Annual Report 2004/2005
Introduction by the Chairman
Chapter 1: The Motorists' Forum
Chapter 2: Advising on Specific Topics
Chapter 3: Raising Issues of Concerns to Motorists
Chapter 4: Work in Progress
Annex A: Terms of Reference
Annex B: Other Positions Held by Members Relevant to the Work of the Forum
The Annual Report has also been made available in Adobe Acrobat format for downloading.
The Adobe® Acrobat Reader® can be freely downloaded.
Viewers with visual difficulties may find it useful to investigate services provided to improve the accessibility of Acrobat documents - http://access.adobe.com
Introduction by the Chairman
Motoring issues have once again been at the forefront of the Government's transport policy agenda in the past year.
I am very pleased that the Motorists' Forum has continued to advise the Government on the development of its new policies over this period, thus ensuring that the interests and concerns of motorists have been taken fully into account.
During the year we have had the opportunity to raise motorists' concerns directly with Alistair Darling, the Transport Secretary, and John Healey, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury. We have also met with senior figures from right across the motoring world to raise issues of importance to motorists.
This has been particularly important in a year when the price of oil has continued to rise, with the resultant increase in petrol prices, and Government has been working to reduce congestion, to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on our roads and to improve air quality.
We are heartened by the level of support and interest we have received from Ministers and policy advisers alike to the advice we have given on these issues.
Two of our major activities this year have been studies on road safety. One has been examining how employers could be encouraged to give a higher priority to road safety for those people driving as part of their work. Here, our work has shown that by the introduction of a number of simple measures, companies could make substantial cost savings, get better motivated staff and avoid the risks of prosecution or death of key staff. We have made a number of recommendations designed to stimulate awareness of the issue and ensure better communication of the good practice that already exists in this area.
However, we also believe that Government needs to affirm that it sees work-related driving as a key aspect of workplace health and safety and that it should place work-related road safety monitoring on the same platform as workplace safety. We hope Government will take the necessary steps.
The second study has been looking to provide the Department for Transport with some fresh thinking about how to reduce excessive and inappropriate speed. This study is due to report later in the year and I very much hope that it will produce a number of new initiatives designed to assist in the management of speed that will meet motorists' concerns about the current approaches adopted.
These initiatives are particularly important as while the UK has a first class safety record, our ambition must be to get casualties still lower. Any casualty on our roads is one too many.
We have also played a major role in the Government's review designed to ensure that the maximum numbers of vehicles on our roads are properly insured. There is no doubt that law-abiding motorists support strong action being taken against those who wilfully drive without insurance, tax or licence. Such people raise costs and risks for motorists who abide by the rules. We urge Government to take tough action in dealing with those who drive outside the law and not to be deterred from doing so. We strongly support the proposal that those who drive without insurance should have their vehicle confiscated provided satisfactory safeguards are in place.
We have also provided advice to Government on a number of other topics. These include safety cameras, graduated fixed penalties for speeding, speed awareness courses, the European Road Assessment Programme, climate change, air quality, congestion measurement, Motorway Service Areas and car parking at stations.
Issues of concern to motorists that we have raised with Government include traffic policing, funding of Automatic Number Plate Recognition, affordable insurance for young drivers, Government grants for cleaner vehicles and the problems of abandoned vehicles.
I am indebted to all our members for their sterling work on all our initiatives. None would have been possible without the time and commitment they have given us and I would like to offer them, and the Secretariat, my profound thanks. We look forward to working with the new Transport Ministers over the coming year.
Sir Trevor Chinn
Chapter 1: The Motorists' Forum
The Commission for Integrated Transport (CfIT) - an independent body advising the Government on integrated transport policy - was asked by the Deputy Prime Minister to set up a group in September 1999 to advise on policy proposals affecting motorists. CfIT subsequently agreed to form the Motorists' Forum. The Forum was launched formally by the Deputy Prime Minister on 31 January 2000.
The Forum seeks to improve understanding between the Government and motoring interests and car users. It ensures that motoring interests and car users' views are reflected fully in the development of both Government and local authority policies affecting motorists. The Forum also acts as a channel for early communication with Government on its emerging proposals affecting motorists.
The Forum works within the framework of the Government's integrated transport strategy and sustainable development policy but it also takes its work forward in the light of the Deputy Prime Minister's statement that the car will remain the dominant mode of transport for personal use.
The Forum meets in Plenary session four times a year. However, where appropriate, detailed work is taken forward by Working Groups. These Groups draw on the experience and expertise of many relevant organisations going well beyond those represented on the Plenary. Reports drawn up by Working Groups are submitted to the full Forum for consideration before being presented to Ministers.
Full details of the Forum's activities - including reports, Plenary agendas and minutes - are published on the Forum's website at www.cfit.gov.uk/mf/.
The Forum's Terms of Reference are at Annex A.
Independent Review of the Commission for Integrated Transport and the Motorists' Forum
A review of the work of CfIT and the Forum was undertaken in 2003. The purpose of this review was to examine the roles of both CfIT and the Forum and to consider whether they remained relevant and necessary to the delivery of Government policy. The review also considered the case for changes to the remit, structure and processes of either body.
The review concluded that the Forum had demonstrated its capacity to do good work, was useful to its sponsoring Department (DfT) and other Government Departments and provided good value for money. The overwhelming majority of interviewees and questionnaire respondents contacted as part of the review felt that the Forum did a good job, praised the Forum for the work that it did and considered that it was valued by its customers and stakeholders.
After consideration of the findings, the Secretary of State accepted the recommendations in full and concluded that the Forum should retain both its current remit and structure.
2004/2005 Highlights
Over the past year, the Forum has continued its role as a constructive and respected adviser to Government Ministers, officials and other interested parties in ensuring that motoring and motorists' interests continue to be represented fully within the transport agenda.
The Forum has undertaken two major reviews into road safety. The first of these was designed to advise on how employers could be encouraged to give a higher priority to road safety for those who drive cars or vans as part of their work and the second, to provide DfT with some fresh thinking about how to make progress on reducing excessive and inappropriate speed.
It has also continued to act as a useful vehicle for debate with Government and others on emerging policies - for example on the review of motor insurance, the new congestion targets that are being developed and the Highways Agency's continuing proposals designed to improve journey time reliability and enhance safety. (See Chapter 2).
In addition, the Forum has continued to raise with Government and others issues of concern to motorists where the Forum wishes to challenge existing policy or priorities for action - such as reduced levels of traffic policing, the need for more consistent funding of grant regimes designed to incentivise the purchase of cleaner vehicles and affordability of insurance for young drivers. (See Chapter 3).
Members
Sir Trevor Chinn chairs the Forum. (Sir Trevor's tenure as the Vice-Chair of CfIT expired in June 2004 but he continues to attend CfIT's Plenaries at the personal invitation of the CFIT Chair - thus ensuring the link between CfIT and the Forum is continued).Other members are drawn from leaders in their fields from a wide cross-section of the motoring community. Members are invited to join the Forum in a representative capacity.
However, Forum members do not just speak for their organisations. As well as being experts in their field, they are also able to bring a strategic understanding of motoring issues and concerns to the table. The Forum is thus able to bring experts together to hear and understand the views of other parts of the motoring world within the wider integrated transport strategy.
The Forum is comprised as follows:
Sir Trevor Chinn CVO (Chair)
Councillor Tony Brown, Member, Local Government Association
Douglas Campbell OBE, Executive Director, The Disabled Drivers' Association
Chief Constable Stephen Green QPM, Operational Strategic Road Policing Portfolio Holder, Association of Chief Police Officers Roads Policing Business Area
David Holmes CB, Chairman, RAC Foundation
Martin Joseph, Chief Executive, National Society for Clean Air and Environmental Protection
John Lewis, Director General, British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association
Christopher Macgowan, Chief Executive, Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders
Simon Machell, Managing Director, RAC
Bert Morris, Director, The AA Motoring Trust
John Mumford OBE, Vice President, UK Region BP plc, UK Petroleum Industry Association
Tim Parker, Chief Executive, The Automobile Association
Roger Putnam, Chairman, Ford Motor Company Ltd
Michael Roberts, Director, Business Environment, Confederation of British Industry
Archie Robertson OBE, Chief Executive, Highways Agency
Stephen Sklaroff, Deputy Director General, Association of British Insurers
Steve Gooding, Director, Roads Performance and Strategy Directorate acts as the Department for Transport (DfT) advisor to the Forum
Secretariat
David Prescott, Secretary to the Motorists' Forum
Any other positions held by members that are relevant to the work of the Forum are at Annex B.
Over the past year, the following have also represented their organisations on the Forum:
Findlay Caldwell, former Managing Director, RAC Consumer Services, RAC Motoring Services
John Dawson, former Director, The AA Motoring Trust
Neil Lovell, former Director of Corporate Communications, RAC plc
Richard Mills OBE, former Secretary General, National Society for Clean Air and Environmental Protection
Roger Wood, former Managing Director, The Automobile Association
Chapter 2: Advising on Specific Topics
The Forum has continued to act over the past year as a consultative body for Government in the preparation of its policies on motoring issues. Areas where the Forum has helped Government to shape its policies are:
Work-Related Road Safety
There is evidence that people travelling as part of their work are at greater risk of accident - indeed it is estimated that between one quarter and one third of all road accidents occur when people are making work-related journeys. This may be because of time pressures on the journey, thinking about work while driving or simply the fact that work-related drivers do a much higher mileage. However it is the aspect of work-related safety which receives least attention by employers with recent research showing that 79% of respondents had yet to compile a car fleet risk management study. The activity is also often overlooked by, or even exempted from, general road safety initiatives.
The Forum was asked by DfT to advise on how employers could be encouraged to give a higher priority to road safety for those who drive cars or vans as part of their work. A Work-Related Road Safety Working Group was set up to oversee this work.
The study concluded that:
- this is an area where some employers have already achieved remarkable reductions in accidents through the introduction of relatively simple measures;
- companies could make substantial cost savings by adopting good practice in the management of work-related driving activities; and
- there is ample advice on good practice which would help employers achieve major improvements.
The missing elements in tackling this issue more effectively at present appear to be that those promoting good practice lack access to effective employer networks and a lack of management focus. The main recommendation from the study is that more should be done to energise and empower the networks that exist and that the issue of work-related driving should be given a much higher profile, both within Government and within employer organisations. The objective is to stimulate awareness and communicate the good practice which is already out there. The study recommended that all organisations should see work-related driving as an integral part of their health and safety management processes and afford it the management priority it deserves.
To try to overcome the obstacles in tackling this issue more effectively, the Group made a number of recommendations to Government. These included:
- making it clear to employers that workplace health and safety legislation applies equally to work-related travel and should be applied in the same way as in the workplace;
- introducing a requirement for employers to report incidents relating to on-the-road work activities under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 1995 (RIDDOR);
- support for an organisation undertaking a systematic programme of outreach designed to coordinate a network of employer champions drawn from public, private, and voluntary sectors who will work through employer networks and associations to deliver awareness;
- using Government-funded advertising and major events as platforms to extend awareness;
- reviewing the exemptions from seat belt requirements that many professional drivers enjoy;
- a Government review of its existing guidance in this area to assess its effectiveness and market penetration; and
- enrolling the Department for Transport as a champion with other Government Departments and public bodies.
Our recommendations require no primary legislation and have a cost that equates to the saving of half a life per annum. They should impose only minor additional requirements on business as we are not recommending a swathe of new reporting requirements, merely the extension of existing health and safety requirements to work-related travel.
Speed
The question of speed, its contributory factor to road accidents and the measures that have been introduced to ensure drivers comply with speed limits remain issues that continue to generate much public debate in the media.
These issues are being looked at by a Motorists' Forum Road Safety Working Group (see Chapter 4) which is due to report later this year. In the meantime, the Forum has continued to debate with Government on a number of speed-related issues. These include:
Safety Cameras
An independent report prepared for DfT on the first three years of the safety camera programme's operation (2000-01 to 2002-03) was published in June 2004. The report covered the 24 safety camera partnerships then involved in the national programme (covering roughly half the country), and data from around 2,000 fixed, mobile and red light camera sites.
The report found that cameras had an effect on both speed and casualties. In brief, as regards speed, there was a 32% reduction in the number of vehicles exceeding the speed limit, and a higher 42% reduction in the vehicles significantly exceeding the limit (15 mph above the limit or more).
As regards casualties, there was a 40% reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured at camera sites (including mobile camera sites where camera equipment was deployed only from time to time) above and beyond the general downward trend in UK road casualties. This equates to around 105 fewer people killed a year at the sites and around 760 fewer people seriously injured.
An element of these reductions will be due to 'regression to mean'. (This is a statistical phenomenon that when applied to camera sites means that when a site has been selected to get a camera because of exceptionally high levels of collisions in the previous period, the site may have fewer collisions in a subsequent year just because of random variation in accidents, not because of the effect of the camera). However, regression to the mean is not likely to account for all the subsequent reduction in casualties, given the fact that site selection is on the basis of casualties over the three preceding years, and not only one year, and must meet the other criteria, including having significant incidence of speeding problems.
As the study also found strong correlation between the amount of speed reduction and the amount of casualty reduction at individual sites, we consider that future research should look at and discuss the regression to mean element in identified casualty reductions.
In the light of this evidence, the Forum continues to support the installation of safety cameras at sites that have a bad safety record. However, we have expressed our concern that casualty rates had remained static - and in some cases had risen - at around a quarter of the camera sites. We consider it important that DfT should ensure that safety camera partnerships keep all camera sites, and the continuing need for cameras, under regular review as this will help answer allegations from some quarters that cameras are being used as revenue-generating devices.
Graduated Fixed Penalties for Speeding
The Forum was consulted on the Government's proposal to reduce penalties for motorists caught driving just above the speed limit and higher penalties for those significantly above it.
We agreed that the existing structure is inflexible and penalises equally those who just exceed the speed limit and those who exceed them by considerably greater amounts. We therefore supported the introduction of a system of graduated fixed penalties.
Speed Awareness Courses
While safety cameras are an integral part of the nation's road safety strategy, public perception of such cameras may on occasion threaten support for the strategy.
At present, those caught speeding by a safety camera are subject to a £60 fine and 3 penalty points (or have the option of going to court). We believe that this inflexibility in the current enforcement regime option can simply harden, rather than change the recipient's attitude, to speeding.
We welcome the fact that the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) has now agreed to offer speed awareness courses, operated to a national standard, to those caught driving a little over the speed limit. The Government's proposed Road Safety Bill also gives the courts powers to impose retraining in certain circumstances where the driver is not to be disqualified but is to have his licence endorsed with penalty points.
However, we have recommended that the option of attending a speed awareness course, operated to national guidelines, should be offered to all first time offenders, as an alternative to an automatic penalty. We hope Government will give this proposal careful consideration as we believe it can encourage those taking part to think about their behaviour and perhaps change it.
European Road Assessment Programme (EuroRAP)
Safety cameras can only be part of the solution to making our roads safe and there are other measures that can play an equally important role. These include practical road-improvement measures.
EuroRAP is an international association that works for improvements to the safety of Europe's roads. It awards stars to roads for safety and produces maps showing the risk of traffic accidents that cause death and life-threatening injuries. It also highlights improvements that could be made to roads to reduce the likelihood of accidents and to make those that do happen survivable.
As most of Europe's roads have lower than average risk, EuroRAP enables the high-risk, low-safety roads that drag the average down to be identified clearly. (The least safe roads have a death and serious injury rate 10 times worse than the best. Raising the standard of higher-risk roads to the average could save 200 deaths and 1,500 serious injuries each year). This practical identification should encourage road engineers and planners to implement existing good practice and the use of innovative highway design measures on such roads.
We have ensured that the work emanating from EuroRAP continues to be brought to Government's attention as potentially it offers a real opportunity to drive up the safety standards of our roads.
Uninsured Driving
The UK has one of the worst levels of uninsured driving populations in Western Europe - estimates place the level at 5% nationally or 1 in 20 car drivers. The Forum was, therefore, pleased to see, and participate in, DfT's independent review of the UK system of motor insurance. (This review was focused on reducing the levels of uninsured driving in the UK and producing recommendations for improving the effectiveness of compulsory motor insurance).
The Forum is in full agreement that more needs to be done to tackle the problem of uninsured driving. We have continued to advise Government that firm action needs to be taken against those who wilfully drive uninsured.
We have supported the Government's proposal to give police forces the power to seize and, in appropriate circumstances, destroy vehicles which are being driven uninsured subject to satisfactory safeguards being in place.
The Forum has also supported the proposal for a scheme of continuous enforcement of motor insurance requirements. We believe that this will simplify the enforcement process as there will be no need to wait for a vehicle to be used on a road before action can be taken. We have, however, stressed the need for the proposals to have an element of discretion; for example, in the case of illness on the part of the driver who would otherwise have conscientiously renewed his or her insurance.
Climate Change and Air Quality
The Forum has continued to discuss these important issues with Government.
Climate Change
DfT figures show that carbon emissions from road transport grew at about 0.6% per annum between 1990 and 2000. This rate is expected to continue over this decade, with continued growth of about 0.6% per annum from 2000 to 2010. From 2010 to 2015, carbon emissions from road transport will stabilise and possibly fall.
The Forum is clear that the motor industry must continue to play its role in tackling greenhouse gas emissions. However, improvements can also accrue from tackling other sectors of the economy and other forms of transport and we believe Government must look at the evidence base and cost effectiveness of the action they are calling for across each sector of the economy. Once the relevant merits of the various cost-benefit frameworks have been established, action should be concentrated on those areas giving the greatest benefit.
There is clearly much debate to be had at present over the future shape of vehicle technologies and fuels. Our view is that Government itself should not be attempting to choose the 'winners' amongst the various alternative technologies and fuels but should be supporting all new initiatives in this field so as to ensure a level playing field. We have also highlighted the dangers that could arise if Government passes the risk of developing such technologies onto developers without providing framework support.
We have also stressed to Government that it needs to have continuity and consistency in its policies over fuel incentives over the long term. Once Government has decided to support a new technology or fuel, that support should not be withdrawn in ways which damage confidence both in the market and in those who supply it. To do so can only undermine the drive for cleaner fuels.
It is clear that fiscal measures work in rewarding the purchase of clean, low carbon vehicles and we have drawn attention to the existing policies which are helping to reduce emissions. These include the differential VED bands that have been introduced (which has led to a marked shift in new sales over recent years towards cars in the lower VED bands), changes in the company car taxation regime and the discount currently enjoyed by certain alternative fuel vehicles from the London congestion charging scheme which has led to an increased demand for such vehicles.
We have also highlighted the important role that 'greener' driving can play in making an effective contribution to reducing pollution. There are a number of simple measures motorists can take to drive more 'greenly' such as not 'warming up' their vehicles, driving more smoothly and at a lower speed, eg travelling at 70mph instead of 50mph can use up to 30% more fuel. We have suggested that Government should consider emphasising more widely the benefits that can accrue from driving more 'greenly'. In such advertising, there could be value in stressing the direct personal benefits that could accrue rather than societal benefits as people may well respond better to the former than the latter.
Air Quality
PM10 and NOx emissions from road transport have fallen by around 45% (in 2002) since 1990, despite continuing traffic growth. This is primarily as a result of tighter European vehicle emission standards and the introduction by motor manufacturers of after-treatment devices such as the three-way catalytic converter. Emissions from all vehicle types are expected to fall by an additional 20-25% (from 1990 levels) by 2010, as a result of even more stringent European standards.
The automotive industry will continue to invest substantial sums in cleaner vehicle technology. However, the price that has to be paid for each vehicle emissions reduction step is growing while the contribution made by each step to air quality improvement is diminishing and for some European cities, the air quality standards will not be met even if the most stringent technically feasible vehicle emissions standards were to be introduced without regard to cost. We agree therefore that the drive towards ever lower tailpipe emissions standards from new cars will need to be augmented by other measures if there is to be a realistic chance of meeting air quality objectives.
We have advised Government that there is much to be gained by the selective and cost effective tackling of emissions from lorries, buses, taxis and vans (with particular emphasis given to older vehicles) as these modes make a disproportionately large contribution to NOx and PM10 emissions.
In 2000, about 35% of total PM10 emissions and just over 40% of NOx emissions came from just 500,000 lorries and buses. Although we appreciate this is due to such vehicles larger size and predominant use of diesel, nevertheless lorries and buses, which represented less than 2% of the vehicle fleet on the road, emitted over a third of all PM10 and NOx emissions. We are aware Government has already introduced several incentives to improve the emissions performance of these vehicles but we have urged Government to be bolder in its approach. With suitable Government incentives and support, there are potentially very real gains to be made in air quality by going further in tackling emissions from these vehicles.
Congestion Measurement
In 2002, the Forum set up a Working Group to look at how motorists perceive congestion, to assess the former Department for Transport, Local Government and the Regions' proposed criteria for measuring/reporting changes in congestion and to see whether the proposals could be made more meaningful to motorists. The Group made a number of suggestions as to how congestion could be measured more meaningfully and its reports were instrumental in DfT changing their approach to this matter.
The Government is committed to publishing a new target in July and DfT sought the views of the Forum on development work on a new target. We have advised that:
- good data provision is being supplied through MIDAS, Traffic Master, ITIS and the National Traffic Control Centre cameras but technical collection of data might be improved;
- a focus on reliability would be broadly welcomed though motorists would also be interested in average journey times, particularly if congestion was to rise substantially over the next few years. Motorists would also be concerned about their own journey experience rather than a distant national aggregate figure;
- any further development of targets over time would need careful management to avoid confusing users; and
- DfT should not focus too tightly on the strategic network. It was important to make sure that the whole journey time was kept in view - on the local and national roads - not just the element on the strategic road network.
This is an important piece of work that DfT are currently carrying out, with the potential to provide real, useful information to road users who need to arrive for a specific appointment or delivery. We look forward to working with DfT on this project as their work advances.
Motorway Service Areas (MSAs)
A review into roadside trading (including MSAs) is currently taking place with a view to full public consultation taking place later in the year.
MSAs are designed to ensure that all motorway users have regular opportunities to rest during their journey and to obtain essential services such as fuel, lavatories, food and drink. Current minimum conditions imposed on MSA providers include remaining open 24 hours a day, every day of the year, the provision of hot and cold drinks at all times, free lavatories and free parking for two hours. Key restrictions include the sale or consumption of alcohol and not allowing the site to be used for purposes unconnected with the use of the motorway (ie the MSA must not become a destination in its own right).
We agree that the time is right for the current regulatory framework covering the operation of MSAs to be reviewed to ensure that this legislation allows MSAs to meet modern consumers' demands and that MSAs themselves can contribute to improved safety and quality of motoring on the UK's motorways. We have stressed, however, that any review should be focused on the needs of motorists rather than the commercial wishes of the MSA operators and that the focus should be on what would make it more likely that motorists would stop at an MSA to take a break to avoid driving tired.
In offering our support for a review, we have drawn attention to a number of issues that will need careful consideration. This particularly includes allowing alcohol sales at lodges within the MSA boundary. While accepting that there are arguments for reviewing this issue, we do feel that any such move is likely to be highly contentious.
We have also emphasised that increased signing of services on the motorway should not lead to a proliferation of 'American style' signs on motorways. In addition, we have pointed out that larger retailing areas at MSAs could have an adverse effect on traditional high street shopping areas and generate increased traffic. We have also highlighted the imbalance that already exists between spaces provided for retail units and other facilities such as children's play areas, together with the poor facilities provided for disabled people at some MSAs.
One issue that we do hope will be considered carefully in the review is the role that some MSAs could play in providing a Park-and-Ride facility to nearby cities. Although we appreciate that there are potential difficulties with the proposal in terms of parking capacity at the sites and ease of access from the site to the town centre, the possibility of providing an alternative to drivers to leave their cars behind for the last and most congested part of their journey is one that is worth pursuing.
Highways Agency (HA) - Plans for the Next Year
We have held a number of discussions with the HA over their proposals to deliver safer, more reliable journeys for road users on motorways and trunk roads.
We believe the HA is taking very positive steps to tackle congestion on inter urban-roads by managing traffic better and providing better information to road users. We particularly support the increase in Variable Message Signs that are being installed on the network to pass on the information from the National Traffic Control Centre although we have stressed to the Agency that any such messages need to be clear, and above all, accurate.
We remain concerned about the time that can arise between an incident occurring and a road reopening. Many of these serious incidents are in the control of the police, and not the HA, but we have asked the HA to look specifically at the role of a local fire officer in connection with incidents involving vehicles carrying hazardous cargos.
We hope the HA's Regional Control Centres, its new Traffic Officers and enhanced Incident Support Units will all work together to reduce the disruption caused by major incidents.
Car Parking at Stations
The Forum has responded to a Value for Money Study the National Audit Office has conducted into improving Britain's railway stations.
In our response, we highlighted that insufficient parking provision at many railway stations is a major issue for those who wish to park at stations and continue their journeys by train. Left unchecked, this is a deterrent to the development of a fully integrated transport strategy. We suggested, therefore, that ease of interchange for car-users with rail and bus services should be a priority.
Fees for DVLA Services
DVLA consulted last year on four options for modifying their fee structures.
The Forum has suggested that any efficiency savings resulting from improved electronic systems should be reflected in the proposed charges.
Chapter 3: Raising Issues of Concerns to Motorists
Traffic Policing
The Forum has continued to stress to Government that police presence on the roads is essential in detecting and dealing effectively with a wide range of behaviour that contributes to accidents and road casualties - for example dangerous driving, drink driving and driving while under the influence of drugs. Roads policing not only helps reduce deaths and injuries on the roads, it also reduces anti-social and criminal misuse of vehicles and provides a reassuring presence to the public.
We therefore welcomed the new strategy for policing the roads that was announced in January by DfT, the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers.
The joint strategy identified the following policing priorities:
- denying criminals use of the roads by enforcing the law.
- reducing road casualties.
- tackling the threat of terrorism.
- reducing anti-social use of the roads.
- enhancing public confidence and reassurance by patrolling the roads.
The strategy commits the Police to deal with all forms of illegal and anti-social use of the roads, including drink driving, speeding, dangerous or careless driving and behaviour which is threatening to road users - including pedestrians as well as drivers. The strategy aims to tackle these through:
- a highly visible police presence on the roads.
- continued operation of the National Safety Camera Programme for cutting casualties and deaths at collision blackspots.
- a national police Drink and Drug Driving Campaign.
- a national police Seat Belt Campaign to increase the level of seat belt wearing, especially in the rear seats and by children.
The Forum will watch carefully to see how the commitments contained in the strategy are implemented and taken forward.
Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR)
ANPR cameras can tell police officers within seconds whether a vehicle has been stolen, is known to be involved in a crime or is untaxed. Cameras scan and record the vehicle registration marks of every passing car. The numbers are then cross-checked against a number of databases, including the Police National Computer, the DVLA databases and police intelligence records, both locally and regionally, to identify vehicles of interest to officers. If a registration plate is flagged up on a database, the ANPR operator can then call for officers to intercept the vehicle and question the driver.
The system has proved remarkably effective in trials. Officers using ANPR make nine times the number of arrests and contribute to three times the number of offenders brought to justice compared with a conventional officer.
Given the success of the ANPR system, we have suggested to Government that they should consider the possibility of subsidising the costs incurred by police authorities in using ANPR technology from the surpluses accrued by the safety camera partnerships.
Affordable Insurance for Young Drivers
The Forum has consistently supported action being taken against those who drive uninsured. However, we have also expressed concern at the difficulties that young people face in getting affordable insurance.
High insurance costs can tempt some young people to drive uninsured. Once outside the law, these drivers can also be tempted to drive unlicensed or untaxed. In other words, the affordability of insurance is effectively leading to a section of the motoring public stepping right outside the motoring laws of this country.
We do, of course, appreciate that the current high premiums young drivers face are a result of the greater risk that this group run in being involved in accidents. Nor are we suggesting that insurance companies should be forced to offer policies that run a substantial risk of being unprofitable. However, given the new enforcement regime that is likely to be introduced in the near future, we consider that the industry now has a real incentive to consider ways of making insurance more affordable to young drivers.
In this respect, we have suggested that insurance companies should develop innovative products to make insurance affordable to young drivers. Could, for example, companies offer more generous discounts to young drivers who participate in extra driver training? Could 'pay as you drive' schemes offer any potential in reducing premiums for young drivers? Could there be a form of 'curfew' placed on insurance eligibility (meaning that those who agreed not to drive after, say, 10.00pm at night, might be offered cheaper premiums)?
The Association of British Insurers is looking at this issue. We are keen to work with this organisation once the results of their research are known to see whether more affordable insurance schemes for young people can be provided.
Government Grants for Cleaner Vehicles
There are a number of Government grants available designed to incentivise the purchase of clean vehicles or the purchase of low emission exhaust systems. These include PowerShift and CleanUp grants.
Following problems with over-subscription, and a subsequent consultation on their effectiveness, the programmes have been revised and are in suspension pending receipt of EU State Aid clearance.
We are concerned about the uncertainty caused by the changes to these grant schemes, and the delay in launching new programmes. We believe that if there is to be a grant scheme, it needs to be clear, consistent and stable over a reasonable period in order to have the desired effect of influencing the vehicle choices of motorists.
Nuisance Vehicles
Over 300,000 vehicles are abandoned nationwide every year, acting as a magnet for crime, anti-social behaviour and arson. A further one million are uninsured and untaxed for more than three months and with no current keeper are likely to be abandoned in the future.
Investigating and removing nuisance vehicles currently costs local authorities across the country £26 million annually. Vehicle arson costs £230 million a year to clean up. Failure to tax vehicles adds up to a £93 million bill in lost revenue. Unlicensed and uninsured drivers are estimated to add £30 to every motor insurance policy.
We are, therefore, pleased to see the introduction of a new national strategy designed to ensure local authorities have the power they need to be able to remove nuisance vehicles immediately to a place of safety.
Chapter 4: Work in Progress
Road Safety
The Forum is currently conducting a major review into road safety. A Working Group is taking forward proposals to provide DfT with some fresh thinking about how to make progress on reducing excessive and inappropriate speed. It is also looking to highlight actions which Forum members themselves can take to contribute to and advance the identified suggestions.
The Group's Terms of Reference are to:
- consider the effectiveness of existing measures - covering driver training, driver information, awareness and education and enforcement - aimed at reducing speed-related collisions and casualties;
- advise on how driver and public awareness can be raised, so that drivers appreciate the impact of their actions and attitudes to others, and the benefits of safer speed behaviour to themselves and others;
- advise on how existing and new measures can be persuasive, positive and attractive, for maximum benefit;
- suggest possible further measures;
- consider how members of the Motorists' Forum might advance the objectives of reducing speed-related collisions and casualties; and
- identify actions which Motorists' Forum organisations and industries can take, to contribute to and advance the identified changes.
The Group's report will be published later in the year.
Annex A: Terms of Reference
Working within the framework of the Integrated Transport White Paper and of Government's sustainable development strategy, and recognising that for the foreseeable future the car will be the dominant mode of personal transport in the UK, the Motorists' Forum will:
- seek to establish a consensus of motorists and the motor industry with the Government in regard to the role of the car in our society;
- co-ordinate and represent to Government the voice of the responsible private and business car user;
- seek to ensure that the use of the car continues to develop in a manner which takes account of concerns for the environment, safety, and social inclusion;
- advise on how far the car fits into the integrated transport strategy and how the integration process can be further developed to offer motorists realistic alternatives to the car;
- advise on the development of policy issues by Government and its agencies, and by local government, relating to transport or affecting the motorist, so that they relate to motorists in an understanding way;
- advise the Government in regard to new technology which can be used inside and outside the car to help achieve these goals; and
- advise CfIT on issues affecting the motorist.
Annex B: Other Positions Held by Members' Relevant to the Work of the Forum
Sir Trevor Chinn CVO
Chairman: Automobile Association; Kwik-Fit Group Ltd; ITIS Holdings plc
Vice-Chairman: The AA Motoring Trust
Directorships: Automotive Skills Ltd
Governor: Motability
Councillor Tony Brown
Member: London Borough of Ealing
Board Member: Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership
Advisor: Ealing Community Transport
Douglas Campbell OBE
Directorships: Douglas Campbell Consulting Ltd; Mobility Roadshow Ltd; Baywatch Campaign Ltd
Trustee: Mobility Choice; Employers' Network On Disability For Milton Keynes
David Holmes CB
Steering Group Member: Road Charging Feasibility Study Steering Group
Trustee: Motorway Archive Trust
Martin Joseph
Chairman: Cleaner Transport Forum
John Lewis
Member: Cars QA Governing Board; Vehicle Industry Policy and European Regulation Group (VIPER); Retail Motor Strategy Group; Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership (Passenger Car and Commercial Vehicle Groups); Automotive Skills Ltd
Christopher Macgowan
Directorships: Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) Ltd; Odette International Ltd
Member: Vehicle Crime Reduction Action Team (VCRAT); CBI Trade Association Forum; Vehicle Industry Policy and European Regulation Group Policy and European Regulation Group (VIPER); Retail Motor Strategy Group; Automotive Academy
Simon Machell
Directorships: Solus
Chairman: Motor Insurers' Bureau
Bert Morris
Directorships: EuroRAP AISBL (Registered in Belgium)
Chairman: AA Motoring Trust Trading Ltd
Member: Vehicle Crime Reduction Action Team (VCRAT); DTI Retail Motor Strategy Group; CBI Transport Policy Committee
John Mumford
Directorships: Cogent Sector Skills Council; Energy Saving Trust Ltd; United Kingdom Petroleum Industry Association Ltd; Energy Institute; University Vocational Awards Council; Alexander Duckham & Company Ltd; BP Oil Llandarcy Refinery Ltd; BP Oil UK Ltd; BP Lubricants UK Ltd; BP LPG UK Ltd; Shell-Mex and BP Ltd; BP D'Arcy Ltd
Steering Group Member: Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership
Member of Advisory Councils: National Consumer Council; Foundation Degree Forward
Tim Parker
Directorships: The AA Motoring Trust
Deputy Chairman: Kwik-Fit Group Ltd
Roger Putnam
Directorships: Jaguar Switzerland; Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) Ltd; Gateway to London; Automotive Skills Ltd; Air Music and Media plc
Chairman: Ford of Britain Trust; Halcyon Days Ltd
Board Member: Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership; DTI Motorsports Board
Member: CBI President's Committee; Motor Retail Strategy Group
Michael Roberts
Non-Executive Director: The Carbon Trust
Member: Commission for Integrated Transport
Steering Group Member: Road Charging Feasibility Study Steering Group
Archie Robertson OBE
Chair: National Road Users Committee; National Environment Committee;
Member: Commission for Integrated Transport; Department for Transport Board
