‘An unacceptable document, ’says Zimmer
Public outcry follows 2024 Road Safety Strategy update
Approval of HRM’S 2024 Road Safety Strategy was deferred at Thursday’s Transportation Standing Committee meeting.
The strategy attempts to update the goals laid out in the 2018 Strategic Road Safety Framework and adopts the vision of achieving zero road fatalities and injuries by 2038. It also includes a goal of maintaining a downward trend in the rate of fatal and serious collisions per 100,000 residents.
Peter Zimmer, a board member of the Halifax Cycling Coalition, says the new strategy sets its goals too far into the future.
“This document, which comes six years after its predecessor, is notably less ambitious,” said Zimmer. “It's putting the target dates out to 2038 for the Vision Zero goal. That’s 20 years after they started this process. It’s not acceptable.”
The Strategic Road Safety Framework was adopted by the regional council in July of 2018 with the vision of reducing fatalities and injuries within the municipality. It set the goal of a 20-per-cent reduction in all road fatalities and injuries by 2023. This goal was not met.
Many critics of the strategy took aim with the use of the per-100,000-people metric to measure a potential decrease in road injuries and fatalities.
Norm Collins, president and treasurer of the Crosswalk Safety Society of Nova Scotia, believes that a more specific number is necessary to achieve the strategy's vision.
"It just boggles my mind that one would think that's an okay way to measure success," said Collins. "If we really want to get to zero, we need a much more significant goal. We set a goal of 20 per cent. We didn't achieve it. The unilateral shift from that goal needs to be an absolute number, not a 'per 100,000.'"
Collins also takes issue with the fact that no external stakeholders were able to have direct involvement in contributing to the strategy.
The second page of the 2024 Road Safety Strategy includes a list of contributors who were directly involved in creating the strategy.
“Tell me, how many of them are outside of government?” said Collins. “The answer is zero.
“As stakeholders, why should we think we’re taken seriously when we’re not even recognized as having input?” said Collins. “In some ways, I’m glad of that, because if our names weren't lifted it might imply that we endorse it. We do not. … I’m not going to call this a strategy, because it’s not, in my opinion. It’s an unacceptable document.”
The strategy will be brought forward to council for a vote of approval May 23. Until then, contributor Samantha Noseworthy is unsure of how it will be revised.
“I haven’t been contacted again yet, so I’m unsure of what’s happening in the interim,” said Noseworthy.
However, she has high hopes for the revised safety strategy, and believes the city will take public criticisms into consideration.
“I think generally, they’re on the right track,” said Noseworthy. “I think it’s good that they’ve delayed it, and that they’re seeking more input before they fully release it. They’re taking in a lot of different peoples’ perspectives, which I think is really great.”
An HRM spokesperson said they were not able to comment on items that are before committee for review.