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
wycombewheeler replied to john_smith | 10 months ago
1 like
john_smith wrote:

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.

delusional

1) boasting about being able to make vehicles less safe seems sociopathic. "Yes we know we could do these things to make people safe but we actually don't want that"

2) if you think can manufacturers will make British (high risk) versions you are mistaken. Most that might happen is importing a few unsuitable tanks, which would be banned in Europe, from USA.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to BalladOfStruth | 10 months ago
6 likes

You can still import some hideous killing machines. NFA on this one - 5.3L or something obscenely similar.

 

Avatar
stonojnr replied to BalladOfStruth | 10 months ago
6 likes

I think you can work it out via the force at impact for speed and weight of the objects, anything above 50g wont be survivable.

I've seen what a car hitting a cyclist side on at no more than 20-25mph did to the rider.

Their injuries were serious & life threatening had they not received some urgent professional medical care, they didn't just bounce off, get up and ask for a milkshake.

Avatar
john_smith replied to stonojnr | 10 months ago
2 likes

If given the choice I would far, far rather be hit head-on. The chances are high that you will go over the bonnet and escape more or less unscathed. If you get taken out from the side you are likely to end up under the car. Being hit by something coming out of a side road has always been my biggest fear.

Avatar
wtjs replied to john_smith | 10 months ago
3 likes

If given the choice I would far, far rather be hit head-on

Well, we're all in agreement about that, at least.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to BalladOfStruth | 10 months ago
1 like

The common one I've seen is 20% chance of dying at 30mph (cited by e.g. Brake).

I think the higher figure (50%) is from this US study from 2011 which is actually for severe injury or death - although they suggest 25% chance of death at 32 mph which seems higher.

A very readable analysis is this deep dive into this by the NL road safety authority.

Avatar
levestane | 10 months ago
12 likes

“believes passionately” is not evidence of anything.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to levestane | 10 months ago
7 likes

Indeed - Dan Dennett (philosopher) has a nice examination of this (in context of religious belief) where he essentially says that such strong beliefs should disqualify you from certain debates.  Not that you shouldn't be heard, but what you're saying is "I've outsourced my reason / decision-making capacity here - whatever (God's local representative / my mate Fred) says is my position".  So "I'm not going to join in thinking at this point".

Avatar
john_smith replied to chrisonabike | 10 months ago
0 likes

Huh? I believe right now that I'm typing something into my computer. Obviously I don't know that I am, since I don't know that the computer isn't a figment of my mind. Belief and reason are fair from mutually exclusive.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to john_smith | 10 months ago
2 likes

Yes ... but I'm not talking about e.g. "but how can we discuss anything as there is no principled way to confirm basic facts about reality - or even my own existence or not.  This may be a dream, could ALL be a simulation (including 'me') or I may be a brain in a vat being fed misleading stimuli").

Waaay off topic so I should probably just point at the source (in Breaking the Spell IIRC).

Hope I'm paraphrasing correctly but I think the context is that you can't really participate in an logical argument by simply saying 'I just know!' or responding to all arguments with "I don't believe it"*.  And if you say "it's true because Dave says it's true and I believe him" you're not really adding anything (but perhaps we can discuss this with Dave - if someone can produce him).

Obviously - people do indeed use such "arguments", but then it's not in the domain of logic but rhetoric. (Which of course is almost certainly more important / effective in human discussions...)

Avatar
john_smith replied to chrisonabike | 10 months ago
0 likes

Agreed.

Avatar
levestane replied to chrisonabike | 10 months ago
3 likes
chrisonabike wrote:

Obviously - people do indeed use such "arguments", but then it's not in the domain of logic but rhetoric. (Which of course is almost certainly more important / effective in human discussions...)

 

... and why (a) humanity finds itself in a tricky position and, (b) the rest of the biosphere is in collapse.

Avatar
Clem Fandango | 10 months ago
23 likes

I'm sure the councillor would be keen to stand in for a crash test dummy in a 30mph impact test.... 

Avatar
Pub bike replied to Clem Fandango | 10 months ago
15 likes

I will happily supply the milkshake to him following the impact.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to Pub bike | 10 months ago
7 likes

Her

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to Clem Fandango | 10 months ago
16 likes
Clem Fandango wrote:

I'm sure the councillor would be keen to stand in for a crash test dummy in a 30mph impact test.... 

They'd be ok if they were only hit in the head.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to eburtthebike | 10 months ago
2 likes
eburtthebike wrote:
Clem Fandango wrote:

I'm sure the councillor would be keen to stand in for a crash test dummy in a 30mph impact test.... 

They'd be ok if they were only hit in the head.

OUCH!

Pages

Latest Comments