§ Lynne JonesTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to his answer of 15 October 2003, 155W Official Report, column 240W, on road deaths, whether the information provided by the Dutch on new traffic arrangements at various sites in North Holland indicated decreases in casualties; and what reasons were given by the two UK authorities for considering more familiar techniques rather than the measures used in North Holland. [134106]
§ Dr. HowellsInformation was supplied on 15 locations in North Holland that had been treated in innovative ways. Only two of the locations had an injury accident record showing more than one injury per year (one had two in a single year, one had three). Of the 15 treatments, 13 were neutral in their influence on injuries, one may have saved injuries and one may have put injuries up. In all cases, though, the casualty numbers are very small.
No specific reasons were given by UK authorities, in discussion with Department officials, for not including measures used in North Holland. The discussions took place while the authorities were considering various approaches in the design of traffic management for the areas under consideration. Removing traffic signals was just one technique in the approach used in North Holland for sharing space. We are not aware that either of the UK sites had traffic signals but the authorities were considering a range of techniques similar to those used in North Holland. Lower vehicle speeds plays a key part in this. Reducing the dominance of motor vehicles allow alternative urban treatments aimed at providing a more equal allocation of space for all road users.