Stakeholder Interview Findings Roles and leadership
2.1.1 The DfT is perceived by central government departments and agencies as the lead agency for road safety. The Road Safety Standards and Services Directorate within the DfT takes the lead on road safety policy and co-ordination of road safety strategy. Many other Directorates within the DfT and other government departments and agencies have specific lead responsibilities for the carrying out of road safety intervention, e.g. Highways England for the strategic road network. It was acknowledged that achieving an effective structure between departments, divisions and agencies is hard, but that differing roles within these are fairly well defined, and overall work reasonably well together.
Results and Prioritisation
2.1.2 It was noted that UK KSI figures are still strong compared to many other countries, and that the reduction in KSIs is levelling off globally. But, at the same time, there was concern that KSIs are now beginning to creep up and that the UK road safety performance record is slipping behind that of Norway, Sweden and Switzerland.
2.1.3 Some central government and agency stakeholders share the view that whilst ‘user experience’ on the roads is currently a key issue, road safety is not given adequate priority, and this is exemplified by the fact that there is currently no manifesto commitment on improving road safety. The previous manifesto commitment on improving road safety was considered very helpful for road safety engagement and implementation, and securing funding in the Autumn Statement.
2.1.4 There is a general perception that there is currently a lack of shared goals and objectives between divisions and agencies, and a reduction in results focus and systematic prioritisation of measures to reduce the overall level of KSIs at lead agency level compared to previous years. Instead it is considered that there is more focus on all outcomes from road collisions, and that priorities are more transient.
2.1.5 Areas perceived by some to be the current focus include young drivers, older drivers, rural roads, automated vehicles and emissions. Areas perceived to currently be less prioritised than they used to be are vehicle safety (with discussions around which EU GSR/PSR measures would be acceptable or appropriate for the UK only beginning to take place now), motorcycle safety, pedestrian safety and child safety, and many felt that these areas should still be higher priority that they are at.
2.1.6 Some agencies consider that the apparent lack of prioritisation of road safety at the lead agency level has gone hand in hand with a lessening priority of road safety at a local authority level, including activity in policing and emergency services.
Many stakeholders considered that it is necessary for the DfT to have a more strategic focus on activities which will have the biggest impact.
10/ 188 Appendix B – Stakeholder Engagement Target setting
2.1.8 There is widespread awareness that whilst target setting is widespread in many public policy areas (including a reduction in the rate of cycling KSIs in the Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy; and 11 road safety KPIs in the Highways England 2015-2020 Road Investments Strategy including targets for reduction of KSIs on the strategic road network), there are no longer road safety targets for KSIs set by the DfT.
2.1.9 Many stakeholders suggested that the lack of targets leads to a lack of road safety priority, funding, proactive activity and targets in other agencies such as policing, the fire service, DVSA, local authorities and health. Other consequences noted were:
A reduction in focus on road safety outcomes by Ministers;
It encourages activity over too wide an area, rather than concentrating on a welfare based analysis of where action most needed; and
Lack of road safety in the Home Office policing strategy. 2.1.10 However, in defence of the lack of targets it was noted that:
The British Road Safety Statement is considered in central government as the main driver of delivery, and has intermediate commitments that success can be measured by, with examples including: legislation to allow learners on motorways in dual control cars, with an ADI, the increase in mobile phone penalty points, and the Safer Roads Fund;
Government is publicly held to account for road safety results through stakeholder, media and political pressure; and
Work needs to take place to see where the biggest difference can be made without targets.
2.1.11 In addition to lack of target setting by the lead agency there is also a perception that road safety is inward looking with little attention paid to international goals and targets such as the Global Sustainable Development Goal targets and EU targets.
Safe System
2.1.12 Those more informed about the British Road Safety Statement are familiar with the Safe System approach and consider that embracing it in work streams is encouraged at a higher level. However, it is widely acknowledged that in these early days of implementation, there are gaps in understanding, and awareness and change in approach at all levels is slow, both in central government and at local authority level.
2.1.13 Some bodies were cited as better at adopting Safe System, including Highways England. Local authorities were cited as adopting the Safe System approach less well. It was considered that the bigger budgets and bigger network of Highways England made adoption of this approach easier. It was also suggested that the Safe System approach could be better promoted to local authorities by both DfT and Highways England, with more indication of the most effective activities to support it.
2.1.14 Concern was expressed by one stakeholder that adopting Safe System means the focus is on KSIs rather than reducing injuries of all severities, and equally that whilst Towards Zero is considered positively, Vision Zero seems defeatist.
2.1.15 The Safer Roads Fund was mentioned by two stakeholders as being important in developing and embedding Safe System capacity and understanding. It has highlighted
11/ 188 Appendix B – Stakeholder Engagement
perception and approach in activity in some local authorities. Stakeholders hope that successful approaches can be rolled out.