Pace Drivers

Something I noticed in the news the other day and was reminded of by Paul was this little gem.

Road chiefs are recruiting “pace” drivers to make sure motorists stick to speed limits.

The trial scheme will see volunteers employed to keep a steady speed of 70mph or less in the third lane of the motorway.

I’ve been critical of the road safety lobby in the past because of their obsession with speed, so it will come as no surprise that I am appalled by this idea. Although I note that the Doncaster Council site makes no specific mention of motorways.

The “speed kills” mantra is misleading to the point of being dangerous. Speed does not kill. If it did, the early trains would have been an abject failure as all the passengers would have died as predicted at the time by the doom merchants. Aircraft fly at 500mph or more and, my oh my, people don’t die as a result – they die when the plane stops flying suddenly; just as people in high speed trains die when they stop as a consequence of collision or derailment. Speed did not cause these deaths; stopping as a result of fault or failure did. On the roads, it is driving too close to other vehicles, failing to observe properly before moving into a traffic flow, lack of awareness and hazard recognition – and, on occasion, failure to regulate speed appropriate to the conditions. Speed is a component part of the whole and should be treated as such. “Speed kills” is taking one component out and operating to the dumbed down lowest common denominator.

In the event of a collision a lower speed will result in less impact damage. So, instead of concentrating on hazard awareness and defensive driving, we are all expected to travel more slowly because people are too stupid to be educated in basic risk awareness and management. Effective risk management is about avoiding the collision rather than mitigating its outcome. Pretty simple really. It is perfectly possible to travel on our roads at three figure speeds safely; given the right traffic and weather conditions. Legality and safety are not the same thing.

Having digressed into a rant, I’ll return to what has to be the most outrageous, stupid, asinine idea I’ve come across in recent times: Using volunteer (read sanctimonious busybodies) pace drivers in the third lane of the motorway to block drivers from travelling above the speed limit. This has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with safety and everything to do with mean spirited, petty, anti-motorist vindictiveness. The third lane of the motorway (incidentally, the safest roads we have) is for the purposes of overtaking – it is not for people to sit in at 70mph or less, holding up other drivers who may, or may not, be about to break the speed limit. If the police wish to prosecute offenders, so be it. Misusing the motorway with self-appointed busybodies is most certainly not the appropriate response.

While I cannot condone it, the outcome will be road rage incidents and undertaking of pace cars. A 70mph bunch of traffic is inherently more dangerous than a faster, evenly spaced flow of traffic. And, let’s be clear here, the 70mph limit is not there for safety, it is a hangover from the nineteen seventies’ fuel crisis. More lately, environmental pressures and patronising, emotive pseudo “don’t kill the children” dumbing down propaganda has driven speed limits lower on some roads. They are, for the most part, political. A safe speed is one in which the driver can stop in the road space that can be seen to be clear – this may well be the posted limit; in urban areas, it is probably pretty close. A safe speed can be well above or below the posted limit. Frankly, the obsession with speed and the idea that we all have to operate to the lowest common denominator simply tells me that either the British driver is pretty dreadful, or that the government thinks so.

So, I suppose the idea that white van man is to be offered driving lessons is something I should applaud. In a way, I do. At least the idea of education rather than restriction and regulation is a move in the right direction. I just find the idea of singling out a stereotype somewhat patronising and, once more, appealing to the lowest common dumbed down denominator. If we are going to be offering post-test driving lessons, why not for every driver?