Better Driving: "Respect on the Road"
Chapter 3: Are Driving Standards Better or Worse Than They Were?
3.1 It is often said that driving standards are worse than they were. But was there ever a golden age, when drivers were habitually courteous and considerate? It seems very doubtful that there was. Lord Montague, writing in The Art of Driving a Motor Car first published in 1906, obviously felt that there was a need to encourage better behaviour on the road. In a chapter entitled Road Maxims and Manners he said "a motorist cannot go far wrong if he drives like a gentleman; in other words with consideration for all".
All Crime - British Crime Survey Data
3.2 The British Crime Survey shows that total crime peaked in 1995, and has since fallen by 44%. Nevertheless, a public perception remains that behaviour generally in society has got worse. The evidence on whether standards of driving have fallen or not is equivocal. There are certainly fewer deaths than there were forty years ago. Despite a threefold increase in the number of cars, deaths on the road have more than halved since 1966. Of course, cars are much safer and there are better roads. But driver behaviour can be expected to have played a part.
3.3 In considering driving standards it is important to distinguish between the ability to drive and control a car correctly and safely and having the right attitudes (including being calm and patient; being alert and looking out; and being considerate). Learner drivers now possess good control skills at the time of passing their driving test. And it appears that it is now harder to get a driving licence than it was: the pass rate has fallen from about 52% in 1990/91 to just under 43% in 2003/04.
3.4 On the other hand, TRL Report 643[9]: Monitoring Progress Towards the 2010 Casualty Reduction Target suggested from an analysis of car accident data that declining driving standards may have contributed to the increased severity of injuries to car occupants. Analyses of the new contributory factor data (see paragraph 2.14) have confirmed the high incidence of loss of control and excessive speed in fatal and serious car accidents that had previously been identified.
3.5 It can be argued that the increasing proportion of car occupants who were killed or seriously injured when their cars overturned points to a decline in driving standards (although changes to the car fleet such as the increasing proportion of 4x4s and people carriers may have contributed to this trend). However, care obviously needs to be exercised with this conclusion.
3.6 Not wearing a seat belt is not only foolish; it is against the law. Thames Valley Police data suggests that 30.6% of drivers, 30.2% of front seat passengers and 57% of rear seat passengers who were killed over a three year period were not wearing seat belts. Of these, the Police estimated that 60% would have survived had they been wearing their belts.
3.7 Estimates for 2005 suggest that 6% of all road casualties and 17% of road deaths occurred when someone was driving over the legal limit for alcohol. In the 1980s and early 1990s, the number of people killed or seriously injured in drink-drive accidents in Great Britain fell from over 9,000 to fewer than 3,000. During the past ten years, however, there has been no clear trend in the number killed or seriously injured, though the number has fluctuated from year to year. Provisional estimates for 2005 indicate a fall of 9 per cent from the previous year. The number of people killed in drink-drive accidents fell to a low of 460 deaths in 1998, but has since risen to an estimated 560 deaths in 2005. The numbers of slight injuries in drink drive accidents have been showing a broadly rising trend since 1993 but have fallen since 2002 and provisional figures for 2005 suggest a fall of 9 per cent from 2004.
Screening Breath Tests by Outcome
3.8 From our necessarily brief review of the statistics, we see no clear indication whether driving standards are falling or not. It may well be that there is no general answer to the question whether standards are falling both because there is no precision about what the question means and there are no data that bear directly on it. A more useful question is whether specific sorts of behaviour - such as driving too close behind the vehicle in front - are becoming more or less common. No data are collected about that, but it would be possible to do so. The collection of such data is important if we are trying to measure the effect of remedial measures, publicity etc on the behaviour of drivers.
3.9 Though the evidence is ambiguous, the general view of motorists seems to be that driving standards are falling. A recent survey in What Car magazine reported that 79% of drivers believed driving standards had fallen, as opposed to just 9% who thought they had risen. (Interestingly, the poll revealed that almost half of those who took part believed that they were good drivers, with 47% thinking that their driving had improved over the past 12 months!).
3.10 We suggest that more work should be done to establish facts about, and trends in, driver behaviour. What has been done so far, and is being done now, is largely survey work and small-scale studies which are useful and important in themselves but do not provide a solid enough basis for the kind of action needed. Some possible ways in which the collection of data might be tackled include:
We are aware that there could be privacy implications for this last proposal and suggest that such concerns should be considered as part of a national debate about what is acceptable in a monitoring context. |
3.11 Another way of getting insight into driver behaviour is suggested by the US 100 car study. This work, which was carried out by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, aimed to find out how drivers actually behave behind the wheel when they think that no-one is watching them.
3.12 The study has provided excellent data on naturalistic driver behaviour, and reveals that nearly 80 per cent of crashes and 65 per cent of near-crashes involve some form of driver inattention within three seconds before the event. Primary causes of driver inattention are distracting activities, such as cell phone use, and drowsiness. US researchers have described the huge database developed through this study as 'enormously valuable in helping us to understand and prevent motor vehicle crashes'. The American results will not be directly applicable in the UK; but the DfT might like to consider carrying out a similar study here. It would be expensive, but only a small reduction in the number and cost of crashes would make it worthwhile.
9: TRL Report 643: Monitoring Progress Towards the 2010 Casualty Reduction Target.