We need t0 start from the position that, whatever the single issue pressure j groups might suggest, there is such a thing as "an accident". Because if we don't, the mantra of "zero deaths and injuries" will sound achievable. Sadly, all the while a mix of human beings and large lumps of machinery are involved, it's not. All any of us can do is to do our best To ensure the potential for mistakes, ignorance through lack of training,** or negligent behaviour are kept to a practical minimum level. That is achievable. Does that word "practical" suggest a trade-off in financial terms? Rightly or wrongly, yes, it does. And while the victims - or the families of victims - mightfind that upsetting, the truth is that just about "every treatment on the NHS-or even something as mundane as a road improvement scheme - is implemented on a sliding scale of budget allocation in relation to the number of potential deaths or injuries involved. So taking into account the political pressure on local authorities to make further budget savings, how can any vehicle safety issue not be looked at without a cost benefit analysis being made?
展开▼
