30 August 2001 Edition
Road deaths must be tackled in schools
An Phoblacht's MICHAEL PIERSE praises recent efforts to heighten awareness about the dangers on the roads, but as this year's death toll rises, with young people the most likely to die, he argues that organised driving instruction and road awareness training is needed in post-primary schools
With the seasonal spate of road deaths that the holiday exodus and associated heavy consumption of alcohol generally entails, there has been renewed focus in recent weeks on one of Ireland's most common and horrific killers.
Every year we see the scrunched-up remains of crashed cars and hear of the ill-fated final hours of their occupants: a teenager who sped home with the news of dazzling Leaving Cert results; a young man after a Saturday night's drinking who decided that taking the risk was favourable to walking five miles home; someone who died because they forgot to wear their seat belt; pedestrians mown down on dark country roads. The most common fatality profile is young, rural and male.
There has been more than one death per day on the roads in Ireland this year. According to statistics published by the 26-County Roads Authority, almost one quarter of all road fatalities are in the 18-24 age group, and three quarters of all fatalities are male. Young people in the border counties are seven to eight times more likely to be killed on the roads than their counterparts in Dublin.
However, recent 26-County statistics suggest that there are some, consistent, glimmerings of hope. 1997 saw a highpoint in road deaths - approaching the 500 figure - after which the Dublin government pledged to take action. To be fair, they did. In a three-year period (2000 statistics are the most recent figures available) a 12 per cent reduction has been achieved in road deaths, while serious injuries have gone down by 15 per cent. The 26-County government road strategy, which is implemented by the National Safety Council (NSC), seems on course for its stated target of a 20 per cent reduction in fatalities by the end of 2002.
The multi-faceted approach pursued by the NSC is obviously impacting in a major way, with the central tenets of publicity, education and legal measures at its heart, although the strategy may need some expansion in coming years.
The propaganda element of the NSA's campaign (in conjunction with the Six-County Department of the Environment) has been central to its success. The graphic and violent nature of TV adverts such as `Damage' and `Shame' has not only been breathtaking but is demonstrably effective.
According to an IMS survey, seven out of every ten young Irish adults say they are more concerned about wearing a seat belt after seeing `Damage', the latest seat belt ad showing on both sides of the border.
The highly-impacting advert depicts a young, carefree, couple heading out in their friends' car. They sit in the back seat. When the car crashes, the young man's failure to wear a seat belt results in his head colliding with that of his girfriend, killing her on impact. As with other, similar adverts, `Damage' is styled to portray an everyday situation that ends, very brutally, in tragedy.
Initial surveys carried out in the Six Counties have revealed that nine out of every ten respondents between the ages of 16 and 35 admit to being ``influenced a lot'' by the advert. Eight out of ten said that they talked about the ad with their friends and family, while six out of ten had encouraged someone they knew to wear a seat belt as a result of seeing it.
Surveys conducted in the Six Counties by Ulster Marketing Surveys and in the 26 Counties by IMS have revealed that the advert `Shame' has also left a considerable dint on the Irish psyche.
`Shame' flashes between a series of interlinked scenes, depicting a typical Saturday afternoon's activities for both a young man and a young boy. Returning home, overjoyed after a successful match, the young man goes for a quick pint with his friends, then loses control of his car, which flips sideways into a garden. The child is crushed beneath it. The camera focuses in on the young man. ``Could you live with the shame?'' a voice asks.
Following the advert's showing on both sides of the border, it was revealed that six out of ten Irish respondents now believe that if you drink any alcohol at all it will affect your driving. This is an increase of 13 per cent on the figure taken before the ad was shown.
Such initiatives are not only cost effective in terms of saving life and limb - their economic benefit, if it is not too cynical to note, is staggering. It is estimated that for every £1 spent on road safety, the accumulated savings in terms of insurance, garda investigations, road maintenance etc, is as high as eight times that amount. According to the 1999 yearly review of road safety in the 26 Counties, carried out by the NSA: ``Implementation of the (26-County Road Safety) Strategy will give rise to very significant net economic benefits; over the period of implementation, 1998-2002, the benefit cost ratio is estimated at 4.5:1, rising to an annual cost ratio of 8.3:1 post-2002.''
Of particular concern is the much higher likelihood of road fatalities among young people, particularly males, in rural areas. Why such an inordinate amount of these deaths occurs in the border area may be revealed in the area's socio-economic profile. Unlike Dublin and much of the East and Southeast region, jobs are scarce in the border area and poverty is much more pervasive. Coupled with the sparsity of population and an inadequate public transport system, young people are more likely to be involved in reckless driving. Why?
First, there is the difference in what a car represents to a young rural male. It is a symbol of affluence and freedom, heralding the beginning of adulthood, the opportunity to escape from boredom and travel further afield. As is the case with drink or drugs, young people, when not fully educated or aware of the dangers posed by some new experience, will often test their limits to devastating effect. Personal transport is often liberating in rural areas, but young men, eager to show off and with little other option in terms of transport home after a night out, will take chances. They have the opportunity to drive, with God knows what previous instruction, and a six-month waiting period, minimum, before they can get a driving test. What results is carnage.
While snazzy TV ads are effective, nothing can substitute actual, hands-on experience, such as is available to high school students in the US. `Drivers' Education' - which comprises instruction and, most vitally, awareness raising in terms of the dangers involved in driving - is a standard element in the formal education system in the United States. It educates young people on the effects different levels of alcohol and drugs have on their judgement, the effects of weather conditions on their driving, and affords them the opportunity to get some practical experience of handling a car.
As Drivers' Education is a prerequisite to every application for a driving license, the net effect is to ensure that drivers are better trained and more aware before they take their potentially lethal vehicles onto the roads.
While efforts to combat drink-driving here have worked and other elements of the current government strategy have been effective, the US experience points to one, gaping shortfall in the Irish experience.
It is essential, as part of any cogent strategy on road deaths, that the gap between driving novice and driving disaster be bridged.
With the seasonal spate of road deaths that the holiday exodus and associated heavy consumption of alcohol generally entails, there has been renewed focus in recent weeks on one of Ireland's most common and horrific killers.
Every year we see the scrunched-up remains of crashed cars and hear of the ill-fated final hours of their occupants: a teenager who sped home with the news of dazzling Leaving Cert results; a young man after a Saturday night's drinking who decided that taking the risk was favourable to walking five miles home; someone who died because they forgot to wear their seat belt; pedestrians mown down on dark country roads. The most common fatality profile is young, rural and male.
There has been more than one death per day on the roads in Ireland this year. According to statistics published by the 26-County Roads Authority, almost one quarter of all road fatalities are in the 18-24 age group, and three quarters of all fatalities are male. Young people in the border counties are seven to eight times more likely to be killed on the roads than their counterparts in Dublin.
However, recent 26-County statistics suggest that there are some, consistent, glimmerings of hope. 1997 saw a highpoint in road deaths - approaching the 500 figure - after which the Dublin government pledged to take action. To be fair, they did. In a three-year period (2000 statistics are the most recent figures available) a 12 per cent reduction has been achieved in road deaths, while serious injuries have gone down by 15 per cent. The 26-County government road strategy, which is implemented by the National Safety Council (NSC), seems on course for its stated target of a 20 per cent reduction in fatalities by the end of 2002.
The multi-faceted approach pursued by the NSC is obviously impacting in a major way, with the central tenets of publicity, education and legal measures at its heart, although the strategy may need some expansion in coming years.
The propaganda element of the NSA's campaign (in conjunction with the Six-County Department of the Environment) has been central to its success. The graphic and violent nature of TV adverts such as `Damage' and `Shame' has not only been breathtaking but is demonstrably effective.
According to an IMS survey, seven out of every ten young Irish adults say they are more concerned about wearing a seat belt after seeing `Damage', the latest seat belt ad showing on both sides of the border.
The highly-impacting advert depicts a young, carefree, couple heading out in their friends' car. They sit in the back seat. When the car crashes, the young man's failure to wear a seat belt results in his head colliding with that of his girfriend, killing her on impact. As with other, similar adverts, `Damage' is styled to portray an everyday situation that ends, very brutally, in tragedy.
Initial surveys carried out in the Six Counties have revealed that nine out of every ten respondents between the ages of 16 and 35 admit to being ``influenced a lot'' by the advert. Eight out of ten said that they talked about the ad with their friends and family, while six out of ten had encouraged someone they knew to wear a seat belt as a result of seeing it.
Surveys conducted in the Six Counties by Ulster Marketing Surveys and in the 26 Counties by IMS have revealed that the advert `Shame' has also left a considerable dint on the Irish psyche.
`Shame' flashes between a series of interlinked scenes, depicting a typical Saturday afternoon's activities for both a young man and a young boy. Returning home, overjoyed after a successful match, the young man goes for a quick pint with his friends, then loses control of his car, which flips sideways into a garden. The child is crushed beneath it. The camera focuses in on the young man. ``Could you live with the shame?'' a voice asks.
Following the advert's showing on both sides of the border, it was revealed that six out of ten Irish respondents now believe that if you drink any alcohol at all it will affect your driving. This is an increase of 13 per cent on the figure taken before the ad was shown.
Such initiatives are not only cost effective in terms of saving life and limb - their economic benefit, if it is not too cynical to note, is staggering. It is estimated that for every £1 spent on road safety, the accumulated savings in terms of insurance, garda investigations, road maintenance etc, is as high as eight times that amount. According to the 1999 yearly review of road safety in the 26 Counties, carried out by the NSA: ``Implementation of the (26-County Road Safety) Strategy will give rise to very significant net economic benefits; over the period of implementation, 1998-2002, the benefit cost ratio is estimated at 4.5:1, rising to an annual cost ratio of 8.3:1 post-2002.''
Of particular concern is the much higher likelihood of road fatalities among young people, particularly males, in rural areas. Why such an inordinate amount of these deaths occurs in the border area may be revealed in the area's socio-economic profile. Unlike Dublin and much of the East and Southeast region, jobs are scarce in the border area and poverty is much more pervasive. Coupled with the sparsity of population and an inadequate public transport system, young people are more likely to be involved in reckless driving. Why?
First, there is the difference in what a car represents to a young rural male. It is a symbol of affluence and freedom, heralding the beginning of adulthood, the opportunity to escape from boredom and travel further afield. As is the case with drink or drugs, young people, when not fully educated or aware of the dangers posed by some new experience, will often test their limits to devastating effect. Personal transport is often liberating in rural areas, but young men, eager to show off and with little other option in terms of transport home after a night out, will take chances. They have the opportunity to drive, with God knows what previous instruction, and a six-month waiting period, minimum, before they can get a driving test. What results is carnage.
While snazzy TV ads are effective, nothing can substitute actual, hands-on experience, such as is available to high school students in the US. `Drivers' Education' - which comprises instruction and, most vitally, awareness raising in terms of the dangers involved in driving - is a standard element in the formal education system in the United States. It educates young people on the effects different levels of alcohol and drugs have on their judgement, the effects of weather conditions on their driving, and affords them the opportunity to get some practical experience of handling a car.
As Drivers' Education is a prerequisite to every application for a driving license, the net effect is to ensure that drivers are better trained and more aware before they take their potentially lethal vehicles onto the roads.
While efforts to combat drink-driving here have worked and other elements of the current government strategy have been effective, the US experience points to one, gaping shortfall in the Irish experience.
It is essential, as part of any cogent strategy on road deaths, that the gap between driving novice and driving disaster be bridged.