Killing mobility

I read the report Transport Watchdog To Kill Speed For Good (February 23). Peter Ripard's intent to reduce speed limits to cut down on road fatalities and serious injury is an over-simplistic solution.

Major Ripard asserts that the vast majority of accidents are caused by excessive speed. If a majority is over 50 per cent what constitutes Major Ripard's "vast majority"? In Northern Ireland (traffic accident fact sheet 2004-2005), of the 70 identified causes of road accidents, excessive speed accounts for 10 and 20 per cent of all fatalities.

Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs is a separate, significant group accounting for 4.6 per cent of accidents in Northern Ireland and claiming 27 per cent of fatalities.

Imposing speed restrictions is not going to achieve much considering that this class of drivers are, by default, irresponsible.

The principal causes of road accidents in this fact sheet were, "inattention or attention diverted", accounting for 27 per cent of all accidents (seven per cent of fatalities) and a diverse group (16 sub-types) characterised by lack of care in manoeuvring accounting for 44 per cent of accidents and 40 per cent of fatalities.

Therefore, 70 per cent of accidents and 50 per cent of fatalities (in Northern Ireland) are not related to excessive speed. There is no reason to expect marked differences between the causes of road accidents in Malta and in Northern Ireland. By imposing crawl speeds on 220,000 Maltese motorists, Major Ripard will at best save the lives of three road users while 350 die every year from the use of tobacco. But this is a good source of excise duty.

The Malta Transport Authority (ADT) endeavours to provide "high quality, safe and efficient land transport... that will meet the travelling needs of the people. If reducing speed limits all over the place will not significantly reduce severe injuries and even fatalities, how long will it take the authorities to admit this? How will the system ensure an "efficient land transport" if traffic flow deteriorates?

In 1957, in the UK, there were 7.5 million (34 million today) vehicles. Road fatalities amounted to a staggering 740 per million vehicles (100 today).

The UK today is full of fast cars while back in 1957 cars commonly found difficulty in reaching 80 kph; zero to 100 kph times exceeded 40 seconds but the number of fatalities was astronomical. Today, all passenger cars easily reach speeds of 80 kph while the most efficient and least polluting speeds are in the 50 to 80 kph range.

What does Major Ripard mean when he says we do not need fast cars in Malta? Shall we start going around in golf carts or milk floats?

More effective means of reducing accidents without reducing flow or freedom are available but these are inconveniently complicated and expensive to implement. Where are the breathalysers to curb drink driving? There are legal technicalities that prevent effective prosecution.

Why does not Major Ripard push for these technicalities to be circumvented? Has there been strong antagonism from commercial groups that have an interest in selling alcoholic beverages?

New accident report sheets used by the Malta police collect more complete data on road accidents. However, this method has been used only for a couple of years and only in cases where injury has occurred. Conclusions cannot be drawn from two years of exclusive data. The perception that the "vast majority" of road accidents in Malta are caused by excessive speed is only a subjective opinion as it is not based on a collection of complete, long-term, traffic accident data as these do not exist.

What objective criteria are being used by the police at the scene of the accident to determine the speeds of vehicles involved?

If the collected data is so complete, there should be information on the state of the road surface at the scene of the accident and whether alcohol and drugs were consumed by those involved in the incident.

Therefore, can Major Ripard assert, from the data at hand, that in the "vast majority" of accidents which are caused by "excessive speed":

That the road surface condition at the scene had nothing to do with the accident?

If in the affirmative, then the "vast majority" of accidents must have occurred in the newly-constructed roads as they are the only ones with a surface that is up to standard.

That there was no alcohol or drugs used by drivers or pedestrians involved in the incident? If in the affirmative we must be a tea total state and there is no drug taking in Malta.

The 50 to 80 kph speed limits as currently used are right. Imposing 30 kph limits near schools and places of people gatherings is acceptable. Beyond that, it calls for the establishment of a motorist's association because muscle, it seems, talks.