Comment & Analysis: When will we say enough is enough road deaths? Anthony Hogg (40) and his wife, Georgina Hogg Moore (39), were killed in the latest hit-and-run, leaving their children orphans.
When 2023 had the highest number of road deaths for a decade, with 184 people killed on roads and streets in Ireland, there was some viable worry. And then a bit of political panic set in earlier this year when the rate of deaths for the first part of the year seemed to be increasing, but once the number of deaths seemed to be more or less heading towards last year’s total, the pressure eased off.
Crisis everted? With four days left in the year, we’re just a few deaths off 2023’s total. Even if the 2024 total is below last year’s, that clearly should not be seen as a success. If our vision of success is just lower than last year’s decade-high, we lack any vision.
As I was about to publish this article, yet another Garda press release was issued relating to a fatal collision. A woman in her 70s, who was a pedestrian at the time, has died following the collision involving a driver in his 20s on the N80 in Co Carlow. So, we may yet match 2024’s carnage.
In the last updated Garda figures (updated at the start of the day), it is also clear that there have been more fatal collisions already — last year, more people were killed per collision.
We keep being told that everybody is “all for” road safety, but that’s verifiably a pack of lies. Well-meaning people especially need to stop lying about this. We know it’s not true based on reporting on this website and across the media.
While there are individuals and groups at all levels who are committed to road safety, it’s also clear that too many are not.
On a very basic level, we know that people using their phones while driving don’t care enough. We know that drunk and drug drivers don’t care much at all. We also know that some parents picking up children from school can put their own convenience ahead of the safety of other children.
And, on a wider level, we also know there is a systematic issue with our road design and enforcement levels, which means the majority of motorists speed in uncongested conditions. The evidence is clear that a 10km/h difference in speed can mean a difference of life or death (or life-long injuries), but society turns a blind eye.
There are too many politicians who complain even about the smallest changes to speed limits or road design that would improve safety. Too many say this action or that won’t stop deaths (when no single action will). Too many judges who think it is their job to make excuses for drivers caught speeding. Too many officials in councils/agencies/departments who are afraid to rock the boat. And too many groups, such as resident associations, look to avoid any changes in their areas.
The common theme is that motorist convenience is way too high on our society’s priority list.
This is to be expected. Pushing against the status quo requires a lot of energy, and it takes even more to get many people to see the extent of the issue and that it is fixable.
There are different levels of opposition and denial. Some politicians object to everything, but most will “just” slow things down by seeking more and more consultation. District Court judges opt for the lower end of sentences and give too many motorists too many chances, while Court of Appeal Justices seem to think there’s no rush with clear road safety measures.
These types of actions by our political and judiciary have a chilling effect on the officials and Gardaí trying to make progress. Light sentences and populist politicking also send out a signal to motorists that business as usual is fine.
The Road Safety Authority was supposed to be focused on evidence-based solutions. Instead of the RSA educating politicians, officials and the wider public on the systematic action needed, we got an agency that was more focused on waging its fingers at schoolchildren and others outside of cars.
The news this website covered that the RSA spent €1.12m on its ‘Lose your independence’ campaign even after researchers found young drivers think losing their licence “feels unrealistic” is so far removed from evidence-based it’s sureal.
As well as too many people buying into the lie that everybody is “all for” road safety, we’re also sold lies that the problem is not solvable or that it would require economic doom and harsh restrictions on personal freedoms; both are lies which are easy to accept because we cannot collectively see a way out of our car-dominated society.
Our attempts to make our streets safer and decarbonise transport have huge parallels and overlap issues. Both require parallel personal and system-level changes.
Both also have benefits wider than their main goals. For example, safer speed limits followed by appropriate redesigning of roads and/or also enforcing limits will made roads safer and reduce congestion, which will have an economic benefit. The reduction in congestion includes from reducing the number of major collisions and having more predictable speeds, which means a smaller gap between the fastest and slowest motorists (a larger difference in speed is a source of phantom congestion).
The truth is that most speeding is pointless and ridiculously stupid, commonly requiring heavy breaking as the speeder in urban areas is stopped by traffic lights or, in suburban and rural areas, catches up with the next car in front of them.
And having safer roads and streets that prioritise walking and cycling is not only safer but also has significant health benefits, both directly for individual health and indirectly in terms of air pollution and for the health service. We’ve seen clear examples of this internationally, including in Paris.
The solutions vary depending on location and road type. In many cases, such as on national roads and motorways, enforcement will be key.
Evidence-based solutions are available. It will take many actions; there are no silver bullets. We need less “common sense”, we need to face down lies and misinformation, and we need more leadership.
Very well said, particularly the final paragraph.
It’s gotten a lot worse out there on our roads. And I’m not being hyperbolic, and deaths don’t reflect the change that’s taken place. 30 years ago there were more deaths on our roads but the roads were actually better than they are now. The level of speeding, rage-driving, phone-driving, text-driving, video-watching-driving, close-passing, anger, impatience, and more have all increased. Deaths (and even injuries) just don’t truely reflect the change that’s happened on our roads due to drivers and cars. Percentage-wise almost no kids cycle or walk to school in 2024. 30 and 40 years ago lots did. Imagine if, somehow magically, tomorrow the same percentage of kids that used to walk and cycle to school on their own 30-40 years ago suddenly started walking and cycling to school (and their friends houses, and to the shops, and local GAA games, etc). There would be utter car-nage. We need enforcement and proper deterents. The Gardai need to have a cultural change in their attitude towards road-violence in all it’s forms (including footpath blocking), the courts and judges need to also start taking the matter seriously. The attitudes on display by authorities have gotten us to where we are today. The particularly abhorrent attitude adopted by many in the Gardai that they can’t/won’t enforce current laws because they’ll “loose the support of the community” is utterly bizarre. Do they not realise that there is a huge section of society that wants them to enforce the laws. Why aren’t they similarly worried about loosing the ‘support’ of the law-abiding section of the community? Why are they tacidly sideing with anti-social criminals.
Well said.
I was just thinking to myself as I read yet more bland mainstream newspaper articles about road deaths, that there’s not one of them taking issue with why so many pedestrians are being killed.
It’s as if the editors don’t want to ask the hard questions because they know it is reflection of how many drivers including their neighbours, family and friends are driving in a manner that’s harming society.
That every time I walk across a pedestrian crossing I have to stare and watch motorists approach to see if they’re slowing or not for the red light is beyond reprehensible. Every single time I cross there’s at LEAST one red light-breaker. The demographics are all ages as well as male/female. It’s endemicly ingrained now… fckn sick of it.
When you discuss crashes/accidents you never mention what safety precautions were being taken. If a motorist needs to wear a seat belt,a cyclist needs to wear a helmet
How does that logically follow? You may as well say “If a motorist needs to wear a seat belt, a pedestrian needs to wear a helmet”.
if i am involved in a collision with a vehicle (or as is more often the case a pedestrian) i would much rather have my head protected.segregated cycle paths & a bit more consideration from pedestrians would go a long way to increasing road safety.there is not really any logic to a pedestrian wearing protective head gear,most of the time they are not likely to be travelling much faster than 5 km an hour.
Joe, do you have some citation to back up your assertion that helmets are useless when travelling at 5 km per hour, but vitally important (to the point where you want them made mandatory) at cycling speeds (10-20 km per hour)? Because it sounds completely arbitrary.
i don’t,just experience of coming off my bike & being glad i decided to always wear a helmet when cycling.if a pedestrian feels the need to wear a helmet that’s their business but it seems a bit extreme to me
I see. And yet you don’t feel it’s extreme to force all cyclists to wear helmets simply because you prefer wearing one.
I brought up pedestrians and helmets because many people do suffer head injuries from falling on the street. But as I’m sure you’ll agree, it would be silly to enforce helmet wearing on all pedestrians, even if it reduces the number of head injuries. Hopefully you can also see why many cyclists, like myself, feel the same about mandatory cycle helmets.
If you’ve ever gone to the Netherlands or Denmark, you’ll see that the vast majority of cyclists don’t wear a helmet. I want Ireland to be more like them, and less like Australia and other countries where casual cycling numbers plummeted after introduction of poorly thought-out helmet laws.
It’s a false equivalence. The data on seat belts is clear and indisputable. They seriously cut down on deaths and injuries in collisions.
The data on helmets is far from clear. In low energy impacts a helmet provides good protection but in high energy impacts the protection is minimal at best. Some research shows that accidents rates may increase with helmets due to an increase in risk taking behaviours and other road users allowing less space due to a perceived high level of competence.
There is also no data that mandatory wearing of seats belts discourages people from driving. The same cannot be said of mandatory helmet wearing.
Great way to end the year’s excellent reporting, thank you Cian for everything you do and stay well in 2025.
I’d like to hear your views on the recent dismissal of proven speeding cases in Portlaoise district court recently (https://www.leinsterexpress.ie/news/crime—court/1688083/shooting-fish-in-a-barrel-judge-sets-out-reason-for-dismissing-speeding-cases-before-laois-court.html). I flip flop between being of the opinion that those disregarding the speed limit being let off will embolden others and thinking that the judge might have a point in that an “unjust” restriction is counter productive.
In that case, the judge somewhat has a point about the 60km/h speed limit zone and how long it is, and how there’s no gateway treatment or much in the way of housing or anything that looks different to the 80km/h zone. I’d like to see where exactly the speed check is being done and how close it is towards the urban area.
However, there are processes in place to appeal the speed limits in any area, and motorists should be able to see the signs that are in place.
Cars were the greatest con-jobs of the 20th Century, and this ‘con’ is now carried into the 21st. They are lethal weapons made available to us, the general public. And a substantial minority of us are totally oblivious to safety campaigns, road warning signs, ads on telly etc.
There are an estimated 1,350,000 people killed on the world’s roads every year – more than wars, epidemics, natural disasters and all other accidents combined. And this figure is only the deaths. Think of the millions more who suffer life-changing injuries. Contrast the measures we took to save lives during covid with how we accept the inevitability of deaths that arise from private car ownership?
We live in a state of denial. We believe that cars and road infrastructure can be engineered to be made safe, and that by using a mixture of reward and punish, people can be trained to be responsible. This is despite overwhelming evidence going back 120 years to the contrary.
The vast majority of life-ending/changing accidents are caused by speed. The only way that private cars can be made to be some way safer is to restrict their top speed to – say – 50 kmph. But anyone who might advocate for such a restriction – to save lives – would be laughed at. We are truly a strange species!
The negative effect of cars doesn’t stop just at deaths and injuries (although that in itself should have been enough to ban most private cars). Private cars have myriad other negative effects. They crowd all of our public spaces, blocking footpaths. Children no longer wander or play outside on their own. Parents now have to helicopter-parent them all the time. Do you want to go to see your friend Charlie? Well, I guess I’d better drive you. Or, I’m afraid you can’t see Charlie today because I can’t drive you. Noise pollution from cars is an enormous (and mostly unrecognised) problem. Air pollution is another enormous problem (and electric cars won’t save us from that due to tire wear). Run-off from roads pollutes our watercourses and rivers. Road construction and the never-ending river of cars means that habitat fragmentation is driving species to extinction (as well as preventing reintrodution of species)(and BTW, habitat fragmentation due to roads/cars is a huge problem in Ireland). The swamping of public spaces by cars means that many people no longer walk or cycle resulting in population-wide health issues. The entire car-industry is sucking up natural resources and driving both climate breakdown and biodiversity loss.
Remember; all of this is on top of deaths and injuries due to direct trauma. Private cars are a pox on society.