mega link
Speed camera manager resigns
RICHARD BALLS
28 July 2004 08:00
Norfolk's speed camera boss has resigned after being presented with the initial findings of a review into the siting of the controversial cameras, it emerged last night.
Barry Parnell, manager of the Norfolk Casualty Reduction Partnership (NCRP), stepped down shortly after seeing the interim report arising from the study ordered by Chief Constable Andy Hayman in a bid to ensure the cameras fitted the required criteria.
It is understood the highly confidential report, which will not be made public until September, is critical of the selection of some fixed camera locations.
The in-depth investigation came after an earlier study by the police found the data to justify the siting of some cameras was questionable and, in some cases, unavailable.
One notorious speed camera ? in Grapes Hill, Norwich ? was decommissioned in April because its positioning could not be justified.
Norfolk Police Authority has called for far greater transparency and accountability over where the cameras are located, the criteria used and the evidence on which decisions are made.
Supt Mark Veljovic, chairman of the partnership, confirmed Mr Parnell had handed in his resignation, but would not comment on the circumstances surrounding his decision.
A temporary replacement will be put in place from Monday while a new partnership manager is recruited.
Mr Parnell is on annual leave and is due to formally leave his post towards the end of August. He has worked for the force as a civilian for about 16 years and previously managed its administration of justice department.
The NCRP was launched in October 2001 and includes representatives from the police, Norfolk County Council, the Highways Agency, Norfolk Magistrates Courts Committee, the Crown Prosecution Service, Norfolk primary care trusts and the University of East Anglia.
It came almost 18 months after the Government unveiled a road safety strategy aimed at reducing the number of people killed or seriously injured by 40pc by 2010.
There are now 18 fixed 'yellow box' enforcement sites and four mobile camera units are deployed across 72 other high casualty locations.
According to the partnership, all the sites have a three-year history of at least two killed or serious injury collisions where speed was a factor per kilometre and it stresses that camera enforcement only takes place across 106 km of the county's 10,000 km of road.
Over its second year of operations, which ended in September 2003, the number of people seriously injured at the sites where cameras are used fell by 54pc compared with the average figure over the previous three years.
The use of speed cameras is a highly controversial issue nationally and Norfolk is no exception. Many people simply see the camera schemes as a money-making exercise and even some of those motorists who support their use are sceptical about the need for them at specific locations.
A NCRP newsletter produced this year says the partnership collected £1,125,490 in fixed penalty fines, just £70 more than its expenditure.
====================================
Notice how their operation MUST HAVE expanded to absorb the entire available budget?
We sent the following PR in response:
====================================
PR133: Safe Speed calls for a full audit of Speed Cameras
News: For immediate release
The resignation of the Norfolk's speed camera boss calls into question
the management of all our speed cameras says Safe Speed.
It has been announced today that Barry Parnell, manager of the Norfolk
Casualty Reduction Partnership (NCRP), resigned after seeing a report
intended to ensure that Norfolk's speed cameras met the rules.
Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign said: "We
must suspend all speed camera operations pending a complete audit of
speed cameras, the way they are operated and their effects on road
safety. We know that something was bad enough in Norfolk to force a
resignation, We know that road deaths have just gone up. We know that
there are peculiarities in the statistics used to justify speed
cameras and we know that the rules for speed camera placement are
fatally flawed."
Paul continued: "If the rules were flouted in Norfolk, and it took an
investigation by the Chief Constable to find out, how can we have any
confidence that other areas have their cameras properly administer and
installed according to the guidelines? Vital public confidence in the
system has been well and truly lost."
In a recent report for the BBC Radio "Today Programme", Professor
Emeritus Mervyn Stone said (regarding the partnership based speed
camera programme): "The emphasis on political acceptability has led
the program down a cul de sac in which essential public trust has been
lost. The mistakes already made should be openly recognised, and the
program should be subjected to a root and branch rethink."
It should came as no surprise that Safe Speed says: "Let's make speed
cameras as unacceptable as drink driving."
See the Safe Speed web site for further information:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk
<ends>
Notes and links for Editors
Press report on the resignation:
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/sto ... 3A44%3A750
Flaw in the rules for speed camera placement:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/rules.html
Fraudulent claims of speed camera benefits:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/pr127.html
The Stone Report:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/stone.html
FATALITIES FIGURES FOR GB 1950 to 2003 (2004 projected)
Excel spreadsheet:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/6800.xls
The same spreadsheet in a zip archive:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/6800.zip
The spreadsheet includes exact web references to official data sources
and a range of interesting graphs.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
