Safe Speed Forums

Drivers stick to limit despite speed camera switch-off
By Chris Walker 9:00am Tuesday 3rd August 2010

MOTORING experts last night questioned whether Oxfordshire drivers would continue to obey speed limits after the county became the first in Britain to switch off all its speed cameras.

An Oxford Mail speed check yesterday discovered that just 15 out of 840 drivers (1.8 per cent) exceeded the 30mph speed limit at two redundant speed camera locations.

The investigation was carried out after Oxfordshire County Council’s decision to withdraw £600,000 of funding saw the county’s 72 fixed speed cameras and seven traffic lights cameras switched off on Sunday.

During an hour-long survey on the A4074 in Nuneham Courtenay, using a speed gun, we found just nine out of 573 (1.5 per cent) drivers broke the limit.
A second survey in Marston Ferry Road, Oxford, found six motorists out of 267 (2.2 per cent) driving at speeds of more than 30mph.

Paul Watters, head of roads policy at the AA, said a survey of its members last year showed that 69 per cent were in favour of speed cameras.
He said: “We’re not celebrating turning off speed cameras, because we don’t think in road safety terms it’s anything to celebrate.
“At the moment it’s a policy vacuum, with potential consequences for a change in behaviour.
“So far, the survey suggests things have started sensibly. But how long will that last?”
None of the speeding drivers in our survey would have received a fine or penalty points had the cameras been switched on, as none had reached 35mph, the speed at which enforcement begins.

Mark McArthur-Christie, chairman of the Oxford group of the Institute of Advanced Motorists, said: “It’s too early to call what will happen. Generally most drivers are reasonable, they’re not going to go too fast deliberately.
“However, speed does not kill. Inattention, people not observing properly and people not anticipating properly are what kills.”
The county council has still not decided whether to remove the fixed speed camera boxes or leave them in place.

Chief Insp Gill Wootton, Thames Valley Police’s head of roads policing, said: “Speed limits are there for a reason and it’s pleasing to see they’re being adhered to. The majority of drivers do stick to the speed limit for the road they’re travelling on.”

Nuneham Courtney Parish Council plans to hold a public meeting next week to discuss the possibility of paying the running costs of the camera on the A4074 through the village, as members want to hear residents’ opinions on the idea.

Parish councillor Lauren Lister said: “The middle of the village tends to be the slowest part, because the camera acts as a deterrent. People do bomb it through here though and huge lorries shake our house, because they’re going so quickly.”

Craig McAlpine, spokesman for the Thames Valley Safer Roads Partnership, which operated the cameras for the county council, said: “I’m not surprised compliance is very high. Our surveys at the Nuneham Courtney camera site show average speeds of 29.5mph and offences of only about 13 vehicles per day.
“This one-off test is therefore only a useful guide to speeds.”
What do you think? Write to Letters to the Editor, Oxford Mail, Osney Mead, Oxford, OX2 0EJ, send us an email at letters@oxfordmail.co.uk or have a say online at oxfordmail.co.uk

...huge lorries shake our house, because they’re going so quickly.

We cannot have local citizens decide on road safety policy

Not even if it their safety that is at risk?

Not when they're at risk of thinking only about themselves (conflict of interest >> NIMBYism and all that)

Not even if it their safety that is at risk?

Parish councillor Lauren Lister said: “The middle of the village tends to be the slowest part, because the camera acts as a deterrent. .

“However, speed does not kill. Inattention, people not observing properly and people not anticipating properly are what kills.”

That's like saying ravenous lions don't kill, walking into a enclosure full of ravenous lions by mistake is what kills.

Here's the Gatso in Nuneham Courtenay.

It is, to be fair, a village on a long straight road and arguably one of the less objectionable locations.

... only the foolish would navigate the village at much more than 35mph.

And should we not be imposing measures to constrain the dangerous actions of fools?

Of course! Measures that prevent careless driving, drunk and drugged driving, etc etc.

I didn't realise we were having an argument.