Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

“I’ve seen children hit by a bus and they’ve bounced up and asked for a milkshake”: Active travel campaigners blast councillor’s “reckless, flippant” road safety comments during 20mph debate

“He was very emphatic that if a child is hit at 30mph, they will die. They don’t,” Conservative councillor Bobbie Dove, who also supported an attempt to reopen a controversial rat run, said

A councillor who supported the controversial reopening of a rat-run bridge to motor traffic has come under fire and faced calls to apologise from active travel and road safety campaigners after claiming that children who are struck by motorists travelling at 30mph “don’t” die, and that she’s “seen children hit by a bus and they’ve bounced up and asked for a milkshake”.

Conservative councillor Bobbie Dove’s comments – described as “reckless and flippant” by RoadPeace – were made during a recent debate at Bournemouth, Christchurch, and Poole (BCP) Council concerning the proposed implementation of widespread 20mph speed limits in built-up areas throughout the conurbation.

In January, as reported on road.cc, the deputy leader of Bournemouth, Christchurch, and Poole (BCP) Council announced that it was the local authority’s “intention” to introduce a “default” 20mph limit on residential streets, similar to the widespread implementation of lowered speed limits in Wales last autumn.

The announcement came three months after the Liberal Democrat-controlled council’s environment portfolio holder Andy Hadley pledged that a full consultation would take place before a decision was made on the introduction of the 20mph zones, which deputy leader Millie Earl said would be “beneficial to people walking, wheeling, and cycling and… benefit public health and air quality”.

20mph sign (CC licensed by EdinburghGreens via Flickr)

> “Any road which isn’t safe for pedestrians and cyclists should be 20mph”: Cycling Rebellion says speed limit plan “doesn’t go far enough”, as council urged to “be brave” and introduce default 20mph zones

However, a report by BCP Council officers published at the end of February raised concerns about the council’s ambitions to implement the reduced speed limit on all urban residential roads and high streets, noting that, “although desirable”, a “blanket” 20mph limit would cost more than £300m to introduce.

Instead, the council officers advised that the local authority should prioritise which roads will be subject to the lowered limit, based on how dangerous they are perceived to be or the number of collisions or serious injuries which have occurred on them in recent years, a selective policy criticised by local cycling campaigners as “not tenable” and presenting a “silly” barrier to progress.

While the new report was condemned by active travel campaigners, at a meeting of BCP Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Board, Councillor Bobbie Dove – while asserting that she “believes passionately” in ensuring that roads are safe – questioned the report’s call for lowered speed limits and the correlation between road safety and 20mph zones.

“Councillor [Oliver] Walters was very emphatic that if a child is hit at 30mph they will die. They don’t,” she said during the meeting.

“I’ve seen children being hit by a bus, and they’ve bounced up and they’ve asked if they could have a milkshake, please.

“We have to be really careful in what this report is saying, why it is saying it, and what is the question that we want answered. We want our roads safer – is it 20mph? Well, it absolutely isn’t.”

> “We warned that voting for these parties would lead to anti-car measures”: 20mph speed limit plan to “really encourage more cycle journeys” slammed as “nuts” and “extremely worrying”

Councillor Dove’s claims have been roundly condemned on social media since the meeting.

RoadPeace, the UK’s national charity for road crash victims, wrote on X/Twitter: “We’re horrified by these reckless and flippant comments.

“BCP Council, please tell us how you will address this? This clip, with your branding on it, is highly damaging. Shockingly, Councillor Dove is the chair of your Children’s Services Committee.

“Road traffic collisions are the leading cause of death among children and young people aged 5-29 years. In the event of a crash, the higher the speed, the higher the injury severity. The frequency of crashes increases with the speed of traffic.”

> "Far more pleasant for walkers and cyclists": 20mph speed limit analysis hailed "astonishing", with drivers' journeys just 45 seconds longer

Meanwhile, Liberal Democrat council leader Vikki Slade said that Dove’s comments were “outrageous and she needs to apologise”, while Green Party councillor Joe Salmon also called on Conservative group leader Phil Broadhead to “have a word” with his colleague.

“She is on another planet here and really needs to engage with the research on road safety if she wants to have an opinion,” he said.

One local active travel campaigner told road.cc that Dove’s comments were “an absolute joke” and claimed that the councillor had “acted as a stooge” during the then-Conservative led council’s successful, and highly controversial, attempt to reopen a narrow road underneath a railway bridge in Poole to motor vehicles in 2021.

Keyhole Bridge before and after, Poole (via Cycling UK).PNG

> Victory for cyclists and walkers in legal challenge to council decision to reopen narrow bridge to motor traffic

Commonly used as a rat-run by drivers, Keyhole Bridge in Poole Park was closed to drivers under an experimental traffic restriction order (ETRO) in 2020 to improve active travel access and provide a safe route for people on bikes or on foot during the Covid pandemic.

However, over the course of the following two years, the then-newly installed Conservative-led administration ignored two public consultations (one of which was mandated by the High Court following a judicial review brought by local campaigners), showing the vast majority of residents supported the extremely narrow road’s permanent closure, by choosing to reopen the underpass to motor traffic.

Poole rat-run (Keyhole Bridge Group)

Launching a legal action in March last year, Cycling UK described the council’s decision as “unlawful”, arguing that it was based on flawed economic analysis and failed to take into account statutory guidance issued to highway authorities under the Network Management Act 2004, while also posing a danger to vulnerable road users.

In December, Cycling UK announced that BCP Council had, in the wake of the charity’s legal challenge, accepted that it had acted unlawfully when reopening the bridge in March 2021 and agreed to pay Cycling UK’s legal costs.

> Park rat-run to remain closed to drivers to promote cycling, following trial made controversial by "vocal minority who drive straight through the park"

And now, after another recent council trial designed to prevent rat-running and promote cycling in Poole Park was vehemently opposed by a “vocal minority” of “car drivers who drive straight through the park”, it now appears that it’s the turn of 20mph speed limits to step forward as the latest active travel and road safety controversy to hit BCP Council.

The local authority’s attempt to introduce a “default” 20mph speed limit in residential areas has so far been stymied by claimed costs of £300m and Dorset Police’s belief that it “will not be able to supply additional resources to monitor and enforce” any speed reduction plan. However, the police said that it would support a 20mph zone on streets where “clear evidence” indicates that the scheme would lead to a fall in collisions.

The recent report to the council, discussed in such inflammatory terms by Councillor Dove, also noted that by introducing a default 20mph limit, some motorists will believe that their freedoms are being “compromised”.

“The profile of people who proportionately drive more – men, middle aged groups, people without a disability, white British, heterosexuals and Christians – will generally consider their freedoms associated with driving are being compromised, though individual views may vary,” the report said.

After obtaining a PhD, lecturing, and hosting a history podcast at Queen’s University Belfast, Ryan joined road.cc in December 2021 and since then has kept the site’s readers and listeners informed and enthralled (well at least occasionally) on news, the live blog, and the road.cc Podcast. After boarding a wrong bus at the world championships and ruining a good pair of jeans at the cyclocross, he now serves as road.cc’s senior news writer. Before his foray into cycling journalism, he wallowed in the equally pitiless world of academia, where he wrote a book about Victorian politics and droned on about cycling and bikes to classes of bored students (while taking every chance he could get to talk about cycling in print or on the radio). He can be found riding his bike very slowly around the narrow, scenic country lanes of Co. Down.

Add new comment

47 comments

Avatar
Left_is_for_Losers | 9 months ago
0 likes

Perhaps we could prove the theory by hitting her with a car at 30mph and see if she still wants a milkshake or an ambulance

Avatar
Steve K replied to Left_is_for_Losers | 9 months ago
1 like
Left_is_for_Losers wrote:

Perhaps we could prove the theory by hitting her with a car at 30mph and see if she still wants a milkshake or an ambulance

Well, she might not be able to manage solid food for a bit afterwards.

Avatar
neilmck | 9 months ago
2 likes

"a “blanket” 20mph limit would cost more than £300m to introduce" £300m! In our town they put a few signs on the roads entering the town and that was it. Where would £300m go?

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to neilmck | 9 months ago
7 likes

Well, first you've got to set up a VIP lane, then give the work to your mates who have no experience or knowledge, ignoring the people who have both, then pay your mates extortionate amounts whether they actually produce anything or not: see Test and Trace.

Avatar
john_smith replied to eburtthebike | 9 months ago
6 likes

And give them a seat in the Lords.

Avatar
Nigel_2003 | 9 months ago
2 likes

I think Councillor Dove should be challenged to justify her claim that she has seen children hit by buses, bounce up and ask for a milk-shake. Facts: When? , where? I'm less interested in the milkshake aspect than the veracity of her claim and, if there's any truth in it, the speeds of the buses in question. I was hit side-on by a van at around 15mph as a child, luckily a glancing blow and bounced quite well (bike wasn't so lucky..) I've also gone into the side of a mountain at over 50mph which was a very different experience so this kind of flippant BS from an elected official really makes me angry.

Avatar
ubercurmudgeon | 9 months ago
8 likes

Sometimes all you can do is shrug and say, "What a dumbass."

Avatar
mitsky | 9 months ago
14 likes

If she has "seen" it then it must be fine for everyone to face that danger, everywhere.

She can show her willingness to challenge this safety proposal by volunteering herself to face being hit by a bus at 30mph to demonstrate that it is not an issue.
Then also volunteering her friends'/families' kids to do the same.

I won't hold my breath.

Avatar
grOg replied to mitsky | 9 months ago
1 like

Children have 'green' bones that tend to flex rather than break; biology.

Avatar
john_smith | 9 months ago
7 likes

I saw someone get shot in the head. She didn't die, at least not immediately. And we're all going to kick the bucket sooner or later.

Avatar
grOg replied to john_smith | 9 months ago
1 like

Is that dumb analogy meant to be humorous? fail..

Avatar
Creakingcrank | 9 months ago
16 likes

The councillor has a great point. A 30mph impact is only the same as falling from a 9m high window, according to this handy calculator for rock climbers. https://www.angio.net/personal/climb/speed.html

Perhaps we could set speed limits by asking local residents to say what height of window they would be happy for their children to be thrown from, and work back from there. 20mph is 4m in case you were wondering.

Avatar
grOg replied to Creakingcrank | 9 months ago
1 like

Let's go back to having someone with a red flag walk in front of motor vehicles; you know it makes sense; on the other hand, Australia has 31 mph (50 kph) residential speed limits, with no significant collision stats; the car haters in inner city left/green councils have put 30 kph zones in, but car drivers just shop elsewhere, so the local business in that area have to rely on their socialist locals to keep them afloat..

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to grOg | 9 months ago
1 like

Wait - are you saying that a socialist *country* near the UK just voted for mostly "right-wing" / socially Conservative parties like the Freedom Party (PVV), the VVD etc?

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/week-after-shock-wilders-win-dutch-...

(For "local shopping = socialism" - according to the OP - see https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kYHTzqHIngk)

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to grOg | 9 months ago
2 likes
grOg wrote:

Let's go back to having someone with a red flag walk in front of motor vehicles; you know it makes sense; on the other hand, Australia has 31 mph (50 kph) residential speed limits, with no significant collision stats; the car haters in inner city left/green councils have put 30 kph zones in, but car drivers just shop elsewhere, so the local business in that area have to rely on their socialist locals to keep them afloat..

That sounds like a win for those areas - less traffic/pollution and you don't have to worry so much about meeting the selfish right-wingers in your local shops.

Isn't it ironic that you're describing a return to old fashioned local shops rather than the out-of-town megashops that have proliferated. Sounds to me like a "conservative" policy in that it's a return to the "good ol' days".

Avatar
essexian | 9 months ago
12 likes

The local authority’s attempt to introduce a “default” 20mph speed limit in residential areas has so far been stymied by claimed costs of £300m

£300 million.... to put up a few road signs and paint "20" on the road costs £300m. Who the hell is doing the signs: Banksy?

Give me a million quid and I'll do the signs for you and have enough left for a new BMW or two. 

 

 

Avatar
Secret_squirrel replied to essexian | 9 months ago
8 likes

It cost someting like £50m to do the whole of Wales.

Its bullshit

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to Secret_squirrel | 9 months ago
6 likes
Secret_squirrel wrote:

It cost someting like £50m to do the whole of Wales.

Its bullshit

And they had to get all the signs translated into Welsh.

Avatar
brooksby | 9 months ago
11 likes

Was the child that councillor Dove saw - because I'm sure she must have definitely seen this happen and wasn't just making it up - wearing a red and blue costume with a cape? 

Avatar
stonojnr replied to brooksby | 9 months ago
8 likes

Or was heard uttering "you don't want to make me angry" just before the crash

Avatar
eburtthebike | 9 months ago
8 likes

"Conservative councillor Bobbie Dove’s comments – described as “reckless and flippant” by RoadPeace....."

That's the trouble with being a responsible public body, you can't give cretins the absolute roasting with f-bombs that they deserve.

Bobbie Dove again "We want our roads safer – is it 20mph? Well, it absolutely isn’t.”"

There's being the party of the driver, then there's being the anti-road safety for kids party.

"Meanwhile, Liberal Democrat council leader Vikki Slade said that Dove’s comments were “outrageous and she needs to apologise”........."

Like Michelle Donelan didn't?

Avatar
BalladOfStruth | 9 months ago
7 likes

The stats honestly seem to be all over the place for survivability rates at different speeds – I’m looking now, and I can see stats that suggest a 50% survivability rate at 30mph, and others that suggest an 80% survivability rate at 30mph – presumably, the lower rates are based on older figures when there was less regulation on pedestrian safety in car manufacturing, but every link I click on seems to give me a different chance of surviving if hit at 30mph.

They do all, however, seem to be based on adults. I can’t find stats specifically pertaining to children. I can find articles discussing road safety that recommend a 20mph limit, and use stats on adults to make their reasoning, but I can’t find child-only stats.

I recall the study posted here last year that alluded to the dangers of stupid, pointless crossovers because every 10cm increase in bonnet-height increased to risk of death and serious injury to cyclists and pedestrians by around 30% - as children are shorter than adults, and young children especially will probably suffer more chest/head no matter what they’re hit by, I’d suggest that even if the most conservative stats are true, survivability results will a lot worse for kids.

What an insane comment by this councillor.  

Avatar
FionaJJ replied to BalladOfStruth | 9 months ago
7 likes

The councillor she's supposedly rebutting says he wasn't claming that all children die if hit at 30mph, but was pointing out the increased risks. But it's not like 1 in 5 odds of dying if hit by a car driving legally are odds we want outside our own front doors.

The stats on bonnet height are going to become more and more relevant. An old lady was recenty struck and killed by a Ford Ranger (described by police in their call to witnesses as a car) recently in a very busy local high street that always has a lot of pedestrians. There was some chatter about how a lot of people speed in what is supposed to be a 20mph zone. But 20mph is too fast for the conditions and highway maintenance style vehicles are just not suitable for those area, unless driven with extreme caution. 

The public need better education on the dangers of vehicles with high bonnets, and IMO not-road-tax needs to be revised to include bonnet shape and height as well as weight, emissions along with mileage to reflect the danger they pose and so people think twice about having one as their family car for running errands.

Avatar
mctrials23 replied to FionaJJ | 9 months ago
6 likes

Have a look a this photo of a child vs the standard jacked up penis replacements they drive in the US. All because they get away with tax breaks because its considered a "working vehicle" despite 99% of them never seeing a spec of dirt or work. 

https://i.redd.it/wmb4b2scq2p81.jpg

Avatar
Hirsute replied to FionaJJ | 9 months ago
13 likes

I really hate those rangers and other wankpanzers. I thought they were going to be priced off the roads with tax changes in July but the motor lobby got it reversed. And there was me thinking the lycra lobby were all powerful.

Avatar
wtjs replied to Hirsute | 9 months ago
4 likes

but the motor lobby got it reversed

Just like all those £billions in fuel tax giveaways designed to encourage bigger guzzlers, more driving, more roads etc. etc. etc.

Avatar
Nigel_2003 replied to FionaJJ | 9 months ago
0 likes

American TV programmes and films often feature Ford Rangers and other vehicles in the same class - they consistently refer to them as "trucks" or "pickups" (pickup trucks) - not cars or automobiles. Ford's site in the UK lists them under vans and pick-ups so I'd be surprised if they're classified by DVLA as cars. Then again, they're not much bigger than Range Rovers and modern Land Rovers, Shoguns Nissan Patrols, etc .

Avatar
marmotte27 replied to BalladOfStruth | 9 months ago
4 likes

"presumably, the lower rates are based on older figures when there was less regulation on pedestrian safety in car manufacturing"

Which regulations, since SUVs aren't banned?

Avatar
BalladOfStruth replied to marmotte27 | 9 months ago
7 likes

I agree on the SUV front, but there absolutley are EU regulations on vehicle design for the benefit of pedestrians - minimum external radius size, minimum deformation under certain impacts, etc. They're one of the many reasons we won't be getting the razor-blade-on-wheels Cybertruck here.

Avatar
john_smith replied to BalladOfStruth | 9 months ago
1 like

Serves you right for living in the EU. Here in glorious Brexitland we liberated ourselves from all that Brussels red tape, so we're free to drive what we wish as we wish. It's called sovrinty.

Pages

Latest Comments