Archive: May 2017

Alcohol testing as a reason for stopping a car by a police officer, raising fines for not using seat belts to 1,000 hryvnias, and conducting social marketing campaigns - such changes in the state traffic safety policy were proposed by experts and MPs during the roundtable "Drunk Driving and Ignoring Seat Belts as the Main Killers While Driving", which was held in the Transport Committee of the Verkhovna Rada with the support of the World Health Organization. 

The participants stated that the high fines for drunk driving, introduced last year, did not produce the expected positive results, the phenomenon of drunk driving has not disappeared and its scale has not decreased. Therefore, according to the participants of the discussion, further changes in state policy are necessary, in particular, granting the police the authority to stop vehicles to check drivers for alcohol consumption in two ways: random breath tests and the so-called “sobriety checkpoints”. 

“Such measures are in line with European practice and have a positive impact on deterring people from getting behind the wheel while intoxicated. We have also already made proposals for specific amendments to the Code of Administrative Offenses, in particular, increasing the period for considering cases of drunk driving to 6 months, giving the police the right to appeal court decisions, and prohibiting the closure of cases for insignificance in which the fine exceeds 1,700 hryvnias. And the fine for driving a car by persons who have previously been deprived of a driver's license should increase 10 times, to 5 thousand hryvnias. This applies primarily to those who were held accountable for drunk driving , ”said MP Mustafa Nayem . 

MP of Ukraine Oleksandr Opanasenko proposed his concept of legislative changes regarding the fight against drunk driving. “It is necessary to confiscate the vehicle from those who have been repeatedly detained while driving drunk within three years. I understand that such a norm will be difficult to implement, but tough measures are needed to restore order ,” the MP believes. He also proposed increasing the norm of permissible blood alcohol content to 0.5 ppm, because he considers the current 0.2 to be low compared to European practices. The participants agreed on the need to at least differentiate the punishment depending on the level of alcohol in the blood, because it is unfair to impose the same punishment on a person with an alcohol content of 0.25 ppm and a driver with 2.5 ppm. Regarding seat belts, the Campaign “For Safe Roads” presented the results of recent research conducted in 20 cities of Ukraine. 

“Our volunteers, using internationally recognized methodology, studied the behavior of about 26 thousand drivers in 20 cities. The average belt usage rate was 14.9%, and in many cities it is significantly lower than 10%,” said the campaign coordinator Olesya Kholopik . 

To increase the level of seat belt usage, the event participants agreed on the need to increase the amount of the fine at least to the average cost of refueling a car, that is, to UAH 1,000. “The purpose of fines is not to punish people, but to deter them from dangerous behavior. The current fine is 51 UAH, which is the price of two liters of gasoline - it is simply a ridiculous amount. It does not deter participants from this behavior, but on the contrary, it sends a signal that the state considers this violation unimportant ,” noted Taras Shevchenko , director of the Center for Democracy and the Rule of Law. Experts also consider it necessary to conduct social marketing campaigns along with changes in legislation and the introduction of new police work methods. “Alcohol and seat belts are behavioral risk factors that depend on existing social norms. World experience shows that social norms can be influenced through well-thought-out and implemented campaigns that would combine educational activities, media coverage and changes in police work. Examples of successful campaigns are “Click it or Ticket” about seat belts in the USA and “Bob” about responsible drinking in Belgium, and Ukraine needs to learn from this,” noted Viktor Zagreba , head of the non-governmental organization “Vision Zero”. 

MP Ihor Didenko , head of the subcommittee on road safety, noted that point changes in state policy are important, but no less important are systemic changes at the institutional level. “Ukraine needs to finally create a coordinating body for road safety, as well as approve a strong state strategy. These are international recommendations, world experience. We have been working on this for a long time, and we invite all participants to take a more active part in these processes ,” he said. The results of this round table will be published on the websites of public organizations for public discussion, after which they will be transformed into draft amendments to regulatory legal acts and submitted to parliament. The organizers hope that the changes will be adopted and come into effect by the end of 2017. According to data from the Safe Roads Campaign, obtained from the Ministry of Health, 4,809 people died and 54,950 were injured in road accidents on Ukraine's roads in 2016, excluding territories temporarily outside the control of the Ukrainian government. Ukraine has one of the worst safety records on the European continent.

 The Verkhovna Rada has registered draft law No. 6443 ( Draft Law on Amendments to the Law of Ukraine "On Road Traffic" (regarding the introduction of world experience in unloading traffic flows) . We are being asked to comment on this legislative initiative by deputies Shynkovych and Gerega, who are not members of the relevant committee of the Verkhovna Rada. The draft law plans to allow turns on a red traffic light. We assessed this legislative initiative from the point of view of road safety and came to a negative conclusion. If this idea is implemented, it will create unnecessary risks and will most likely have negative effects on road traffic and the safety of road users. The countries of the European Union do not have such traffic rules as the Ukrainian deputies propose. The essence of the draft law in the explanatory note is not substantiated. The reference to the experience of foreign countries, such as the USA, Canada and Korea, although interesting, is not justified, since these countries have specific road traffic, their road traffic rules and road signs differ significantly from European ones. For example, in many US states, crossing a double solid line is allowed. 

Moreover, traffic rules differ significantly between the US states themselves and the provinces of Canada. In addition, it is worth noting that these overseas countries, unlike Ukraine, are not parties to the Vienna Convention . The reference to these countries, as well as to the Dominican Republic and China, is questionable due to the unconvincing achievements of these countries in the field of traffic safety. In the European Union and some countries that are leaders in terms of safety (Sweden, Holland, Denmark, Switzerland), there is no practice of universal permission to turn on a red signal. At least, we are not aware of its existence in any EU country. At the same time, in some countries there are practices of marked permission for such a maneuver at specific intersections, which is indicated by the appropriate marking (additional sign or traffic light section), similar to Ukraine. In addition to the inappropriateness of the foreign experience mentioned by the authors of the draft law, they completely failed to take into account the existing context of Ukraine. In particular, low traffic discipline (for example, drivers often stop behind the stop line), the lack of intersection control cameras, low level of knowledge of traffic rules by road users, a large number of drivers with fake or purchased driver's licenses, and other risk factors that are typical for Ukraine as of 2017. Under these conditions, the approval of the draft law is expected to lead to a number of negative effects:

• increase in the number of collisions between vehicles
• an increase in the number of collisions with pedestrians and cyclists crossing the street on a green traffic light
• conflicts on the road between motorists who believe they should be given a lane to turn on a red light
• conflicts between motorists and pedestrians/cyclists

And these effects, in turn, will lead to a whole list of negative social consequences that are undesirable and socially harmful:

• increase in injuries and mortality in Ukrainian cities
• increased workload of the National Police bodies for registration and investigation of road accidents
• increasing the burden on healthcare facilities for the treatment of road accident victims
• increased traffic congestion and associated economic losses due to the significant time required to process each accident
• increasing social tension, misunderstandings and conflicts on the road.

If a change in state policy can lead to negative consequences (as in our case), then they should be compared with the positive ones and an informed decision should be made. However, in this draft law, we were unable to identify specific positive consequences. The explanatory note defines the expected positive result as "unloading of traffic flows in case of intensive urban traffic at intersections". However, this is a dubious statement for several reasons. 

• 1) Such unloading can continue to be carried out within the existing regulatory framework. 
• 2) Solving the problem of traffic jams is the prerogative of the mayors of these cities, not the parliament. 
• 3) The authors have a misconception that traffic lights are the cause of traffic jams. The topic of transport planning and traffic management is much more complex and deeper than it seems to the average driver or MP who has visited Canada or the USA. In view of the above, the NGO "Vision Zero" considers it inappropriate to approve draft law 6443 and recommends that people's deputies leave the rules of the road at regulated intersections unchanged. The decision on whether to allow a turn at a red light (i.e., on placing a "green arrow") should be made by local governments individually in each case, depending on the configuration of a particular intersection, the number of lanes on each street, the intensity of the flow of cars and pedestrians in each direction, the available visibility triangles, the history of road accidents at this intersection, and other factors.