The decision by the ACT Government and road user groups to adopt the Swedish Government's ''Vision Zero'' approach (''European model drives debate on cutting road toll'', May 15, p7, and Editorial, May 15) is to be applauded.
The litmus test for Canberra adopting Vision Zero will be whether the ACT Government can make the necessary changes to road laws and whether Canberrans can significantly change their driving attitudes and behaviour.
All the evidence points to Canberra being a fast-driving culture where many drivers regularly exceed the speed limit.
We must start from a position that promotes the safety of our most vulnerable road users the elderly, children, pedestrians and bicycle users.
We need to begin by adopting the Swedish and European approach of 30km/h limits on local roads. Indeed, a 30km/h limit should be mandatory on all Canberra's suburban streets where there are no footpaths. The 40km/h speed limit adopted by Sweden's Vision Zero for its arterial roads should also be seriously looked at, especially where busy 60km/h roads through our suburbs generate a significant level of speeding.
The deaths and injuries to Australians on roads is a simmering, ongoing national tragedy that deserves radical but proven solutions.
David Turbayne, Watson
Your editorial ''Road to zero toll'' (May 15) is right to congratulate the ACT Government for embracing the Swedish initiative Vision Zero.
The concept has been promoted in Australia for over a decade and the WA Government recently adopted a ''Towards Zero Vision'' for its road-safety strategy.
Despite the pessimism of your editorial writer, there are a range of initiatives on the horizon to improve driver behaviour and skills and to improve infrastructure and vehicles to reduce unnecessary trauma from crashes.
There are many low-cost, mass-action programs which could make a real difference.
If the Vision Zero concept were adopted nationally, with targets set to improve the safety rating of all roads over time, if fleet owners including governments selected cars with high safety ratings, and we developed a five-star approach to driving, we could save not only many lives but reduce hundreds of unnecessary injuries and long-term disabilities.
The challenge is for all the community and our leaders to believe it is possible and recognise the potential of a comprehensive safe systems approach over an often shallow focus of only increasing driver penalties.
The Vision Zero initiative should be a valuable agenda for the new National Road Safety Council announced recently by the Council of Australian Governments and is a must for the agenda of the National Infrastructure Council. It is a pity it was overlooked in last week's national budget.
Lauchlan McIntosh, president, Australasian College of Road Safety
The Swedish initiative Vision Zero (''Road to zero toll'', May 15, p12) certainly is a very worthwhile model to reduce road trauma.
Would anybody in Australia seriously think that a speed limit of 30km/h on our country roads and urban roads, and 40km/h on our long arterial roads, be maintained by our drivers?
Very likely not! You cannot simply transpose the conditions of a small country to another large one.
Although the number of fatalities has slightly decreased in recent years, the total cost to Australia has increased from $18.5billion (Australian Automobile Association report 2005) to $20billion..
That staggering amount translates to $54.9million a day! How can a small population like Australia's afford this in these difficult times?
Other European countries, including universities, are pursuing different approaches.
The European Union, commencing with professional drivers (e.g. bus, truck, police and emergency services drivers) is looking at driver education with high-fidelity driver training simulators. These expose the learner to all conceivable road hazards and measure their reaction. A driving school can't do this.
Attempts to introduce simulators in Australia have totally failed to date. Australian authorities assiduously avoid the subject. Even the NRMA, with two simulators in Sydney, has gone quiet on this. Vested interests and lethargy probably stand in the way. Imagine the savings if the daily costs (and human suffering) could be reduced by only 10 per cent, if general simulator training were introduced. Is it practical?
Yes.
Simulation forgives reality does not.
Max R. Pallavicini, Fraser
Email a friend