prices than they would pay at retail outlets off the motorway network. This is mainly because MSA operators have higher running costs because they have to be open 24/7 and 365 days of the year, but also because there is no competition between service areas on the same motorway. It has been estimated that well over half of visitors stop only to use the toilets or to take a break from driving, without buying anything.
Operators have invested heavily and worked hard to achieve higher standards, but motorists continue to pay high prices. Recently, the government announced some relaxation of the ancient rules on MSA signing by allowing descriptions of what is available to be included on the advanced signing. The IAM believes this does not go far enough and it is now time for another independent inquiry into how motorway service areas can serve motorists better, and make our motorways even safer.
Speed surveys show that on uncongested motorways, 57 per cent of car drivers exceed the 70mph speed limit, and 20 per cent exceed 80 mph. IAM RoadSmart’s most serious concern is that legalising today’s unofficial and tolerated 80 mph speed limit could create tomorrow’s unofficial 90 mph limit. Average traffic speeds would increase, as would accidents and their severity and more people could be killed and seriously injured.
Not all UK motorways are built to the highest standards and many have sections with limited sight lines, tight curves, only two lanes and slip road designs that may not be able to deal with a higher limit safely.
Closely monitored smart motorways which set the speed limit according to traffic flows and density do however offer the ability to increase limits and enforce them. If the speed limit can be lowered below 70 mph in congested conditions, it could just as easily be increased to 80 mph when traffic flows are much lighter and conditions are good.
In Holland the limit was recently increased to 80mph (120kph) after a comprehensive review of motorway capacity, congestion and safety. The limit has only been increased on those sections where the road can cope with it. The vast majority of the busy Dutch motorway network remained unchanged or had variable limits applied to recognise varying traffic conditions throughout the day.
British motorways are the most congested in Europe so few drivers actually achieve 70 mph consistently on every journey. Any change in the limit is therefore unlikely to affect most drivers on their daily commute.
The location of manhole covers, junction design, fuel spills, use of bus lanes and basic road maintenance programmes all have a direct effect on the safety of motorcycle users.
The solutions to all these problems are well known but the will is not yet there to ensure that the special risks that bikers face are designed out of our road system. The IHIE have just revamped their detailed guidelines for motorcyclist friendly designs but progress has been slow in getting a motorcycle champion or design expert in every highway design office.
The IAM’s 2007 report Barriers to change: Designing safer roads for motorcyclists highlighted how lethal a crash barrier can be to a rider unfortunate to hit one, and the simple safety measures that can be implemented to reduce the severity of injuries.
Hitting a barrier is believed to be a factor in between eight and 16 per cent of motorcyclist deaths. A rider who hits a barrier is 15 times more likely to be killed than a car occupant, and injuries will be up to five times more severe than if the rider had hit the rigid object at the roadside that the barrier is there to guard against.
Two-thirds of riders in collision with crash barriers are killed or maimed by sliding into the supporting posts. Road authorities around the world are now working to make barriers ‘crash friendly’ to riders, with a particular focus on these support posts. Evaluation suggests that these strategically placed barriers halve the number of biker deaths caused by the old style barriers.
“The Department of Transport have confirmed (April 2023) that no new smart motorways will be built in England. Existing smart motorways will continue to be upgraded and two almost complete schemes finished. At least five years’ worth of data will be collected to give a full evaluation of their impact and safety performance. IAM RoadSmart have welcomed this decision with feedback from its members stating that they feel unsafe on smart motorways and would like the hard shoulder reinstated.
IAM RoadSmart Policy:
Surveys of the public also show a consistently high degree of support for a lower limit across the country. So, there is seemingly an appetite for change. But what is IAM RoadSmart’s view?
The UK legal limit was set in 1967 at a level where impairment was undeniable - 80 milligrams of alcohol for 100 millilitres of blood (0.8). Recent research suggests that impairment begins at 0.5 and lowering the limit could save at least 40 lives a year on Britain’s roads. We are now out of step with the rest of Europe where most countries have adopted the lower limit of 0.5. 240 people were killed in drink drive accidents in 2018 and the total number of collisions and accidents where at least one driver was over the alcohol limit rose by 3% from 2017 to 5,890.
Long term alcohol related incidents have been flat lining for the last five years - 13%, or around one in seven, of all fatal crashes involved alcohol in 2018.
Research shows that drink driving is most common amongst young drivers and the middle aged and police still catch thousands of drivers over the limit across the UK every year. Most were stopped by routine patrols rather than as the result of a crash.
IAM RoadSmart acknowledges that a lower limit could risk diverting police resources from catching the most dangerous offenders who pay little regard to any limit, but it would also send a very powerful signal on drinking and driving. For the moment, the government is committed to keeping the current legal limit of 0.8 but this approach can only work if there is vigorous and focused enforcement on drink driving. Given the recent cuts in police budgets and the lack of improvement in drink related deaths it is clear the battle has been not yet been won and the ‘status quo’ is not good enough.
You may also want to read more about IAM RoadSmart's £70,000 drink campaign raising awareness of the potential financial cost of a drink drive conviction. You can see details here
Young people have no incentive to treat driving as a skill for life and often seek to learn as quickly and as cheaply as possible. New drivers are most at risk in their first year of driving and yet the current system abandons them to learn by their own, sometimes fatal, mistakes.
The risk factors are well known; lack of experience (in all traffic conditions but especially rural roads, darkness and poor weather), attitude, distraction (by peer passengers or smartphones) and alcohol and drugs. Choosing effective restrictions to limit the effect of these risk factors should be the key objective of the government in creating a new licensing system that is practical, affordable and works to reduce young driver road deaths and injuries.
Back to top
IAM RoadSmart © 2021. Registration England & Wales 562530 | Registered Charity Number 249002 (England & Wales), SC041201 (Scotland)