NZAA - RESEARCH SYMPOSIUM ON DRIVER INATTENTION, DISTRACTION AND FATIGUE

SEPTEMBER 2011

Leo S Mortimer, Manager Safety, Road & Rail Group - Ministry of Transport

The role of regulation

• Various forms of bring about behavioural change

• The introduction of the cell phone ban as an example

• When do you regulate? • What do you regulate?

Objectives – Mobile phones

• The public policy objective is to reduce the risks caused by driver distraction, particularly those related to the use of hand-held communication devices.

Options

• Publicity campaign to increase driver awareness

• A comprehensive ban on using a mobile phone while driving

• Banning the use of hand-held mobile phones while driving

• Do nothing

Over this six year period the social cost associated with these crashes is estimated at $187.9 million

Year Fatal InjuryTotal crashes

Social cost (2008$, real)

2003 4 46 50 21.7m

2004 5 59 64 31.8m

2005 7 72 79 42.5m

2006 2 93 95 27.0m

2007 6 96 102 38.5m

2008 1 116 117 26.6m

Table 1. Crashes where mobile phone communications device was a contributing factor and social cost

Estimated reduction in social cost of mobile phone related crashes (2008$, real terms)

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

High $9.1m $10.0m $10.9m $11.7m $12.6m

Low $7.6m $7.6m $7.6m $7.6m $7.6m

Estimated benefit to cost ratio under different scenarios

High benefit Low benefit

High cost 1.7 1.3

Low cost 3.3 2.5

Consultation

• 53 submissions discussed the proposal to ban the use of hand-held mobile phones while driving

• unanimously (at least in principal) in favour of a ban on the use of hand-held mobile phones while driving.

• banning the “use” of hand-held mobile phones would be difficult to enforce.

• A number of submitters supported the hands free rather than a total ban

• While many others said the use of hands-free mobile phones should also be banned.

• prohibit their use would be costly to businesses and the economy,

What was the public saying?

• Broad public support for the banning of hand-held mobile phones.

• A NZ Automobile Association poll at that time said 76 percent of its members supported a ban on the use of hand-held mobile phones

• A recent Research New Zealand poll revealed 86 percent public support for a ban on the use of hand-held mobile phones while driving

Casualties in mobile phone crashes

• Casualties in crashes where 'cell phone' was identified as a contributing factor; (prior to late 2009 other 'communications devices' were also included) (hand held devices are not identified separately) (law forbidding use of hand held devices while driving took effect Nov 2009)

Year Fatal Serious Minor

2005 10 14 81

2006 2 22 101

2007 8 15 121

2008 1 24 133

2009 5 15 72

2010 5 15 73

Mobile phone crashes – Crash severity• Crashes where ‘mobile phone' was identified as a contributing

factor (prior to late 2009 other 'communications devices' were also included) (hand held devices are not identified separately) (national data for causes for non-injury crashes began in 2007) (law forbidding use of hand held devices while driving took effect Nov 2009)

Year Fatal Serious Minor Non-injury

2005 7 11 62

2006 2 20 77

2007 6 15 85 223

2008 1 22 96 218

2009 5 13 63 174

2010 5 13 50 129

Questions

Leo S Mortimer

Manager Safety - Road & Rail Group

Ministry of Transport

L.mortimer@transport.govt.nz