[PR] Cyclists Demand place on National Safety Council

Victor

.

Press Release: Cyclists Demand place on National Safety Council

From: Irish Cycling Campaign

Date: Wednesday 23 Mar 2005

For Immediate use
The Irish Cycling Campaign (ICC) today called on the Minister for Transport, Martin Cullen, to ensure that cyclist and pedestrian representatives are appointed to the new National Safety Council (NSC) board, once its current 3 year term ends on April 14 2005. Currently both of these key groups of vulnerable road users are excluded from the NSC.

David Maher PRO of the ICC explained "currently cyclists and pedestrians are excluded both from the NSC board and from its Road Safety Committee. The domination of the NSC by sections of the motoring industry such as the AA, the Motor insurers and the National Roads Authourity (NRA) has left vulnerable road users voiceless in their campaign for safer roads.
Currently there is no forum for cyclists or pedestrians to express their concerns in this area".
Maher continued "it is a very worrying development that there has been absolutely no debate on the make-up of the NSC in the run up to its re-appointment. We fear this means it will be be the same old discredited quango where big money of the motoring lobby ensure that the NSC engages in a policy of victim blaming, instead of getting the killers off our road. Our
repeated letters to Minister Cullen on this issue have been ignored to date".

Maher ended by stating "the current road safety strategy has failed due to a lack of enforcement. The number of speeding tickets issued annually has dropped by 80% since the introduction of penalty points. The appointment of the new board offers Minister Cullen a chance to ensure the views of all road users are represented within the NSC."

ENDS

mackerski

If the cyclists' lobby want more speeding tickets issued then by golly we must do something. I for one propose to speed a lot more in order to get the figures back up. Who's with me?

On a side note, did the cyclists want to give or receive safety advice? We should be told...

Dermot

cyclopath2001

mackerski wrote:

If the cyclists' lobby want more speeding tickets issued then by golly we must do something. I for one propose to speed a lot more in order to get the figures back up. Who's with me?
On a side note, did the cyclists want to give or receive safety advice? We should be told...

Let me help you with this as I think you must have read it very quickly and misunderstood the points being made:

The NSC is a body that promotes a motorist-centric view of road safety. The press release calls for this view to be balanced by the inclusion of people representing the views of cyclists and pedestrians in its membership.

The press release observes that the number of speeding tickets issued has gone down. Not, unfortunately due to a decrease in the incidence of speeding but due to a lack of enforcement.

It does not ask for more speeding tickets to be issued. You have (deliberately?) misrepresented this to make a very perverse & dangerous point.

Cyclists would be very happy for the number of speeding tickets to decrease, but only if this meant that motorists were no longer speeding.

Road safety is a serious matter, take it seriously.

mackerski

cyclopath2001 wrote:

The press release observes that the number of speeding tickets issued has gone down. Not, unfortunately due to a decrease in the incidence of speeding but due to a lack of enforcement.

I didn't see anything in the claims made to suggest that the incidence of speeding had decreased, and even less to back up such a suggestion had it been made.

cyclopath2001 wrote:

It does not ask for more speeding tickets to be issued. You have (deliberately?) misrepresented this to make a very perverse & dangerous point.

The report observes with apparent dismay the reduction in speeding tickets. I am forced to conclude that the group concerned would like to see more issued. As to my point being dangerous, the danger presumably lies in the possibility that some readers can't spot a flippant comment when they read one. Sorry about that. Very irresponsible of me...

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Road safety is a serious matter, take it seriously.

I've been taking it seriously for very many years. Never even knocked down an invisible cyclist, despite overwhelming odds. There was a serious side to my post. The cyclist lobby(ies?) are concerned at Irish motorists contributing disproportionately to road-safety policy, presumably because they are not, as a group, renowned for their skill in this area (which I agree they are not). Now, it seems, they should be joined by the only two groups I can think of that are, based on any objective observation, even more clueless than the motorists.

I happen to believe that cyclists and pedestrians should be represented on these bodies, but we need to recognise the facts too.

Dermot

cyclopath2001

mackerski wrote:

The report observes with apparent dismay the reduction in speeding tickets. I am forced to conclude that the group concerned would like to see more issued.

Not so, the group is dismayed by the lack of enforcement. The reduction in speeding tickets is a symptom of the lack of enforcement. You are not forced to the conclusion that 'that the group concerned would like to see more issued'. This is a conclusion that you arrived at voluntarily as it provided you with a convenient platfrom from which to attack cyclists.

Far easier to demolish what you imagine to be the attitude than the actual one.

even more clueless than the motorists.

Simply not true.

murphaph

Seems like you're both generalising about the other's group. Having been a member of both groups, there are idiot cyclists and idiot motorists. There are responsible cyclists and there are responsible motorists.

mackerski

Actually, I'm generalising about all three groups - motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. I myself fall into two of those categories, and I think that the interests of all should be represented on the NSC. I also don't see that the interests of any one group are at odds with the others - the friction that manages to exist does so as a consequence either of bad behaviour (like motorists failing to watch out for cyclists, or cyclists failing to stop at traffic lights) or of unreasonable prejudice (such as "private cars are the problem" or "they should all be strung up by the goolies" [could be used against any of the groups, that one]).

Dermot

RicardoSmith

"All for one and one for all"

I reckon it would be a good idea to have everyone represented.

Are their stats on cyclist offenses?

mackerski

RicardoSmith wrote:

Are their stats on cyclist offenses?

I understand the level of tickets issued went down last year, so that must mean compliance with the law is improving.

Dermot

sceptre

RicardoSmith wrote:

"All for one and one for all"

I reckon it would be a good idea to have everyone represented.

Ditto. I can't see why anyone should have a problem with representation from cyclists and pedestrians on the council.

RicardoSmith

mackerski wrote:

I understand the level of tickets issued went down last year, so that must mean compliance with the law is improving.

Dermot

From whence did this understanding arise?

Capt'n Midnight

For Immediate use
The Irish Cycling Campaign (ICC) today called on the Minister for Transport, Martin Cullen, to ensure that cyclist and pedestrian representatives are appointed to the new National Safety Council (NSC) board, once its current 3 year term ends on April 14 2005. Currently both of these key groups of vulnerable road users are excluded from the NSC.

Even though most people killed or injured on our roads are persons travelling in motorised vehicles, in the majority of incidents where other road users are killed or injured are it usually the fault of a motorist. I still reckon that replacing the drivers air bag with a harpoon would significantly improve road safety. At present motorists are cacooned up in soundproof boxes, a significant proportion haven't passed any test or use indicators correctly.

It's like Sellafield - why should non-motorised road users be subjected to a risk that they have no say in ?

mackerski

RicardoSmith wrote:

From whence did this understanding arise?

'Twas a gag. I'm not sure that the actual level of penalties issued to non-motorised road-users is even statistically valid.

Dermot

RicardoSmith

mackerski wrote:

'Twas a gag. I'm not sure that the actual level of penalties issued to non-motorised road-users is even statistically valid.

Dermot

I reckon it would be another great source of fines. The majority of cyclists seem to break lights and make illegal turns etc.

Hows that for a gag?

Iób

mackerski wrote:

Never even knocked down an invisible cyclist, despite overwhelming odds.

Oh yes, "the invisible cyclist". And what about her cousin, "the pedestrian who appeared out of nowhere"?

What's the point in traffic laws when we can't even get the laws of physics enforced on our roads?

MT

Yes, cyclists and pedestrians should be represented on this body. The first order of business should be the dreadful state of cycle 'tracks'. I've always wondered if the use of the word 'track' was a cruel joke on the part of the authorities. With the amount of leaves, etc. on some they should maybe rename them dirt tracks. I'm not a cyclist myself but even as a driver I can see the deplorable state they're in - certainly won't be enticing me unto a bike!

mackerski

It's possible I was over-cynical in my reaction to the press-release. After all, if you consider that the NSC has been dominated up till now by motorist-types, they've clearly been very busy coming up with strategies aimed at whipping other motorists into line. Self-regulation, you might say. Maybe the cyclist and pedestrian lobbies want representation so they can put the safety and compliance messages through to their peers.

Nice idea, anyway.

Dermot

robfitz

Here are the details of the members of the NSC and the body the represent or background.

http://www.nsc.ie/Aboutus/Council/Members/

Council Members

The Council members of the NSC have been appointed for a three year
period until 14th April 2005 by the Minister for the Environment and
Local Government. They are.

Mr. Edward Shaw Chairman
Mr. Brian Huston
Mr. Finbarr Crowley
Mr. Conor Faughnan
Mr. John Weafer
Ms. Bernadette Kinsella
Asst. Commissioner Mr. Richard Kelly
Councillor Declan McDonnell
Councillor Mary Roche
Ms. Grainne Harte

Council meetings take place on a monthly basis. In addition, specialist
Road and Fire Safety Committees are appointed by the Council to study
and make recommendations on matters relating to these disciplines.

http://www.nsc.ie/Aboutus/Council/Roadsafetycommittee/

Road Safety Committee

Board member Dick O'Driscoll has been appointed Chairman of the
Council's Road Safety Committee.

Dick's experience stems from his position as Director of Underwriting
and Distribution with the Hibernian Group- one of the country's major
insurance companies. Further expertise is being provided by Finbarr
Crowley (NRA), Hilary Dalton, Dept. of Transport, Conor Faughnan (AA),
Chief Supt. Denis Fitzpatrick of the Garda National Traffic Bureau, and
Cllr. Declan McDonnell.

Mr. Edward Shaw - Chairman
Mr. Dick O'Driscoll (Insurance Industry)
Mr. Finbarr Crowley (NRA)
Mr. Conor Faughnan (AA)
Mr. Jim Humphreys (Dep. of the Environment & Local Government)
Ms. Bernadette Kinsella (Clare County Development Board)
Asst. Commissioner Mr. Richard Kelly (Garda National Traffic Bureau)
Councillor Declan McDonnell (Galway City Council - PD)
Councillor Mary Roche (Waterford City Council - FF)
Hilary Dalton (Dep. of the Environment & Local Government)
Chief Supt. Denis Fitzpatrick (Garda National Traffic Bureau)
Mr. John Weafer (Principal Officer, Department of Transport)
Ms. Grainne Harte (??? Public Relations Practitioner)
Mr. Brian Huston (??? Director, Pricing and Product Development, Hibernian General Insurance Limited)

Do you think any of these people do any significant walking or cycling on a regular basis?

I would suggest a cycling representative from one of the Cycling Campaign's or Irish Cycling, or even someone from the Dublin Transportation Office involved with cycling issues.

I don't know of any pedestrian only groups, but a representative from children/student, elderly, blind, or disabled groups could fit the bill.

murphaph

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

I still reckon that replacing the drivers air bag with a harpoon would significantly improve road safety.

very funny! Perhaps they could retro-fir older models to use the propellant gas to drive the harpoon in the event of an accident!

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

It's like Sellafield - why should non-motorised road users be subjected to a risk that they have no say in ?

Do these non-motorised road users gain no benefit from motorised vehicles? Your loaf of bread would be a tad more expensive (if available at all) if it had to be delivered on a horse and cart! It's a risk-benefit trade off that most members of modern society have bought into.

Hotblack Desiato

cyclopath2001 wrote:

The NSC is a body that promotes a motorist-centric view of road safety.

It's even worse than that, looking from the saddle I'm sitting on every day. They promote a CAR-centric view of road safety :mad:

Anything with less than 4 wheels they just see as a problem.

The other fundamental flaw with the NSC is that basically they are a government-run mouthpiece for the insurance industry, who fund most of their activities. Their TV ads all demonise young male drivers; this helps counteract the public pressure on the industry to cut their outrageous premiums.