THE Road Transport Department reads with great interest “Confessions of an express bus driver” (Down2Earth, May 25).

However, the issues highlighted must be taken with a pinch of salt. Road crashes involving public transport have declined by as much as 36%. While acknowledging the usage of drugs, of more concern is the blatant disregard for the law and mismanagement by some bus companies.

The article also highlighted that all bus drivers involved in fatal accidents have outstanding summonses for speeding. It must be understood that whenever a bus is found exceeding the speed limit, a notice is issued to the owner demanding the particulars of the driver who committed the offence. Bus companies will then submit the driver’s particulars to the authorities who then issue a summons. Failure to settle the summons within a stipulated time will require the case to be mentioned in court.

If the offender fails to appear in court, the driver is blacklisted as provided for under Section 17 of the Road Transport Act 1987. Any driver blacklisted is prevented  from renewing his driving licence and road tax until he is served a re-summons of the original offence to be settled immediately before the blacklist is uplifted.

This process is fair to the offenders who have considerable time to settle their summonses.

Unfortunately, drivers whose livelihood depends on driving often continue driving despite having multiple summonses. The annual renewal of the Public Service Vehicle Licence, which gives the drivers up to 12 months, and the high demand for drivers, means many keep driving before the blacklist mechanism takes effect.

This leads to corporate responsibility and good governance on the part of bus operators.

Maintaining proper records of drivers must be a priority when providing services to the public.

The RTD and police are ever willing to furnish detailed information in our database if operators reciprocate the idea of vetting drivers’ records. Bus operators can do this when hiring or assigning a driver. Operators must be aware of their drivers’ records, as letting a habitual offender to be in control of passengers’ lives is irresponsible.

It is incumbent the industry regulate itself as enforcement alone is not enough. We believe one way the companies can do this is by adopting the SHE (safety, health, environment) code of practice.

Under the code, bus companies will undergo due diligence on multiple aspects of the industry, including the vetting of drivers’ records and road offences as well as meeting the industry standard in remuneration packages for their drivers. The code is also strict about working hours.

It is the government’s aim that by adopting the code, bus companies will put a premium on safety and use it as a selling point to meet the demands of the public and thrive in business.

However, it must be realised that these factors cannot be tackled by enforcing the code on the economically stricken industry.

Twenty-two companies have adopted the code, some voluntarily and they must be applauded for doing so. In the long run, all bus companies will have to adopt the code as the CVLB has already included it as a condition for renewal of permits (bus permits are extended every five years).

We regret that authorities have been labelled as lackadaisical in their efforts. The RTD does not wish to be on the defensive but must clarify the government’s seriousness on road safety issues.

Since 2007, the RTD has been conducting operations at 22 bus terminals nationwide. This increases to 32 terminals during festive seasons. At the terminals, RTD officers inspect drivers’ licences, the vehicles’ brakes and tyres as well as compliance with Rule 10B of the Road Transport Rules which covers the need for a second driver and maintaining a logbook for trips exceeding 400km.

During festive seasons, urine samples of drivers are tested every three days to ensure that they are not driving under the influence of drugs.

Another noteworthy enforcement effort is the suspension for a month of commercial vehicles which fail thrice in a row the test on their brakes during the routine Puspakom inspection. In short, these efforts are aimed to prevent any mishaps resulting from the condition of the bus and drivers.

The RTD has also begun to systematically  implement enforcement measures  with regards to public transport. As a result of the Road Safety Strategic Plan 2006-2010, a system based approach to enforcement will be realised once the Automated Enforcement System comes into law.

Under the AES system there will be constant policing of accident-prone locations (black spots).

This image capture technology (vehicle and driver) is fully automated from camera to the courts with summons being deemed served on the offenders.

The legislation regarding summonses issued by AES is being amended to have the blacklist mechanism automatically bar offenders who fail to settle their summonses. This system has been proven in over 45 countries and will be the catalyst to change aggressive driving behaviour of road users.

The RTD is also the agency implementing the UNECE standards in automotive engineering on the construction and use of all motor vehicles.

More specifically, the 13 standards have been gazetted into the Road Transport Rules (Construction and Use) with the aim to impose international safety standards on the vehicles.

With regard to buses, this means better, stiffer and more durable construction that improves safety.

While all these actions are being implemented, the industry’s involvement in steps to improve safety standards must be proactive and reciprocal.

It is critical that transport companies accept that safety is paramount and a requisite for providing a service.

Safety as a premium must be reflected as a return on investment for all industry players.

As quoted in the article, the statement that rings true and clear is that as long as any company continues to operate with impunity then there will be more trouble. This department couldn’t agree more!

Source: The Sun – May 29, 2009