Half of East Lancashire's road accidents involve under 25s

First published in News Lancashire Telegraph: Photograph of the Author by , Chief reporter

CHILDREN and young people are involved in around half the fatal or serious road accidents in Burnley, Pendle and Rossendale, it has been revealed.

Thirty-two under 16s and 47 16-to 25-year-olds were either killed or badly hurt across the three boroughs in 2010.

Road safety chiefs have now launched a new scheme aimed at pre-school children called Little Safety Stars, especially in areas with high collision rates.

And the Wasted Lives campaign, championed by the Lancashire Telegraph, will continue to address reckless behaviour by novice drivers at the other end of the scale.

Analysis of accident figures has shown that under-16s in Burnley, Pendle and Hyndburn are significantly more at risk, particularly as pedestrians, than in any other part of Lancashire.

Reducing child fatality and casualty rates is a key priority in the county council’s road safety strategy.

County Coun Tim Ashton, highways cabinet member, said ‘good progress’ had been made in recent years in reducing accident numbers.

A new eight-year masterplan has been drawn up.

He said: “Our commitment to road safety goes beyond achieving targets, in particular, improving the safety of our children and young people remains a high priority for us.

“Road safety is the responsibility of all road users in Lancashire. We will be working with our partners and local communities to win ‘hearts and minds’ and influence driver behaviour.”

Plans are well advanced for 20mph zones in the Rosegrove area of Burnley, central Colne and Helmshore. Other areas are set to follow in 2012.

Similar plans are being made for outside some primary schools.

Officials are also backing a project aimed at young moped and motorbike riders.

Comments (16)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:41pm Tue 10 Jan 12

BuckoTheMoose says...

"Little Safety Stars"? What is wrong with the Green Cross Code?
"Little Safety Stars"? What is wrong with the Green Cross Code? BuckoTheMoose
  • Score: 0

3:50pm Tue 10 Jan 12

harrythehamster says...

Exactly Bucko- And what about the Tufty campaign.Thats what was about when i was a kid before the green cross code man. This has all come about due to playstations.oh yes.They never go outside anymore so when they finally do get forced outside to"Play out" like we used to have too they can't handle the excitment. Then they run in the road like dos off leashes.Ban television,playstati
ons & computors in bedroom and make the little bast**ds play out with footballs and scooters and bicycles.They won't melt in the rain.Buy them a coat instead of another bloody playstation game.
Exactly Bucko- And what about the Tufty campaign.Thats what was about when i was a kid before the green cross code man. This has all come about due to playstations.oh yes.They never go outside anymore so when they finally do get forced outside to"Play out" like we used to have too they can't handle the excitment. Then they run in the road like dos off leashes.Ban television,playstati ons & computors in bedroom and make the little bast**ds play out with footballs and scooters and bicycles.They won't melt in the rain.Buy them a coat instead of another bloody playstation game. harrythehamster
  • Score: 0

5:13pm Tue 10 Jan 12

Keep Darwen Green says...

Raise the legal driving age to 25, simples. Until then public transport beckons
Raise the legal driving age to 25, simples. Until then public transport beckons Keep Darwen Green
  • Score: 0

5:13pm Tue 10 Jan 12

juanbbien says...

Life to kids these days is all virtual experiences on X- boxes,Computors etc they don't know what exists out of this reality world,
Life to kids these days is all virtual experiences on X- boxes,Computors etc they don't know what exists out of this reality world, juanbbien
  • Score: 0

5:26pm Tue 10 Jan 12

happycyclist says...

Give over you lot, it's nothing to do with playstations. There are just more cars on the road than when you were playing football in the street -more cars moving and more parked cars, making everything more dangerous.

I like KDGs suggestion.
Give over you lot, it's nothing to do with playstations. There are just more cars on the road than when you were playing football in the street -more cars moving and more parked cars, making everything more dangerous. I like KDGs suggestion. happycyclist
  • Score: 0

7:19pm Tue 10 Jan 12

Chris P Bacon says...

happycyclist wrote:
Give over you lot, it's nothing to do with playstations. There are just more cars on the road than when you were playing football in the street -more cars moving and more parked cars, making everything more dangerous.

I like KDGs suggestion.
That's one of those statements that would have got you a big 'WRONG' on I.Q, that is. There may well be more cars now than in the time you refer to but it's most definitely NOT 'more dangerous' than it used to be. It's a fact that the last year for which we have figures, FEWER people were killed in car-related incidents than in any previous year.

While it might SEEM more cars and more traffic leads to more danger and more deaths, paradoxically, it is clear if you peruse the facts for a few seconds, it is actually SAFER with more traffic!

I know it doesn't seem to make sense but more people were killed on the roads of Britain between 1939-1945 than were killed in bombing attacks. Many times more people were killed on the roads in those years than were killed on roads in recent years with many, many times more cars, busses and lorries on the road now than there were then. I know it seems odd, but it's a fact.
[quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote: Give over you lot, it's nothing to do with playstations. There are just more cars on the road than when you were playing football in the street -more cars moving and more parked cars, making everything more dangerous. I like KDGs suggestion.[/p][/quote]That's one of those statements that would have got you a big 'WRONG' on I.Q, that is. There may well be more cars now than in the time you refer to but it's most definitely NOT 'more dangerous' than it used to be. It's a fact that the last year for which we have figures, FEWER people were killed in car-related incidents than in any previous year. While it might SEEM more cars and more traffic leads to more danger and more deaths, paradoxically, it is clear if you peruse the facts for a few seconds, it is actually SAFER with more traffic! I know it doesn't seem to make sense but more people were killed on the roads of Britain between 1939-1945 than were killed in bombing attacks. Many times more people were killed on the roads in those years than were killed on roads in recent years with many, many times more cars, busses and lorries on the road now than there were then. I know it seems odd, but it's a fact. Chris P Bacon
  • Score: 0

7:39pm Tue 10 Jan 12

Chris P Bacon says...

Don't mean to harp on but this will illustrate the figures:

http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Reported_Ro
ad_Casualties_Great_
Britain
Don't mean to harp on but this will illustrate the figures: http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Reported_Ro ad_Casualties_Great_ Britain Chris P Bacon
  • Score: 0

8:19pm Tue 10 Jan 12

Ian123xyz says...

They go six months without a crash and get over confident and complacent.

They never consider that around a blind bend or corner there could be an unexpected obstacle or hazard.
They go six months without a crash and get over confident and complacent. They never consider that around a blind bend or corner there could be an unexpected obstacle or hazard. Ian123xyz
  • Score: 0

8:51pm Tue 10 Jan 12

Burnley student says...

Keep Darwen Green wrote:
Raise the legal driving age to 25, simples. Until then public transport beckons
Why should all under 25 year olds be blamed just because some idiots can't drive properly.

As a compromise I'd say younger drivers should be forced to take a harder test or the pass plus before being allowed to drive but in return insurance should be lowered. We both know public transport in Burnley simply isn't as reliable or flexible as a car...
[quote][p][bold]Keep Darwen Green[/bold] wrote: Raise the legal driving age to 25, simples. Until then public transport beckons[/p][/quote]Why should all under 25 year olds be blamed just because some idiots can't drive properly. As a compromise I'd say younger drivers should be forced to take a harder test or the pass plus before being allowed to drive but in return insurance should be lowered. We both know public transport in Burnley simply isn't as reliable or flexible as a car... Burnley student
  • Score: 0

1:37pm Wed 11 Jan 12

milano says...

Burnley student wrote:
Keep Darwen Green wrote:
Raise the legal driving age to 25, simples. Until then public transport beckons
Why should all under 25 year olds be blamed just because some idiots can't drive properly.

As a compromise I'd say younger drivers should be forced to take a harder test or the pass plus before being allowed to drive but in return insurance should be lowered. We both know public transport in Burnley simply isn't as reliable or flexible as a car...
How would raising the age limit work? Would this not increase illegal driving. Also how can introducing a two tiered driving test dependant on age work. There are already incentives insurance wise to take pass plus. Most major accidents are down to either being under the influence, speeding or not having the experience to handle the car and road conditions - which can apply to all drivers not just young ones.
As for pedestrian accidents a lot of primary schools already do road safety projects and schemes but how many times do you see adults with small children not observering simple road safety? dashing across the road when they are only a few feet from a crossing? Adults with babies / small children in pushchairs that they place off the kerb into the road whilst they wait to cross? (That really p's me off when i see that!) No hands being held? The ones that go to the crossing, press the button then don't bother waiting for the green man? What's the use of teaching children at school if no-one backs it up at home
[quote][p][bold]Burnley student[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Keep Darwen Green[/bold] wrote: Raise the legal driving age to 25, simples. Until then public transport beckons[/p][/quote]Why should all under 25 year olds be blamed just because some idiots can't drive properly. As a compromise I'd say younger drivers should be forced to take a harder test or the pass plus before being allowed to drive but in return insurance should be lowered. We both know public transport in Burnley simply isn't as reliable or flexible as a car...[/p][/quote]How would raising the age limit work? Would this not increase illegal driving. Also how can introducing a two tiered driving test dependant on age work. There are already incentives insurance wise to take pass plus. Most major accidents are down to either being under the influence, speeding or not having the experience to handle the car and road conditions - which can apply to all drivers not just young ones. As for pedestrian accidents a lot of primary schools already do road safety projects and schemes but how many times do you see adults with small children not observering simple road safety? dashing across the road when they are only a few feet from a crossing? Adults with babies / small children in pushchairs that they place off the kerb into the road whilst they wait to cross? (That really p's me off when i see that!) No hands being held? The ones that go to the crossing, press the button then don't bother waiting for the green man? What's the use of teaching children at school if no-one backs it up at home milano
  • Score: 0

1:38pm Wed 11 Jan 12

milano says...

Burnley student wrote:
Keep Darwen Green wrote:
Raise the legal driving age to 25, simples. Until then public transport beckons
Why should all under 25 year olds be blamed just because some idiots can't drive properly.

As a compromise I'd say younger drivers should be forced to take a harder test or the pass plus before being allowed to drive but in return insurance should be lowered. We both know public transport in Burnley simply isn't as reliable or flexible as a car...
How would raising the age limit work? Would this not increase illegal driving. Also how can introducing a two tiered driving test dependant on age work. There are already incentives insurance wise to take pass plus. Most major accidents are down to either being under the influence, speeding or not having the experience to handle the car and road conditions - which can apply to all drivers not just young ones.
As for pedestrian accidents a lot of primary schools already do road safety projects and schemes but how many times do you see adults with small children not observering simple road safety? dashing across the road when they are only a few feet from a crossing? Adults with babies / small children in pushchairs that they place off the kerb into the road whilst they wait to cross? (That really p's me off when i see that!) No hands being held? The ones that go to the crossing, press the button then don't bother waiting for the green man? What's the use of teaching children at school if no-one backs it up at home
[quote][p][bold]Burnley student[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Keep Darwen Green[/bold] wrote: Raise the legal driving age to 25, simples. Until then public transport beckons[/p][/quote]Why should all under 25 year olds be blamed just because some idiots can't drive properly. As a compromise I'd say younger drivers should be forced to take a harder test or the pass plus before being allowed to drive but in return insurance should be lowered. We both know public transport in Burnley simply isn't as reliable or flexible as a car...[/p][/quote]How would raising the age limit work? Would this not increase illegal driving. Also how can introducing a two tiered driving test dependant on age work. There are already incentives insurance wise to take pass plus. Most major accidents are down to either being under the influence, speeding or not having the experience to handle the car and road conditions - which can apply to all drivers not just young ones. As for pedestrian accidents a lot of primary schools already do road safety projects and schemes but how many times do you see adults with small children not observering simple road safety? dashing across the road when they are only a few feet from a crossing? Adults with babies / small children in pushchairs that they place off the kerb into the road whilst they wait to cross? (That really p's me off when i see that!) No hands being held? The ones that go to the crossing, press the button then don't bother waiting for the green man? What's the use of teaching children at school if no-one backs it up at home milano
  • Score: 0

1:45pm Wed 11 Jan 12

happycyclist says...

Chris P Bacon wrote:
happycyclist wrote:
Give over you lot, it's nothing to do with playstations. There are just more cars on the road than when you were playing football in the street -more cars moving and more parked cars, making everything more dangerous.

I like KDGs suggestion.
That's one of those statements that would have got you a big 'WRONG' on I.Q, that is. There may well be more cars now than in the time you refer to but it's most definitely NOT 'more dangerous' than it used to be. It's a fact that the last year for which we have figures, FEWER people were killed in car-related incidents than in any previous year.

While it might SEEM more cars and more traffic leads to more danger and more deaths, paradoxically, it is clear if you peruse the facts for a few seconds, it is actually SAFER with more traffic!

I know it doesn't seem to make sense but more people were killed on the roads of Britain between 1939-1945 than were killed in bombing attacks. Many times more people were killed on the roads in those years than were killed on roads in recent years with many, many times more cars, busses and lorries on the road now than there were then. I know it seems odd, but it's a fact.
That's me told!
[quote][p][bold]Chris P Bacon[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote: Give over you lot, it's nothing to do with playstations. There are just more cars on the road than when you were playing football in the street -more cars moving and more parked cars, making everything more dangerous. I like KDGs suggestion.[/p][/quote]That's one of those statements that would have got you a big 'WRONG' on I.Q, that is. There may well be more cars now than in the time you refer to but it's most definitely NOT 'more dangerous' than it used to be. It's a fact that the last year for which we have figures, FEWER people were killed in car-related incidents than in any previous year. While it might SEEM more cars and more traffic leads to more danger and more deaths, paradoxically, it is clear if you peruse the facts for a few seconds, it is actually SAFER with more traffic! I know it doesn't seem to make sense but more people were killed on the roads of Britain between 1939-1945 than were killed in bombing attacks. Many times more people were killed on the roads in those years than were killed on roads in recent years with many, many times more cars, busses and lorries on the road now than there were then. I know it seems odd, but it's a fact.[/p][/quote]That's me told! happycyclist
  • Score: 0

1:54pm Wed 11 Jan 12

happycyclist says...

Chris P Bacon, the stats might show that the roads are safer, but I don't FEEL as safe as I did 25 years ago. And there might be other factors in those stats, such as better emergency services.

The criticisms in the wiki article can't be ignored either, such as the discrepancy between police reports and hospital admissions, or the possibility that fewer pedestrians are killed because they are deterred from going anywhere near the roads. This very real fear is what makes people drive their kids to school -which is where I get my fear from when I say I feel less safe.
It's a complicated subject.
Chris P Bacon, the stats might show that the roads are safer, but I don't FEEL as safe as I did 25 years ago. And there might be other factors in those stats, such as better emergency services. The criticisms in the wiki article can't be ignored either, such as the discrepancy between police reports and hospital admissions, or the possibility that fewer pedestrians are killed because they are deterred from going anywhere near the roads. This very real fear is what makes people drive their kids to school -which is where I get my fear from when I say I feel less safe. It's a complicated subject. happycyclist
  • Score: 0

3:13pm Wed 11 Jan 12

harrythehamster says...

milano wrote:
Burnley student wrote:
Keep Darwen Green wrote: Raise the legal driving age to 25, simples. Until then public transport beckons
Why should all under 25 year olds be blamed just because some idiots can't drive properly. As a compromise I'd say younger drivers should be forced to take a harder test or the pass plus before being allowed to drive but in return insurance should be lowered. We both know public transport in Burnley simply isn't as reliable or flexible as a car...
How would raising the age limit work? Would this not increase illegal driving. Also how can introducing a two tiered driving test dependant on age work. There are already incentives insurance wise to take pass plus. Most major accidents are down to either being under the influence, speeding or not having the experience to handle the car and road conditions - which can apply to all drivers not just young ones. As for pedestrian accidents a lot of primary schools already do road safety projects and schemes but how many times do you see adults with small children not observering simple road safety? dashing across the road when they are only a few feet from a crossing? Adults with babies / small children in pushchairs that they place off the kerb into the road whilst they wait to cross? (That really p's me off when i see that!) No hands being held? The ones that go to the crossing, press the button then don't bother waiting for the green man? What's the use of teaching children at school if no-one backs it up at home
They have managed to do a two tier system for motorcyclists since the early 80's. If it is really young drivers causing all these deaths to others and themselves then why aren't they forced to drive a car with only say a 600cc engine for a period of time until they gain experience? motorcyclists can only ride a 125cc restricted to 12BHP untilt hey gain experience and take their test.Then they are restricted to 33BHP until they are at least 21 (Ithink) But these riders are restricted to low capicity machines.Why not young car drivers. also children do need education in crossing the road.Especially certain people in our community. Not wannting to harp on about it but parts of were i live are blighted with sleeping policemen due to certain children having no road sense whatsoever.You know who i mean?
[quote][p][bold]milano[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Burnley student[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Keep Darwen Green[/bold] wrote: Raise the legal driving age to 25, simples. Until then public transport beckons[/p][/quote]Why should all under 25 year olds be blamed just because some idiots can't drive properly. As a compromise I'd say younger drivers should be forced to take a harder test or the pass plus before being allowed to drive but in return insurance should be lowered. We both know public transport in Burnley simply isn't as reliable or flexible as a car...[/p][/quote]How would raising the age limit work? Would this not increase illegal driving. Also how can introducing a two tiered driving test dependant on age work. There are already incentives insurance wise to take pass plus. Most major accidents are down to either being under the influence, speeding or not having the experience to handle the car and road conditions - which can apply to all drivers not just young ones. As for pedestrian accidents a lot of primary schools already do road safety projects and schemes but how many times do you see adults with small children not observering simple road safety? dashing across the road when they are only a few feet from a crossing? Adults with babies / small children in pushchairs that they place off the kerb into the road whilst they wait to cross? (That really p's me off when i see that!) No hands being held? The ones that go to the crossing, press the button then don't bother waiting for the green man? What's the use of teaching children at school if no-one backs it up at home[/p][/quote]They have managed to do a two tier system for motorcyclists since the early 80's. If it is really young drivers causing all these deaths to others and themselves then why aren't they forced to drive a car with only say a 600cc engine for a period of time until they gain experience? motorcyclists can only ride a 125cc restricted to 12BHP untilt hey gain experience and take their test.Then they are restricted to 33BHP until they are at least 21 (Ithink) But these riders are restricted to low capicity machines.Why not young car drivers. also children do need education in crossing the road.Especially certain people in our community. Not wannting to harp on about it but parts of were i live are blighted with sleeping policemen due to certain children having no road sense whatsoever.You know who i mean? harrythehamster
  • Score: 0

3:32pm Wed 11 Jan 12

bankhall says...

the road safety awareness of these little darlings is unreal.The amount if times you see oeople strolling across a main raod whilst texting etc is unreal.They seem to think they can just walk across when they want and 1/2 ton of steel wont affect them.Iaim for the morons that makes them move
the road safety awareness of these little darlings is unreal.The amount if times you see oeople strolling across a main raod whilst texting etc is unreal.They seem to think they can just walk across when they want and 1/2 ton of steel wont affect them.Iaim for the morons that makes them move bankhall
  • Score: 0

9:06pm Wed 11 Jan 12

Your ferret stinks says...

bankhall wrote:
the road safety awareness of these little darlings is unreal.The amount if times you see oeople strolling across a main raod whilst texting etc is unreal.They seem to think they can just walk across when they want and 1/2 ton of steel wont affect them.Iaim for the morons that makes them move
Yeah but you have got to realise in this nanny state that pedestrians have the right of way in all cases and always has been, so therefore you will always have the ar5eholes who will slowly walk infront of the oncoming car as a challenge to attack them knowing they are in the right at all times and theres a payout should they be touched in the slightest by any motorist.....even if they are parked on double yellow lines having a chat with their mates and stood in the middle of the road!
[quote][p][bold]bankhall[/bold] wrote: the road safety awareness of these little darlings is unreal.The amount if times you see oeople strolling across a main raod whilst texting etc is unreal.They seem to think they can just walk across when they want and 1/2 ton of steel wont affect them.Iaim for the morons that makes them move[/p][/quote]Yeah but you have got to realise in this nanny state that pedestrians have the right of way in all cases and always has been, so therefore you will always have the ar5eholes who will slowly walk infront of the oncoming car as a challenge to attack them knowing they are in the right at all times and theres a payout should they be touched in the slightest by any motorist.....even if they are parked on double yellow lines having a chat with their mates and stood in the middle of the road! Your ferret stinks
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree