Whilst we love the alleged objective,the recent Road Safety Foundation report commissioned for the RAC Foundation, creating a cost effective justification for road investment is not rocket science. Just see our story on this from two months ago: Third World roads for good!
But is this more about a riposte to the cost of the Road Safety Industry and the over slowing of transport infrastructure, which happens to be about £30 billion per year too, that we have been advancing to politicians over the last couple of years? It seems like one hell of a coincidence! (That road safety £30 billion per year is only the starters by the way).
But regular readers, by now, will know that we tend to look at the basic premise of reports because if the premise is wrong, no matter how glamorous the report, the whole report becomes pointless too.
It readily accepts the DfT figures on accident costs - which is in reality pure speculation and guesswork- to create a basic premise and rapidly moves on. Surely this is not good enough.
Then their professor, Stephen Glaister CBE, there is more death from accident in the home than from any cause on the road after 300billion driver miles a year, many more from NHS failings, from smoking and so on. See our comments on this here. http://bit.ly/e9KCQi
There is only a 175,000,000 to 1 chance of dying on the UK roads at any given time.
So we must attack the exaggeration and the guesswork of this report and its premise. Why? Because to faithfully accept these figures is to justify the massively expensive Road Safety Industry which feeds from figures like these and dare we suggest the RACF and the RSF too?
Again we ask: 'Why all these Ltd Company Charities and foundations? Why the CBE's and OBE's in this very lucrative industry? Are they all really necessary from the public purse?
Follow the money folks.