RSA - 2024 Additional Funding Request

Seth Brundle

I note from the Irish Times (article linked below) that the RSA have requested approval for funding of €6 million for 2024.

Apparently the funding would cover nine additional staff at about €600,000. The balance of the funding would go towards other proposals including "significantly expanding safety campaigns over the coming months".

The extra measures proposed included “awareness initiatives” such as increased advertising spend on campaigns highlighting the dangers of drink driving, and others focusing on speeding, distracted driving and drug driving.

Am I being naive, but is there any evidence that this type of funding is worth it? In my view there is only one reason the fatality rate increased last year and that is because people know that if they take a chance, there won't be a garda nearby (or there won't be one who actually could be bothered taking action!) so they take the chance.

Illegal parking, speeding, phone use, drug use, non-insured drivers - can you actually think of a road traffic offence that is adequately enforced?

Is there any evidence (although I don't believe so) that any of the RSA campaigns have any tangible effects. To my knowledge, they spend about a million a year tarting kids up in high-viz and do nothing to actively discourage the person behind the wheel from speeding past that kid.

There are a lot of problems in the process of road traffic law enforcement (absence of enforcement, ridiculous judicial decisions, legal loopholes and so on) but am I really to believe that the public in general will self-police properly after watching some RSA adverts?

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2024/01/30/rsas-request-for-funding-boost-turned-down-despite-rise-in-fatalities/

Duckjob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058333917/rsa-2024-additional-funding-request

Their ongoing fetish with getting the population to dress up like they're heading to a building site everytime anyone steps outside their door is proof enough that they are unfit for purpose and need to be defunded.

bk

Yes, completely not fit for purpose.

Put the money into automated red light cameras, speed cameras, etc.

coylemj

They paid consultants to come up with the daft proposal ('Vision Zero') of them being able to achieve zero deaths or serious injuries on the roads by 2050. That barmy and completely unattainable objective alone says that they are nuts. They think that by pouring money into advertising, they can affect driver behaviour. They can't.

Seth Brundle

Due to "operational priorities" the RSA will not appear before the Public Accounts Committee (as they are obliged to do!). They have not appeared before the PAC since 2018.
RSA CEO Sam Waide said the RSA has “limited availability” due to “immediate road safety priorities”.

https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2024/05/03/rsa-declines-to-appear-before-tds-because-of-immediate-road-safety-priorities/

Seth Brundle

I note that the RSA are before the PAC tomorrow so hopefully we will get some answers to questions that arose after Sam Waide's car crash [sic] interview.
Does the organisation deliver on its mission of reducing road deaths? Does it provide value for money in it's campaigns?

Meanwhile, they are being criticised on social media for their continuing habit of referring to collisions as accidents…

https://twitter.com/RSAIreland/status/1805179113474293967

Seth Brundle

The RSA rightfully seem to be getting a proper bollicking from the PAC. In terms of the RSA submitting observations on projects (or rather their lack of doing so)…

TD Marc Ó Cathasaigh questioned who it was that made the submission on this matters, and whether the RSA had transport or road safety engineers on staff. Rowland said that it did not, and that the remit of the authority was “education and awareness”.

“No, it’s not. It goes far beyond that,” Ó Cathasaigh responded.

He said that under the Road Safety Authority Act 2006, the RSA has as its function:

“the promotion of public awareness of road safety and of measures, including the advancement of education, relating to the promotion of the safe use of roads, including co-operation with local authorities and other persons in this regard.”

He said the RSA’s remit should include making submissions.

“And to tell me that the Road Safety Authority doesn’t have a road safety engineer on staff. I am gobsmacked,” Ó Cathasaigh said.

He also questioned what the cost benefit analysis of a RSA campaign to distribute 394,350 hi-vis materials to school children, and whether this money should be better spend on targetting drivers and preventing road deaths, rather than focusing on the victims.

https://www.thejournal.ie/road-safety-public-accounts-6420316-Jun2024/

magicbastarder

i'm not sure why the RSA should have a road engineer on staff; their remit is not designing or engineering roads.

Seth Brundle

If they were to make submissions on infrastructure projects, surely a qualified opinion is more valued than an un-qualified one?

Macy0161

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122310749#Comment_122310749

Given the quality of work of many road engineers we see in active travel outcomes, would it really be more valuable?

extra-ordinary_

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122309684#Comment_122309684

In fairness…

Rowland said… the remit of the authority was “education and awareness”.

“No, it’s not. It goes far beyond that,” Ó Cathasaigh responded.

…“the promotion of public awareness of road safety and of measures, including the advancement of education, relating to the promotion of the safe use of roads, including co-operation with local authorities and other persons in this regard.”

Way to go Ó Cathasaigh, tear them a new asshole, by repeating their answer, albeit a longer version…

magicbastarder

That's the problem with a lot of those hearings, they're used as an opportunity by some politicians to grandstand