Road Safety News

Young farmers call for action over rural road deaths

Monday 2nd July 2012

The National Federation of Young Farmers' Clubs (NFYFC) is meeting with Mike Penning, road safety minister, to request funding for a specific person in each county to run rural driver training and hazard awareness courses (BBC Newsbeat).

NFYFC, which represents 23,000 young people in rural areas in England and Wales, is also calling for specific targets for cutting rural road deaths.

Milly Wastie, NFYFC vice-chair, says: “We really need to step up. Everyone knows someone that’s either a friend or a family member that has lost their life.

“Not only are they putting themselves at risk, they're also putting their mates at risk, as well as other road users.”

Mike Penning said: “We welcome the support of any group looking to improve road safety, especially those involving young people.

“Any road death or injury is a tragedy and I will continue to take urgent action to crack down on the most dangerous drivers while improving training to make our roads safer for everyone.”

Click here to read the full Newsbeat story.


Comment on this story
Report a reader comment

What's your view - comment on this story:

I confirm that I have read and accept the moderation policy and house rules relating to comments posted on this website.
Your comment:
Your name and location:
Your email:

Given the lamentable standard of hazard perception of most drivers, and the fact that we are all licensed to drive on rural roads, I support the idea of improving any driving training.
David, Suffolk

Agree (2) | Disagree (0)

It'll never happen. The interest in road safety from this Government seems almost non-existent.
Liam, Essex

Agree (1) | Disagree (0)

This is a concern raised by the National Federation of Young Farmers and they want to plan a campaign about the risks faced by young drivers who use rural roads. This is young people helping identify an issue and work on it for themselves. They have accepted our offer for Road Safety GB to work with them to help them to identify exactly what the risks are, typical accident causations etc and then we will help them as they design their campaign on that basis. We are delighted to be able to support their initiative to help themselves.
Honor Byford, North Yorkshire

Agree (2) | Disagree (1)

I am right behind the young farmers, as a group as large as that can throw weight behind their campaign.

I hope that Honor will use the correct terminology when representing Road Safety GB - please remember Road Traffic Incident/Collision/Crash not the 'A' word. We need to use the correct terminology to get the correct message across.
Judith Norfolk

Agree (1) | Disagree (0)

Thank you for your support Judith. As you will see from my posts, I do mostly use the current terminology of crash or collision but not absolutely always - and accident is technically/linguistically quite correct too. Some collisions are also accidents and the word is widely (and correctly) used in common language and in official documents. See DfT Stats 20 "...Road Accident Reports..." and numerous other references e.g. Health Records. I understand and agree with the point you are making and you are correct that it is important to use the right words in presentations, posters, reports and the like but I don't want to get too hung up on the terminology in general posts and discussions.
Honor Byford, North Yorkshire

Agree (1) | Disagree (0)

The Police record the numbers of casualties resulting from "incidents" where there was at least 1 "collision" that was "unintended". Any other Incident/Collision/Crash is not recorded by Police.

Therefore the "correct terminology" for the Police figures is "accident", although the incorrect term "collision" seems to have been adopted for political reasons.

Words are important, but there are bigger issues than the word "accident".
Dave Finney - Slough

Agree (1) | Disagree (0)

i am a bit confused here. We all know that there are more deaths and serious injuries on rural roads than in urban ones. Higher speeds limits of up to 70 mph make that a certainty. Losing control on bends and inappropriate overtakes are responsible for the majority of such accidents, followed by involvement with another vehicle.

But are we talking just general stats or are they making the special case of, or for, residents living within urban areas being more at risk from injury because they live in that faster, more dangerous environment?
bob craven

Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

Just a question. Both teenagers from rural and urban areas need instruction before passing the driving test.

But, and here is the but, they all learn round towns where the driving test is to take place and rarely if ever get onto the faster rural roads.

These roads will be the communicating links between young people and their friends, workplace and social life. Maybe some consideration of special driving time should be in order so that they become more aware of the dangers of rural roads but under supervision.

Arguing over words ain't gonna solve the problem.
bob craven lancs

Agree (0) | Disagree (0)