Proceeding contribution from David Drew (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 9 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Road Safety Bill (HL).
Road Safety Bill [Lords]
If only we had that power. I will stick to the retro-reflective tape, if the hon. Gentleman does not mind. I wish to address other canards. It is argued that the measure would be too costly. All the research—including the Government’s research done by Loughborough university, for which I am grateful, because I have been pursuing the issue for more than two years—suggests that this is not a cost issue. The addition of £100 will not break the bank for those buying new vehicles worth £100,000. I would like to go much further; we could do more retrospective work. Another canard is that such changes will make very little difference, but the evidence shows that although accident rates are declining, the rate of accidents involving heavy goods vehicles has increased by 8 per cent. There is also evidence that the greatest threat is at night. Many heavy goods vehicles are well lit, but not all, and the minimum we expect is that British HGVs have the tape fitted to make them clearly visible and further to decrease the number of road traffic accidents. I do not understand why the Government are so reluctant to accept that point. As Lord Berkeley said in the other place, this issue is a ““no-brainer””. It is a straightforward minor measure, but the Government have got very steamed up about it. The final canard is that the pressure to adopt the measure comes from those who manufacture the tape. I have worked with lobbyists on the issue, but if it saves people’s lives it is appropriate for the industry to promote it. Many companies have already installed the tape, and drivers and cyclists—as I am—know that it can be seen clearly at night. That gives cyclists especially a chance to get out of the way. Too many accidents are caused because people simply do not see the poorly lit vehicles that do not have the appropriate reflective tape. This is a minor road safety measure that could make a difference and I plead with the Government to accept it. Everyone seems to want it and I suspect that opposition to it comes from within the road transport lobby, although I do not know. That lobby is split on the issue, and given that people’s lives are at risk, we should be prepared to make our case. Otherwise, we will be surrendering to the basest instincts and I am not prepared to do so.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 450 c93-4
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Contracts Appeals Death Bridges Breathalysers Buses Licensing Fixed penalties Disqualification EU law Drugs Exemptions Injuries Insurance Level crossings Driving under influence Large goods vehicles Foreign nationals Driving instruction Misuse Motorcycles Taxis Registration Safety Safety measures Roads Testing Speed limits Road traffic offences Traffic lights Level crossing orders
- Legislation
- Road Safety Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 11:46:22 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_350212
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_350212
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_350212