Safe Speed Forums

Rise in accidents at camera sites
Lottie Gross • Published 4 Sep 2011 05:00

ACCIDENTS increased at blackspots across the Reading area after speed cameras were installed.

But road safety experts say it would be wrong to simply scrap the cameras and are calling for "healthy public debate" to ensure they are used more effectively.

The Department of Transport has published speed camera statistics from 75 local authorities in response to ministers' concerns that thousands have been installed nationally to make money rather than improve safety.

Safer Roads, which works with Berkshire's six unitary authorities and Thames Valley Police, says that of the 90 cameras installed across the county, 66 sites showed a decrease in accidents and at 12 places they increased. Across the Reading area there are 21 camera sites and at four of them accidents have risen, while 14 showed a decrease and three remained unchanged.

A camera was installed in Silverdale Road, Earley, in 1995 at a spot where there had been no accidents in the previous three years. There were four in the next three years, and another two in the period between 2007 and 2009.

One of the worst sites was in Reading's Tilehurst Road where there were 18 collisions during the three years before the cameras' installation in 1995, and that rose to 29 in the following three years. The figure did drop between 2007 and 2009 but still stood at 21.

The cameras themselves are largely funded by fees from errant motorists taking speed awareness courses. But Thames Valley Police are expected to comply by the end of September with a DoT request to reveal the fines revenue from each camera.

Chief Inspector Gill Wootton, head of the force roads policing department, warned that looking at statistics for individual camera sites in isolation could not prove or disprove their effectiveness, and she added: "Speed cameras are used across the country to help in the reduction of collisions and in lessening the impact of collisions when they occur."

Richard Owen, Safer Roads operations manager, said cameras cost around £20,000 each to install but said that in Berkshire they are only loaded with film one day out of 10.
He added: "I would encourage people to talk about the speed cameras in healthy public debate, and to discuss where they are and where they could be more effective, because they may be moved if necessary."

FACTBOX:
Berekely Avenue/A4 (30mph) - 14 collisions in three years prior to cameras being there, 19 in the three years after and 16 between 2007-09
Tilehurst Road (30mph) - 18 collisions in three years prior to the cameras being there, 29 in the three years after and 21 between 2007-09
Woodcote Road/A4074 (30mph) - 2 collisions in the three years prior to cameras being there, 8 in the three years after and 7 between 2007-09

Chief Inspector Gill Wootton, head of the force roads policing department, warned that looking at statistics for individual camera sites in isolation could not prove or disprove their effectiveness...

Richard Owen, Safer Roads operations manager, said cameras cost around £20,000 each to install but said that in Berkshire they are only loaded with film one day out of 10.
He added: "I would encourage people to talk about the speed cameras in healthy public debate, and to discuss where they are and where they could be more effective, because they may be moved if necessary."

Be sure to know the distinction between "accidents/collisions" and KSI accidents.

And that's even before we consider confounding factors such as RTTM (which still plays a part in how speed camera effectiveness are perceived) as well as Bias On Selection.

So you can capitalise on the illusion resulting from RTTM ? Where have I seen this tactic before?

So no chance of a speed camera manager considering the possibility that the road safety budget would be better spent instead on real safety measures!

Well one could say (& some like to) that there is no such thing as 'an accident'. That all traffic collisions are incidents.
There is also the distinction that there are many incidents which are never reported and there are Police reported (within the confines of their processing (checking boxes)). Then there are those where there is 'damage only' incidents. Is that what you were driving at ?
Perhaps what I said was not clear (enough) ?