An interesting question, indeed.
However, Safe Speed, to my way of thinking, is a twofold organisation.
Firstly it promotes safe and safer driving. COAST.
Secondly it ask the question "do speed cameras work? Do they always work? Are their examples of locations were speed cameras do not work or cause accidents?"
It is the role of SafeSpeed to ask questions.
So far I have not been impressed with the standard of reply from speed camera partnerships. They have not answered the questions.
They are one trick ponies, in my opinion. They claim to be safety partnerships, yet do not promote other aspects of safe driving.
A colleague at work told me of a row she had with her doctor. Every time she goes to him with an ailment (migraines, glandular fever, liver damage caused by glandular fever, etc.) He tells her: "It is because you are eating pork. If you stop eating pork, you will be well."
Her protestations that she does not like pork so never eats it fall on deaf ears. He
knows that eating pork is bad for you, so that's it! If you are ill, you must be eating pork!
Speed camera partnership: "There are a lot of accidents on the road, therefore this is caused by people driving too fast."
Protestations about poorly engineered roads, badly built roads, sunlight dazzling people or causing epileptic fits in otherwise healthy drivers, etc., etc., etc., are ignored because like the doctor who knows people are made ill by eating pork, speed camera partnerships know that road accidents are caused by speed, so therefore if you stop eating pork... er... I mean, if the partnership is allowed to erect more and more speed cameras, then all road accidents (no matter what their cause) will be reduced.