Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Apr 21, 2018 08:54

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 15:27 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 15:33
Posts: 25
I didn't agree with the road pricing petition that has recently
dominated the media, just because there is not enough information on
what the road pricing policy would be to weigh it up with.

However it did inspire me to create a petition of my own.


Tired of people moaning about speed cameras and how they have replaced
traffic police, it occurred to me why not use a proportion of the
revenue raised in fines from road safety cameras to fund highways
policing and better training of highways officers?


http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/roadpolicing/

_________________
It's not what you ride... it's how you ride it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 20:32 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 10:30
Posts: 56
Well I've signed Dan, but I think after this Budget, the Government has other ideas for the taxes raised.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 20:33 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 01:51
Posts: 329
Because at the end of the day it would be better to add a tax on fuel duty that averages out the money they would raise from cameras, and still be cheaper than the average camera fine money raised per person.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 20:48 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6731
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
I dont agree with this - those responsible for law enforcement should never be given a financial incentive to maximise the revenue from fines. That will inevitably distort enforcement priorities.

_________________
"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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 22:52 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
PeterE wrote:
I dont agree with this - those responsible for law enforcement should never be given a financial incentive to maximise the revenue from fines. That will inevitably distort enforcement priorities.


:yesyes: Exactly.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 02:43 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 15:33
Posts: 25
SafeSpeed wrote:
PeterE wrote:
I dont agree with this - those responsible for law enforcement should never be given a financial incentive to maximise the revenue from fines. That will inevitably distort enforcement priorities.


:yesyes: Exactly.


Actually, it's better than the current situation.

At the moment (pre April 1st 2007) Road Safety Camera Partnerships are responsible for raising penalties and they are also responsible for siting new road safety cameras.

Using revenue from fines to fund extra road policing is surely a better alternative then funding more cameras?

Reinvesting proceeds from the collection of fines in preventing further infringements and detecting further infringement is surely better than putting them into the general pot with revenues raised from general taxation and treating them as such?

Ultimately, it is the Government responsible for law enforcement and going by some of your own arguments, they have more financial incentive then any road safety camera partnership/police authority to raise revenue from fines.

_________________
It's not what you ride... it's how you ride it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 02:51 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6731
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
So would the police who benefited from the revenue have no influence whatsoever over the location or settings of cameras?

If not, who would, and what criteria would they use?

Would this scheme apply only to fixed cameras, or also to mobile cameras?

If the latter, the same question, redoubled.

_________________
"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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2007 23:14 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9234
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Have alway pondered the ideas that trfpols should/could work within the framework of the SCP - e.g get some portion of ticket revenue clawed back - perhaps traffic wardens could become self financing - till the awful ttruth about the scp quangos was revealed.
This week - PC Jones has a target of xx tickets , to make his force profitable .
Next week, due to political viability ---???? as the CC is put under pressure.
The Traffic Warden is sent out to hide behind busses to make up the revenue.


LIKE ALL THINGS MOTORING - COULD/CAN WE TRUST OFFICIALDOM TO ACT WITHIN THE RULES ????


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.271s | 15 Queries | GZIP : Off ]