| You are in: UK | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]()
| Wednesday, 24 November, 1999, 09:58 GMT Government criticised on road safety
The government has suffered fresh attacks on its transport policy - after reports that local councils have gone begging to businesses to help children cross the road. Camden School for Girls in north London was told by its local council it could not afford a pelican crossing on a busy red route. The crossing was only built when Tesco and Esso, who have outlets nearby, put up �17,500 of the �44,000 cost.
But Lyn Sloman, of the pressure group Transport 2000, said: "This is pathetic. "Imagine if they made safety investment decisions on the railways on the basis of business sponsorship - yet roads are much more dangerous than trains. "Up and down the country there are local groups trying to get improvements to make roads safer, but the government money isn't there." Lord Whitty's statement came after claims that government economists value lives lost in rail crashes at �3m, but only �1m for road crashes. The sums - central to setting budget priorities - reflect the cost to the economy of the accident services, the loss to the economy of the person's labour, and the grief caused to relatives. The economists estimate in 1997 the total value of prevention of all road accidents was �14.8bn. Yet spending by councils on safety improvements in that year totalled just �60m.
But road safety campaigners say minor road schemes like speed cameras bring far better value for money in saving life. An estimated 3,500 people die on Britain's roads every year - many times more than the number killed in train crashes. Brigitte Chary from Roadpeace, a road victims' charity she set up after her own son was killed in a road accident, said: "The comparison between the government's attitudes to road safety and train safety is an outrage.
"But road victims get ignored, and the government is completely complacent about this." The headteacher of Camden School for Girls said he was concerned at the increasing use of private money for projects like road crossings. Geoffrey Fallows said: "I certainly feel that if Tesco has money to be spent on education it should be spent on the school rather than the road. "It is a rather worrying development." Pupil Danielle Conacher, 18, said: "Road safety should be a top priority. The crossing should be responsibility of the council, not Tesco." Camden Council said it was inundated with bids for safety schemes and could not afford the crossing until Tesco and Esso stepped in. A spokesman said: "It is a hell of a theory in many ways. "But it is becoming more apparent in London that councils are looking to private money to fund such projects." |
Links to other UK stories are at the foot of the page. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Links to more UK stories |
| ^^ Back to top News Front Page | World | UK | UK Politics | Business | Sci/Tech | Health | Education | Entertainment | Talking Point | In Depth | AudioVideo ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- © MMIII|News Sources|Privacy | ||