The motion urges the Executive to take the necessary action. This is a cross-cutting issue, the responsibility for which does not fall to only one Minister. In order to achieve satisfactory progress, the Executive will be required to take a co-ordinated and cohesive approach, involving not only the Department of the Environment, but the Department of Education and the Department for Regional Development.

Almost 300 schoolchildren were injured travelling to and from school last year. Of those, 76 were passengers on school buses and 100 were pedestrians. The category of pedestrians includes pupils who had just alighted from or were about to board buses. Everyone will agree that those figures must be reduced and that we must do our utmost to improve children's safety.

Research in the United States shows that three times as many deaths occur when pupils are boarding or alighting from school buses as occur when they are the occupants of buses. As a result, the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America states that children are at a greater risk of being killed when boarding or alighting from a school bus than at any other time. It also states that more school bus safety efforts should be directed towards improving the safety of children when boarding and alighting from buses.

In 1992, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), which is part of the US Department of Transportation, published guidelines on pupil transportation safety. Those guidelines established minimum recommendations for a state highway safety programme for pupil transportation, including the identification, operation and maintenance of school buses used for carrying students. It also made recommendations for the training of passengers, pedestrians and cyclists. The NHTSA recommends that each state in America should have a comprehensive pupil transportation safety programme and that a single agency for the administration and collation of safety data be established.

The guidelines also recommend that each state enact legislation to provide for uniform procedures regarding school buses stopping on public highways for the loading and unloading of children, and that public information campaigns should be conducted regularly to ensure that the driving public understands fully the implications of school bus warning signals and requirements to stop for school buses that are loading or unloading children. Standards have also been published that establish requirements for safety devices to be installed on school buses to improve pedestrians' safety when they are close to the stopped school buses. The purpose of those standards is to minimise the likelihood of any vehicles passing a stopped bus and injuring nearby pedestrians.

In practical terms, the guidelines recommend that all school buses be clearly identifiable: they are usually painted a bright glossy yellow, which is the worldwide symbol of road safety. School bus drivers should receive training on unloading and unloading procedures, and education programmes have been created to teach children how to board and alight from school buses safely. In Kansas, those programmes are introduced at the start of each school year and repeated regularly throughout the year as a reminder.

School bus drivers should give a clear warning signal that they are about to stop the bus to allow children to alight or board by flashing amber lights that are clearly visible to other motorists. When the bus stops, red lights should flash and an extended arm safety device should be activated to indicate that the children must not cross immediately in front of the bus. The guidelines also recommend that when the school bus is stopped and the red lights are flashing, other motorists should be required to stop at a safe distance from the bus, regardless of the direction in which they are travelling.

Although the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has no authority to require states to adopt those guidelines, several states have enacted appropriate legislation. For example, in New York, not only must motorists not pass a stationary school bus, but when picking up or dropping off passengers who have to cross the public highway, the bus driver must instruct such passengers to cross in front of the bus while the driver keeps the bus halted with the red signals flashing until such passengers have reached the opposite side of the highway. Motorists are prohibited from overtaking a school bus when it is stopped and the penalty for doing so is a considerable fine, penalty points or a spell in jail. There are various methods by which that is enforced in other American states.

Members may also be aware of a project in Staffordshire in England where a local authority's yellow school bus fleet is claimed to be a resounding success in cutting congestion and taking children to school safely.

I have outlined measures being taken in the United States to improve school bus safety and, in particular, the efforts being made to improve the safety of school bus loading zones when children are boarding and alighting from buses. It is clear that school bus safety in the United States is regulated to a much greater extent than in Northern Ireland, and I understand that other countries such as Australia and New Zealand are basing proposals on the American experience. In its report, the Committee for the Environment recommended that urgent research be undertaken into the potential for new legislation prohibiting other road traffic from passing school buses, and a 1999 report on school transport made similar recommendations in the Republic of Ireland.

Surely it is about time that we took action to address the matter seriously. We can learn from the American experience. We can put measures in place to make travelling by school bus safer. Therefore, I urge the Executive to introduce several pilot schemes in rural and urban areas to assess the impact that the prevention of overtaking school buses while children are boarding or alighting would have, and to see whether such legislation would be suitable for application here. I commend the motion to Members.

As expected, many Members have indicated that they wish to speak in the debate, and for that reason I must limit all those who wish to speak to five minutes. I must also advise that it may not be possible to call everyone who wishes to speak.

Five minutes would not be enough time for me to go into the matters on which my Committee gave me authority to speak.

The opening speech referred to Members knowing that today would be the last appearance by the Minister of the Environment. Members do not know that. If an announcement has been made, it has not been conveyed to me as the Chairperson of the Committee for the Environment or to the members of that Committee that there is a new Minister of the Environment. If that is the case, it would be more appropriate if the relevant Committee were told properly, or told in the House, rather than a Member making an announcement on behalf of some anonymous individual.

I must add that I support the motion with some hesitation. I wish to put on record that anything that contributes to children travelling more safely to and from school deserves the unequivocal and wholehearted support of the Assembly. However, I must draw the attention of the House to matters relevant to the timing and content of the motion.

There is no need for the Executive to conduct an investigation, as suggested, into the welfare of children and school transport because the Committee for the Environment has already dealt with that matter comprehensively.

My Committee spent more than a year carrying out a thorough inquiry not just into the safety of children getting on and off school buses but into every aspect of school transport safety. The Committee considered submissions from 57 groups and individuals. It took oral evidence from 13 different sources, including the leading Departments and the Royal Ulster Constabulary, and it employed leading specialist transport consultants to assess critically and contribute to its findings. The report was published and was in Members' hands in September 2001.

Several of the Committee's 28 recommendations relate directly to the motion and are relevant to some of the points made by Mr Kennedy. Page 26 of the report deals in some length with the issue of children boarding and alighting from buses, and the Committee recommended, among many other matters,

The Committee made several recommendations, which were highlighted in its report. I do not have the time to go into those recommendations in this debate. I wrote to the Minister and his Department on several occasions regarding the report, but it was not until the eve of this debate that a contribution was received from the Department of the Environment. Up until then, the Committee received little or nothing of substance from the Department. Indeed, last Thursday, at the request of my Committee, senior officials from the Department of the Environment appeared before the Committee to bring Members up to date on the progress, or lack of progress, that had been made with regard to the report.

Unfortunately, it transpired that their brief was short, and it was indicated that it may be at least four months before the Department will get round to appointing an official to look at the report's key recommendations in any depth. Even then, it is intended to recruit outside consultants to advance the work.

My Committee's despair and frustration will be appreciated. I inform the House of that, because as far back as October last year we requested that major revenue be made available to implement some of the recommendations. Up until now, we have not received a substantial response. However, we shall demand one. If it is Mr Foster's final appearance as Minister today, make no mistake about it - my Committee will be demanding that the new Minister take action on the issue, because we have not had action to date.

Time has run out, but there are many other things that I would like to have said on behalf of the Committee.

TOP

I support the motion. I do not need to tell the House that the safety of our children is of paramount importance, and issues such as a safe means of transport to and from school deserve priority. Safety when boarding or alighting from buses is not the only issue - on-board safety and the proximity of bus stops to children's homes are also important. We all want to keep our children safe, and we all have a responsibility to do what we can to prevent accidents and, as has been mentioned this afternoon, deaths.

Increased traffic is already a problem on our roads, and a drive is under way to encourage people to make more efficient use of public transport. To do so, parents must be assured that their children will be safe on the journeys to and from school and that there will be adequate supervision to prevent accidents when boarding or alighting from buses. Parents must also be assured that safety measures will be in place when their children are travelling on the buses. As a member of the Committee for Education we considered several measures, including the use of seatbelts; the abolition of the "3 for 2" seats; lights and signage on school buses; new legislation to either prohibit or severely reduce the speed of traffic overtaking school buses; the design of drop-off and pick-up points; supervision at road crossings; and the yellow bus system used in the United States. All those measures have the potential to reduce deaths or casualties, but each has a cost. All would help to protect the safety of children using transport to and from schools.

As has been mentioned by the Chairperson of the Committee for the Environment - the Committee of which I have recently become a member - the school transport inquiry report showed that the cost of installing seat belts is estimated at £180 million, which includes £40 million in recurrent costs. Can we put a price on a child's life? In its presentation to the Committee last week, departmental representatives talked about the benefits of preventing road casualties. In economic costs, a death was equal to £1 million. A sum of £1 million would compensate no parent for the loss of a child.

Safety on school transport is a classic example of an opportunity for interdepartmental co-operation. It could involve the Department of Education, the Department for Regional Development and the Department of the Environment. However, that co-operation is not apparent because costs appear to be given a higher priority than children's lives.

Road safety education programmes are important to increase awareness of safety issues. It is vital that the safer routes to school initiative be expanded and delivered to all schools across Northern Ireland. We must ensure that our Administration delivers for young people. Its effects would be to encourage good practice, improve the co-ordination of transport services for children and emphasise the user of a public service rather than the provider.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. I support the motion, and I welcome the presence of the Minister of the Environment and the Minister of Education. The safety of children on school buses involves our road system and many Departments, including Education and Environment. The matter has been close to the hearts of the members of the Education Committee for some time. We asked for action on this issue. The House's attention has been drawn today to the Environment Committee's report, which was issued last year and on which no action has been taken. That must be changed.

I agree with Ms Lewsley that nothing is more important than the lives and welfare of our children. Action is vital. I am not sure that £140 million would be needed to install seat belts, but we should start that process. Seat belts are very expensive, but the lack of seat belts has not caused the deaths of children. Deaths occur mainly when children are boarding or alighting from buses, and mostly outside the bus, rather than when travelling on the bus. Seat belts would not be so very expensive.

Bus stops are a major danger zone. Passing vehicles kill or injure children leaving a bus stop or boarding a bus. The Department of the Environment alleviated that problem recently by providing space for buses at the sides of busy roads to allow traffic to continue while children board buses.

More work must be done to find out what system we should use. The Environment Committee has done much good work in gathering all the information; there is enough evidence available for action to be taken.

There is the possibility of a new collegiate system of schooling. That will require more transport for children. There are fewer children now, and that may necessitate the closure of some schools. That would oblige children to travel greater distances to the nearest school. The emissions from the additional buses will create an environmental problem.

Educating the public, children and bus drivers to the fact that children cannot tell the speed of oncoming traffic is important. Drivers seem to think that children know the speed that drivers are travelling at, and children seem to think that drivers see them, when it is obvious that they do not. Seeing a child at 20 metres can be the first sight that a driver has of a child leaving the front of a bus, and that can have serious consequences.

There is also the issue of the speed of drivers passing buses, and that is where the yellow bus scheme in America comes into its own. Anyone driving at more than 30 mph has a 90% chance of causing death. When speeds are reduced that percentage drops considerably. It has been shown that speed is an important factor. The American system is better than a system of flashing lights. A study in Tasmania has proved that flashing lights do not slow traffic - motorists will only slow down if they face penalties. Flashing lights may help, but it is almost necessary to stop traffic passing a bus when children are alighting or boarding. It is as simple as that. Go raibh maith agat.

I thank Mr Kennedy for moving this motion. I am also pleased that both Ministers are here.

I also share the concern expressed by Mr McCrea, the Chairperson of the Committee for the Environment, that his report has been gathering dust since September. Why has action not been taken? The report prepared by the Committee is detailed, informative and comprehensive in every way. I give full marks to the members of the Committee.

I am not so happy with the response from the Department of the Environment. Why has it taken so long to respond to the various concerns of the Committee? Surely a report provided by any Committee deserves to be taken seriously and acted on, especially when it involves such a serious matter as protecting the lives of our schoolchildren. I understand that Translink and the education boards have responded, but the Department of the Environment has not.

I made a written submission to the Committee, as did Ards Borough Council. We concentrated on four main themes, which were included in the Committee's report along with several others, and were among the many recommendations made to the Executive.

As the motion says, we need immediate measures to safeguard our children when using school buses. I have four main worries. First, I am concerned that the use of a double seat by three children is allowed. We must adopt a policy of one seat, one child. Secondly, on the question of seat belts, an inequality already exists in that private bus operators are, rightly, required by law to have seat belts on every seat, whereas public transport operators are not. That is grossly unfair, and I believe that there should be seatbelts for every seat on all our buses.

Thirdly, I support fully the policy of prohibiting standing on school buses. How can we ask for seat belts for all passengers and then allow standing? That is unacceptable. My fourth area of concern was highlighted by the presentation made to the Committee by the Women's Institute of Northern Ireland. Mrs Lyttle, from Portaferry in my constituency, who is chairperson of the international Women's Institute, made a good case for immediate safety improvements on the buses for all schoolchildren. Like myself, the Women's Institute was deeply touched by the death on the main road between Portaferry and Kircubbin in 1998 of a child who had just got off a school bus to visit his grandparents. Unfortunately, a passing car struck the youngster, who was fatally injured. In my opinion, another young life was lost unnecessarily. There have been other incidents in which fatalities have occurred.

We must support the proposals of the Portaferry Women's Institute to achieve improvements in safety for youngsters getting on or alighting from a bus. Stopping the traffic has been suggested and was included as a recommendation in the Committee's report. I understand that in some countries, the traffic is stopped in both directions. That must be looked at immediately.

The 28 recommendations contained in the report of the Committee for the Environment must be taken seriously and acted on as soon as possible. Otherwise, we will continue to have tragic accidents like the one that occurred outside Kircubbin in my constituency a few years ago. Surely every Member in the Assembly wants to avoid such a repetition. I support the motion, and I hope that the full report will be brought to the Assembly in due course and the 28 recommendations acted on immediately.

I acknowledge the work of the Minister and, on his departure, I congratulate him on the work that he has done and on his commitment to road safety. I know that he made changes for the better. I will always say that it will never be enough - but I would say that. I urge the Member who takes the Minister's place to make the issue of road safety a top priority. The permanent secretary promised the Public Accounts Committee that that would be done.

I urge the new Minister to treat road safety as the top priority issue. I do not want to go on at length because everything necessary has been said about buses, road safety and the potential for following the example of the United States. There are interesting examples in the different states.

I welcome and support the motion wholeheartedly. We have learnt from the Chairperson of the Committee about the relevant report, of which I am aware. I would not knock the fact that the motion has been tabled, as Members are all in this together. If a Member decides to table a motion to do something about a report that is sitting on a shelf, that is all the better, given that it is for the safety of children. It does not matter, therefore, who says it or when it is said, as long as it has the goal of saving lives. Every effort must be made to make buses, roads, and public transport in general, safer for our children.

I want to touch on the issue of ministerial and departmental responsibility for road safety. My Colleague, Ms McWilliams, recently took a delegation from the Saintfield Road to meet the Minister for Regional Development, Mr Peter Robinson, to bring to his attention the dangers for children on that road. She had a constructive meeting, and she is hopeful that a pelican crossing will be put in place. I am using that as an example, because the problem is in knowing which Minister and which Department to go to.

Mr Kennedy, in his opening remarks, asked who covered the issue. In this case, the Department of Education, the Department of the Environment and the Department for Regional Development all have a role. It is too fragmented with regard to which Department has responsibility for ensuring action. That is an inappropriate way to deal with such an important issue. I urge the Executive to give the matter serious consideration and to bring road safety under one roof.

I want to conclude by quoting a figure that I have stated on many occasions, because I am an advocate of road safety. It is a figure that is still startling even when it is repeated - 150 road deaths per year in Northern Ireland, which is higher than the United Kingdom average, and 12,000 casualties per year. Patricia Lewsley has spoken about the human cost and that goes without saying, but 12,000 road casualties a year costs the economy £450 million a year. That shocks me every time I say it. When we seriously start to prioritise road safety we will not only save lives, we will save money. However, lives are much more important. I support the motion and hope that something is done promptly.

Every day over 100,000 children use transport in different parts of the North. It is a useful facility for both parents and children. It is helpful towards children's learning, and it widens opportunities and choice for parents. Unfortunately, as the motion states, there are accompanying dangers. Sadly, from time to time they involve the loss of young lives.

Already this winter two children have lost their lives when, according to the reports, alighting from school transport vehicles.

Two aspects of school transport vehicles have been mentioned by other Members: the provision of seatbelts and regulations such as the "3 for 2" seating rule. Both these received attention in the Committee for the Environment's report, and I hope that work will continue.

We have to understand that the facts show that most fatalities around school transport occur when children are alighting from school buses, so areas where children are either boarding or alighting from school buses need particular attention. School buses include those provided by the boards, those provided by Translink and the privately owned buses that do school transport runs on contract from the education and library boards.

How recognisable are school transport vehicles, especially when children are boarding or alighting? I support strongly the idea of having better warning lights fitted on all school buses to improve the visibility of the vehicles and to draw the attention of passing motorists to the fact that children are boarding or alighting and are somewhere around the bus. In my constituency of Fermanagh and South Tyrone there was a fatality a couple of weeks before Christmas. A 14-year-old child had got off a bus, and it had moved on, but as she crossed the road to get to her home, an oncoming car hit the child. From the reports I understand that there was no fault with the school bus driver, with the operation of the bus or with the driver of the oncoming vehicle, who was unfortunately caught up in the accident. That is why we must think about how we warn passing motorists of the dangers to children around that time.

I also support a cross-departmental approach involving the Department for Regional Development, and, again, I call for the gritting of all school bus routes in winter. That would make an important contribution, as would the provision of parking areas where buses could pull in off a main road to allow children to get on and off. Although children get road safety education in schools, this is so important that the Department of Education should make sure that in the interest of their safety, children get specific education about personal safety and school transport.

TOP

One issue is sure to provoke the same degree of concern and frustration at the same time of the year, each year, and that is the overcrowding of school buses and the safety of pupils travelling by bus. Problems have risen at the start of every term over the past few years and continue to affect many school routes across the Province. Every September for the past five years we have had horror stories of over 100 children being squeezed onto school buses every morning and of pupils being bypassed because buses are overcrowded. Although there has not been a serious accident yet because of this, the potential for injury to passengers remains at an unwarranted high.

Unfortunately, the lives of many children have been claimed, and many serious injuries have been sustained as pupils have alighted from school buses. In almost every instance it has been impossible for the driver of the overtaking vehicle to take evasive action when pupils step out into their path.

One area of local life which the Assembly has the power to address and improve is the overcrowding of school buses. The reason for that is twofold. The main one is that legislation currently classifies 13-year-olds as children and allocates three such children to a double seat on school buses, but children of that age are just too big for that. To compound the problem, pupils have school bags, kitbags, hockey sticks and art folders with them, which often have to be set on the floor because of insufficient storage space, making it difficult for standing passengers. A change in the legislation is, therefore, essential to deal with the problem, as more buses are needed to carry children to and from school.

Therein lies the second problem: Translink will only provide the transport that the local education board pays for. In the past four years, lobbying has failed to make any progress on that matter, with the education boards claiming that no problem exists. It is inevitable that more transport will have to be provided, as it is only a matter of time before there is a serious accident. Translink representatives, although co-operative, say that they are only fulfilling their legislative obligations and that, as things stand, they cannot provide further transport or safety measures.

There is no excuse for packing buses full of schoolchildren and no reason for legislation's not addressing children's safety when alighting from school buses. I am gravely concerned about the safety of children using the school bus service, including those attending Glastry College, Comber High School and Regent House in my constituency. Their safety does not get sufficient priority and, again, it is only a matter of time before serious injuries are sustained.

I welcome the publication last September of the Committee for the Environment's report into school transport. I am glad that the public inquiry found in favour of many of the proposals requested by interested groups and organisations. Most encouraging was the recommendation that serious consideration be given to the use of hazard lights on school buses. There is an argument that cars and other vehicles should be prevented from overtaking school buses that slow down and stop to allow children to alight, and that also display the new signage.

Another encouraging factor was the proposal to abolish the "3 for 2" seating arrangement, which stipulates that three young people should share a seat constructed for two adults. Children today are taller and bigger than children used to be, and they carry more equipment and coursework with them to school. It is too much to squeeze three children onto one double seat. I am glad that the Committee has called for the implementation of the one-seat-for-one-pupil policy and that legislation that permits children to stand on school buses is being phased out. All pupils should be entitled to a seat.

Other recommendations such as those that call for improved liaison between schools and service providers, misbehaviour and vandalism to be addressed, a reduction in the baggage carried by children on buses and the development of a new and enhanced road safety education programme are to be welcomed.

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle. Everyone agrees that protecting schoolchildren as they travel to and from school on buses is hugely important. Sábháilteacht ár bpáistí agus iad ag taisteal ar scoil ag iad ag taisteal abhaile.

There is merit in the argument that the Executive should have taken action on this before now, and the recommendations of the Committee for the Environment should have been acted upon decisively. It is to be hoped that a more joined-up approach will be taken in future.

I welcome the presence of Mr Foster and Mr McGuinness. When matters within the remit of the Department for Regional Development arise, Mr P Robinson should be here also.

I support many of the recommendations contained in the Environment Committee's report. It is legal for dozens of schoolchildren to stand in school buses, which not only puts them in danger but obscures the driver's view when he checks his mirror. The provision of seat belts and illuminated school bus signs is important. The American model of good practice has been examined, and another model of good practice exists in Germany, where the emphasis is placed on information for car drivers, with motorists educated about the likely patterns of behaviour of schoolchildren in traffic.

Iris Robinson made a good point about the problem being worsened by the heavy school bags that children must carry. In India there are restrictions on the number and weight of bags that children should be expected to carry. If those limits are exceeded, the school is fined. The web site of the North Western Health Board in Donegal contains advice on school bag safety.

We are united in our hope, expectations and prayers for the safe journeys of schoolchildren. When they leave home in the morning, the last thing that anyone wants or expects is an accident. The subject is made pertinent by the recent death of Julie Meldrum in Fermanagh, which other Members mentioned.

I am aware of the time restrictions, but I will refer to the Department for Regional Development's safer routes to school initiative. I welcome the western division of the Road Service's provision of two lay-bys and attendant footways at Slevin's Crossroads at Tattyreagh near Omagh. Those works are being completed on the main Omagh to Fintona road as a result of lobbying and a site meeting, which my Colleagues and I initiated about two years ago as part of the safer routes to school initiative. A near-fatal accident occurred there just over 10 years ago.

The development of the safer routes to school initiative by the Department for Regional Development is important, but the approach to the issue must be joined up. The statutory walking distance of two miles for primary schoolchildren and three miles for post-primary schoolchildren must be relaxed, and that is a particular problem in isolated rural areas. Last week, I lobbied for the provision of safe transport home for a post-primary school pupil who is dropped off in a forested rural area 2·8 miles from her home. She is expected to walk home between 4.00 pm and 5.00 pm in winter through a forested region. All those initiatives are important, as is a joined-up approach. Rumble strips should be added to roads. Flashing lights should be added to buses, and they could also be erected outside schools and timed to warn motorists when children are arriving at, or leaving, school.

I commend the motion and any action that concentrates the mind of the Ministers responsible for the matter. I wish Mr Foster all the best and congratulate him on the good work that he has done as Minister.

TOP

As a dedicated and slowly maturing Back-Bencher, I associate myself with Members' tributes to Minister Sam Foster. He is a man of great experience, integrity and wisdom, and I know that he will continue to give excellent service, perhaps in a more relaxed fashion, to the Assembly and to his constituents.

I commend the Member for his motion. It takes account of the strong feelings expressed throughout the community that the safety of children travelling to and from school is a matter of the greatest importance.

It is also a confirmation of the importance of the exhaustive process of consultation on the subject by the Committee for the Environment. That resulted in the publication of the 'Report on the Inquiry into Transport Used for Children Travelling to and from School', which contains many recommendations aimed at maintaining a safer environment for our children.

I may be going over ground covered by the Chairperson. However, perhaps it is a good thing that, on this issue at least, we are singing from the same hymn sheet. The Committee's report has been doing the rounds in the relevant Departments for some time. The Department for Regional Development, the Department of Education, and the Department for Employment and Learning have responded appropriately. Unfortunately the lead Department, the Department of the Environment, has not been so forthcoming. This is surprising, given the Minister's undoubted and very strong commitment to road safety. However, feet are being dragged, perhaps because of the cost or the complexities of such long standing and neglect. A start must be made - and the sooner the better - before the tragedy that is "waiting to happen", happens.

I must refer to one departmental reaction to the last part of recommendation 1 in the report - the need to carry out a regulatory impact assessment

That is a proper and inevitable step. It seems to me that the Department is reluctant to set things in motion because of the waves that might be created, either because certain recommendations would be considered essential but prohibitively expensive, or because the benefits would be too little to justify the expense.

With regard to the specifics of the motion, I suggest that the Executive have ready access to a great deal of the information that an investigation might discover. Much of what is needed is to be found in the Committee's report - for example, in recommendations 8 and 9, which deal with effective school bus signs and warning lights. Recommendation 12 considers the possible benefits of a dedicated school bus system, like the American yellow buses. Recommendation 14 deals specifically with action to reduce the risks of boarding and alighting from school buses. No doubt there are additional or alternative actions that could be taken. However, those measures would be a good, affordable start.

Drivers have an awesome responsibility. They must appreciate, or be taught, the importance of self-restraint and patience. A car in motion is a terrifying weapon when it comes into contact with fragile flesh. Motorists must be made aware of the power that they have to kill, maim and cause distress and anguish to their neighbours. They must learn self-restraint and consideration in every situation, all the time. If they do that, everything else will be easy.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>