Safe Speed Forums

From an article in the East Anglian Daily Times – Friday July 9th 2004

South Suffolk MP Tim Yeo, the Conservative’s Shadow Secretary of State for the Environment and Transport, has called on the National Audit Office to undertake an independent and thorough audit of the Safety Camera Partnerships, which run all speed cameras in use throughout the UK.
“There is a widely-held suspicion among motorists that some speed cameras are not saving lives and are there to raise money. This claim is strengthened by the fact that, despite a massive growth in the number of speed cameras, there has been a 2% rise in road deaths,” says Mr Yeo.
“The Safety Camera Partnerships are bureaucracies funded entirely by the proceeds of speed cameras. Last year, two million fines were issued and it has been predicted that this year there could be three million. However, until now, it has not been possible to ascertain just how much money is raised from each camera and therefore how much money is being ploughed into improving road safety”
“Conservatives believe that the partnerships should be called upon to provide details of camera revenue to the NAO which can then be compared to road deaths/accidents rates in the vicinity.”

The MP's website is
http://www.conservatives.com/people/per ... sonID=4599

If it is the motorist and taxpayer providing the money to operate the pratnerships, then the motorist and taxpayer should have FULL view of all the accounts and justifications for every single scamera placed on the highway.
If we don't get that information, then they must be hiding something.
As for telling the pratnerships to audit their scameras, this is akin to asking a non driver to take their test, without an examiner, when they come back to say whether they have passed or not.

_________________
Semper in excreta, nur quantitat variat.

Just realised something. Not only does a motorist who speeds pays £60 fine, but everyone is paying for them out of their taxes, so we are all being fined, then if your caught speeding, its a bonus for mr blair and his croonies.

.......and here's me thinking, If I slowed down the cameras would starve and go away. Think I'll change my name to Mr Naive.

Yet more tired illogical crap from the Tories, a party I have voted for on many occasions.
Typical statement from the tired twits: "Under the plan, the safety criteria for locating each camera would be published on a website, along with the revenue - and fines imposed - generated from each camera each year; speed limits outside schools would be reduced to 20 mph at times when children are arriving and departing, and accompanied by flashing warning lights; while penalty points for speeding offences would be variable and range from one to six points. Standard fines would remain, as would a ban for excessive speeds."

Does this not sound like it is describing exactly the situation we have now? I am of the opinion it does. Perhaps I'll vote LibDem, my Grandfather will be turning in his grave.

_________________
It's Champion Man

Are the safety criteria for each camera really published on a website?

If so, perhaps you could give us a URL?

And maybe there should be a discussion of what engineering measures could be taken to remove the (supposed) necessity for a camera.

Why should we not have a "camera removal plan" for each location, involving changes to road layout, marking, signing etc.?

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

The accident stats have been published on many of the camera partnerships websites. I also believe that DFT are about to do the same with an amalgamated list if they haven't already done so.


The whole idea of the cameras is that the drivers most likely to crash are those that ignore "road layout, marking, signing etc." yet may be made to take more care when the contents of their pockets or their driving licences are at risk.

_________________
It's Champion Man

What, like car thieves? Guess not.
I agree that those those who persistently ignore the things you mention are more likely to crash, and perhaps even most likely. But the speed cameras themselves cannot address that sort of behaviour. All that happens is an FPN gets sent out, and even then that's only if the driver was also speeding. Worse still, that all takes place days or even weeks later. Absolutely nothing is done to moderate the behaviour of the driver at the time, and if the lousy driving was below the speed limit, nothing is done ever.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Chumps _ I have already commented on a dodgy stat by Cambs. Namely - it stated on 20 March 2004 that on that day in history for years 2000-2003 - 188 KSIs occurred on the A14 and A141 in the area - and this is why they were placing a mobile trap on that day.

Only one thing wrong with the statement - it is just not true.

I travelled on those very roads on that particular day every year since late 80s. No such accidents occurred. I was never held up in any aftermath. The relative and friends (mostly doctors based Papworth/Addnebrookes) were not called in to deal with emergency of such epic proportions.

And I can be specific as to the day - because the reason why we drive there on that particular day for one particular do - is to celebrate the guy's wedding anniversary!

So - we have to take all these stats - whatever side - with pinch of salt. Though weighting appears to be more on anti-scam side than pro-scam side based on the blatant discrepancy as above ..



The whole idea of the cameras is that the drivers most likely to crash are those that ignore "road layout, marking, signing etc." yet may be made to take more care when the contents of their pockets or their driving licences are at risk.[/quote]

Cannot really improve on Gatsobait's response here.

"Mail" carried story regarding speed traps along M4 Wiltshire stretch. SCP is enforcing with talivans along the bridges - yet the Wiltshire Police claim they are puzzled as to frequency of accidents along the stretch - and are reported in the paper as linking it to fatigue

So - why try to "cure" with emphasis on speed.

It is what we are saying - repeatedly - accidents occur for other reasons - and if drivers are succumbing to tiredness/boredom or whatever on this very long motorway across the south of England - then the emphasis should be on dangers of not taking breaks, etc.

Scams can detect this? Sure - they can - and fairies reside at bottom of my garden too!