Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Thu Apr 23, 2026 12:49

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 00:21 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 15:49
Posts: 393
Undercover probe reveals the 'buckets of money' made from speed cameras
14.10.06

Britain's booming speed camera network is at the centre of a giant 'scam' aimed at making 'buckets of money' for the Government, the boss of a leading supplier of the devices has admitted.

The sensational confession was made by the chief executive of Tele-Traffic, which supplies cameras to virtually every police force in Britain.

His unguarded comments, made to an undercover reporter posing as a prospective buyer of speed cameras, will add new weight to the public's perception that the gadgets are designed more for making money than improving road safety.

The Tele-Traffic boss, Jon Bond, who was until a few months ago the police Chief Superintendent in charge of speed cameras in Warwickshire, urged our reporter to place an order and promised: 'There will be so much money coming in you won't know what to do with it.'

He and his colleagues revealed how:

So many motorists are being snared that courts are struggling to process the sheer volume of cheques sent to pay fines.

Tele-Traffic is run by former traffic police who offer to introduce customers to currently serving officers willing to give advice on the products.

The Government manipulates the speed camera system so that the Treasury rakes in the multi-million-pound profits without the cash going back to improve roads.

The Mail on Sunday posed as the London agents for an Eastern European firm keen to establish a speed camera network in their own country. We asked how the cameras operated in Britain - and the answers we received will shock many, but also confirm the darkest suspicions of millions of motorists.

The Tele-Traffic team encouraged our reporters to site any cameras they bought where they could catch 'businessmen in the morning and school-run mums in the afternoon.'

Setting up cameras in new areas was the equivalent of having 'a blank cheque book', they said, guaranteeing 'when you first set up you will have lots of offences, you will have bucketfuls'.

Britain's speed camera system is run by more than 40 regional road safety partnerships, made up of representatives from police, courts and councils.

The partnerships are funded by the Department of Transport, which demands that each region gives target figures for the number of motorists they plan to catch speeding over the next year. If these targets are not met, then Whitehall cuts the size of its funding.

This has the effect of making the local partnership set low targets, rather than risk losing cash by falling short of predictions. And that is good news for the Government, since the system is geared so that any extra fines go to the Treasury.

Warwickshire, for example, had set a target of issuing 80,000 tickets in a year. Under the recently amended rules all the revenue from the fines goes to central government, with a portion of it returned to local authorities and to fund the road safety partnerships.

If Warwickshire only managed to catch 60,000 motorists, then the local partnership would have to make good the shortfall itself so it dare not undershoot. If, however, it fined 100,000 motorists, then all revenue from the additional 20,000 fines would disappear to the Treasury.

So although it might appear that the Government's rules are intended to encourage partnerships - to set low targets and therefore not persecute an excessive number of motorists - the practical effect of them is to ensure that the targets are regularly broken and more, rather than fewer, motorists are ensnared.

And although it escapes any of the blame, the Government picks up all the profits.

Further, partnerships that easily overshoot their targets one year can set higher ones the next, so growing their empires.

Mr Bond claimed that the Government was so keen to increase this revenue that it announced changes to the rules last year.

Instead of fines going directly to fund the partnerships, that money will, from 2007, go direct to the Treasury. Whitehall will then allocate funds for road safety to local authorities to use as part of their general transport plan, in theory breaking the link between fines and revenue.

'This was done so the Government wasn't perceived to be revenue raising,' explained Mr Bond. 'But the reality is that the Government is actually raking off even more money than before. They are giving less money to the partnerships than they would have received through the old operation. So it's all a scam - it's smoke and mirrors.

'The Treasury cannot lose and they get the cash while the camera operators are the ones who get all the criticism. Brilliant, really.'

But successful partnerships do rake in increased grants, enabling them to engage more staff, move into bigger premises and methodically expand their empires. The result is an ever-burgeoning speed camera industry in which central Government, local worthies and gadget suppliers all have a stake. But it costs the motorist millions of pounds in fines, plus immeasurable inconvenience.

Again, critics said yesterday, road safety is forgotten. The speed camera system is a scandal that is all about hitting targets, building local empires and raising money for Government.

Paul Smith, of the motorist organisation Safespeed, said: 'This Mail on Sunday investigation has given us the first glimpse of the secret society behind the world of camera partnerships and the private firms which are picking up lucrative contracts from them.

'In Tele-Traffic you are showing us a company which has become a virtual retirement home for police officers. I believe that now this Pandora's box has been opened there will be more to come.'

Tele-Traffic UK supplies 97 per cent of the country's police forces with portable laser cameras which are hand-held or set up in special roving police vans.

Mr Bond's partners are Peter Gay, a former PC and now the firm's customer service manager, and Mike Ricketts, another former policeman.

Posing as foreign businessmen, The Mail on Sunday met them over dinner in a Michelin-starred restaurant at a five-star hotel in the Cotswolds.

At the beginning of the meeting the Tele-Traffic team stressed the importance of speed cameras in promoting road safety. But then the trio began to speak more openly about the 'revenue raising', truth behind the cameras and that remained the dominant theme of the evening.

Mr Bond at least is well qualified in that respect. Five years ago he set up the Warwickshire Safety Camera Partnership, which has a website mockingly called 'smilecamera. co.uk'. But Mr Bond admitted that during his tenure as chairman of the Warwickshire partnership the number of cameras in that county doubled and the courts were swamped with cheques from speeding motorists.

Mr Bond, who is due to address the annual conference of the Association of Chief Police Officers this week, said: 'The beauty of the mobile units we sell is their flexibility. They will catch businessmen going into work in the morning and school-run mums in the afternoon.

'There will be so much money coming in you won't know what to do with it.' Asked how Tele-Traffic could guarantee a return on the cost of their cameras, Mr Gay laughed and said: 'You are going to get your revenue. That, at the end of the day, is not a problem.'

Mr Bond said: 'The money will come in in buckets, a promise repeated during the course of the evening by his colleagues, who also spoke in terms of generating 'buckets' of money.

So much so, said Mr Bond, that the courts - which process fines and issue the points on a driver's licence - have been struggling to cope with all the cheques. Again, he made clear that the speed camera industry was all about meeting targets rather than preventing accidents.

He said: 'It will be too much for you to cope with. It will be too many offences - you won't be able to cope with them.

'In Warwickshire last year we issued 80,000 tickets when we could probably have done double that number. But we couldn't because the courts, which handle the fines, wouldn't have been able to cope.

'Imagine 80,000 cheques for £60 coming through your door in a given year. They were swamped and we are the smallest of all the speed partnerships.'

Mr Bond said that in his last year in Warwickshire he deliberately sent officers out to quiet roads when the number of fines approached the limit the courts could cope with an extraordinary story that makes a mockery of the police's claim that speeding tickets are about safety.

'I had to send the camera operators out to roads where they would only catch one or two people an hour,' he said.

Tele-Traffic sells basic hand-held laser speed cameras for £3,000 and the directors told how this could be recovered from speeding drivers in just an hour. Mr Gay said: 'Take the UK model of £60 a pop. If you buy a piece of our kit at £3,000, then operate it in a two-hour session, on an averagely busy road, you will catch about 100 drivers that's £6,000.

He also told how Tele-Traffic was expecting approval from the DoT for a camera the company has developed which can trap motorists from almost a mile away, raking in even more cash.

Tele-Traffic's business is not limited to the UK. Ireland has bought more than 400 laser cameras from their company - and over there, the government is quite open about using cameras to raise revenue.

Mr Ricketts said the Irish government had made an election promise to reduce stamp duty and had made it clear they would make up the lost revenue from speeding fines.

'We have produced for them a new system to make up that revenue,' Mr Ricketts said. 'So they are going the opposite way to the UK Government. They are actually openly promoting speed enforcement as their revenue raiser.'

One thing Tele-Traffic appeared less open about was an alarming discovery it made last year that thousands of motorists might have been wrongly prosecuted for speeding. Mr Gay told how the son of the firm's founder, another former chief superintendent, was caught speeding by a police officer using one of the firm's lasers in a camera on the A14 last year.

He added: 'We looked into it and the officer operating it had not been trained properly, which technically makes the prosecution invalid. We told them that meant every prosecution over the previous five years could also be invalid because of the absence of training. But they insisted on prosecuting him anyway.'

Despite having a news section on its website, Tele-Traffic never told the public about the 'unsafe', prosecutions and there is no record of any of the police forces covering the A14 making any such declaration either.

Happy that our meeting had gone well, Mr Bond and his colleagues promised that it would be 'no problem', for them to introduce the undercover reporters to serving policemen on the Warwickshire Safety Camera Partnership and get hold of unpublished figures for how much the Treasury is raking in from speed cameras.

Last night motorists campaign groups demanded an inquiry.

Tony Vickers, of the Association of British Drivers, said: 'Motorists have suspected for many years that the whole system is against them - now we have the proof that it starts with the Labour Government and goes downwards.

'While there is no evidence that any individual on the partnerships profits from this, the truth of the matter is that it is enabling certain police officers to build mini-empires which are completely unaccountable to anyone but the Treasury.'

Link to article


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 00:39 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 01:48
Posts: 526
Location: Netherlands
Great minds think alike, orange!
I have just deleted my post which I submitted a few minutes after yours.

Here's the link, anyway:
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/liv ... =NEWS&ct=5

Seems pretty heavy to me, I wonder what the reactions and repercussions will be.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 01:10 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Safe Speed issued the following PR at 23:24:

PR382: An inside glimpse of the evil empire - it isn't pretty

PAUL SMITH IS IN LONDON ON SUNDAY AND MONDAY AND AVAILABLE FOR INTERVIEW

news: for immediate release

An exclusive investigation by the Mail on Sunday has revealed some truly
shocking facts about the UK's hated speed camera programme. Undercover
reporters visited a company that imports speed cameras, posing as buyers. The
information they received is frightening.

Apparently the former manager of a camera partnership admitted to knowing that
prosecutions were invalid because an operator (or operators) did not have the
training that the law requires. To continue to prosecute motorists in such
circumstances is surely perverting the course of justice. There must be a
criminal investigation.

And for the first time we have seen a clear admission that speed camera
prosecutions are overloading the court system.

The Mail on Sunday is keen to say that the government uses speed cameras to
raise revenue. Safe Speed does not agree, but the commercial motivations appear
clearly revealed at Teletraffic, and of course 'empire building partnerships'
must generate cash to build.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "The speed camera evil empire is crumbling and
fit for collapse. The idea that the law of the land is being administered in a
slapdash and greedy fashion is bad enough. That it exists on the basis of false
safety claims, when all that has been delivered is more danger, is a scandal of
national proportion in itself."

"Some will find the revelations in the Mail On Sunday astonishing, but I know
from my own work that it's just the tip of the iceberg."

"Speed cameras are 21st century snake oil. Many of the purveyors are
charlatans, and all of them are wrong. The widespread side effects of the
infernal cameras conspire to damage road safety, the police public
relationship, respect for the judiciary, respect for official road safety
messages and significantly worsen the experience of living in Britain."

"The damage to road safety is massive, with roads fatalities now around 1,200
lives per year above the predictions of a decade ago. I am absolutely certain
that bad road safety policy, founded on speed cameras is to blame."

"It's game over for speed cameras. The empire will not strike back. This tragic
episode in UK road safety will go down in history as a vast folly.

<ends>

_________________
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 Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 05:31 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
Is this how ACPO makes its extra cash? "Mr Bond, who is due to address the annual conference of the Association of Chief Police Officers this week, "

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 09:32 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
They’re all tow rags, it all works like a mafia and the government are in on it. It’s a feeding frenzy by greedy people who are only looking after their own interests.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 09:59 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Dixie wrote:
...it all works like a mafia and the government are in on it. It’s a feeding frenzy by greedy people who are only looking after their own interests.


Nice summary. I might use that in a second PR. How would you like to be described? 'Safe Speed visitor'? {full name}? Anything else?

_________________
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 Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 10:04 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
SafeSpeed wrote:
Dixie wrote:
...it all works like a mafia and the government are in on it. It’s a feeding frenzy by greedy people who are only looking after their own interests.


Nice summary. I might use that in a second PR. How would you like to be described? 'Safe Speed visitor'? {full name}? Anything else?


How about SafeSpeed Supporter but no name just now I’ve got something on the go at the monment.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 10:10 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
"whilst there are buckets of money to be collected the real road safety stastics are being distorted, and resourses put into profitable sites rather than road safety"
another supporter...

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 10:21 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
After reading the above article by the Mail, for a second time, it makes me wish all the more that I was a rich person because I’d fund Paul Smith to the hilt, unfortunately I’m not rich. If there are any people with money reading this I’d like to ask them to consider helping this guy and give him the support he needs to fight a corrupt government with its band of greedy followers.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 10:50 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 15:05
Posts: 1225
Location: Glasgow
Charlatans, every single one of them. And that includes YOU Mr Steve Callaghan of CSCP. Hope you are reading this because no-one will sympathise with your playing the victim after this little revelation.

Scumbags, parasites.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 11:07 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 15:30
Posts: 643
They say that the courts are overloaded processing the fines. I reckon it would not take too much to bring the whole system crashing down. If this story spreads I suspect it would be quite easy to start a campaign to get nobody to pay their fines. The courts could not possibly chase two million people a year. Part of the reason that the Community Charge (aka Poll Tax) was destroyed because so many peole refused to pay.

There would need to be a fighting fund to support the poor sods who do get targeted because the vindictive bastards will throw the book at them.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:22 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
semitone wrote:
If this story spreads I suspect it would be quite easy to start a campaign to get nobody to pay their fines.


Somebody needs to do something because this government or whoever the next one is will just carry on using this lucrative gravy chain. The conservatives have already said they will hit the motorist even more, so it’s obvious they have realised just how much money can be made out of the British motorist in the name of safety.

semitone wrote:
There would need to be a fighting fund to support the poor sods who do get targeted because the vindictive bastards will throw the book at them.


I'm in support of that. :)

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:54 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
semitone wrote:
They say that the courts are overloaded processing the fines. I reckon it would not take too much to bring the whole system crashing down. If this story spreads I suspect it would be quite easy to start a campaign to get nobody to pay their fines.


Since Safe Speed is winning the big 'speed and safety' argument, it wouldn't be smart to divert resources into a civil disobedience campaign. (Not that you were suggesting that we should - I'm just clarifying the position.)

Ultimately the ONLY way to beat cameras is by winning the safety argument. For example, if the ECHR case wins, it will be a great victory, but the government will simply change the rules and carry on.

So if anyone's going to gather resources for a campaign, can you please ensure that Safe Speed receives some much needed benefit too? This is essential because, at the end of the day, we're the only way to win.

And if anyone does start a civil disobedience campaign, I will give it heavy support in terms of safety credentials and news distribution.

_________________
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 Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 13:14 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
SafeSpeed wrote:
Ultimately the ONLY way to beat cameras is by winning the safety argument. For example, if the ECHR case wins, it will be a great victory, but the government will simply change the rules and carry on.

Which is why I don't bother with the likes of ABD and PePiPoo, as great as they are they don't tackle the problem at source.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 14:28 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 12:00
Posts: 11
Location: Washington, DC USA
The video clip is finally working, but it's only 25 seconds worth. Is there any way to get the whole tape? Great stuff.

This is not the first look into the minds of camera operators. Across the pond here in 2001, about 400 people jointly fought their red light camera citations in San Diego. A former employee of Lockheed Martin IMS (the company that ran the program) testified under oath that revenue was their only motivation and that "safety" was never a consideration. Documents recovered at trial supported the testimony. All 400 were acquitted and the system shut down -- for about 3 years until it was unveiled "reformed" with exactly the same people running it in exactly the same way. :roll:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 15:14 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Safe Speed issued a further PR at 14:16 this afternoon:

PR383: Investigations Demanded Following Speed Camera Revelations

news: for immediate release

Following the Mail on Sunday revelations, The Safe Speed road safety campaign
declared that speed cameras were '21st century snake oil' and demanded formal
investigations.

Safe Speed DEMANDS an urgent CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION regarding the suggestion
that camera fines were being routinely issued in the full knowledge that the
process was defective. This may represent an 'abuse of process', 'perverting
the course of justice' or 'malfeasance in public office'. The matter is
extremely serious and a most urgent investigation is required to protect public
confidence in the justice system.

Safe Speed also DEMANDS a large scale INDEPENDENT PUBLIC INQUIRY into the
entire speed camera programme. The following questions must be answered:

- Has the public been mislead about the effects of speed cameras on road
safety? And who is responsible?
- What are the side effects of speed cameras? And are the side effects worse
than any potential benefit? What is the road safety 'net benefit'?
- Do those in charge of speed cameras work in a 'secret society' designed to
maximise profit and keep the public in the dark?

Safe Speed believes that the true costs of the UK speed camera programme so far
amount to

- Around one BILLION pounds in speed camera fines
- Around 16 MILLION motorists convicted by speed camera
- Around 8,000 LIVES LOST on UK roads due to 'loss of trend' caused by policy.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "I believe that the revelations in the Mail on
Sunday are just the tip of the iceberg. It is a glimpse inside a secret society
where the law and its enforcement are managed for profit."

"False or spun road safety information is deadly because it causes life saving
resources to be misallocated. Safe Speed's extensive research has left us
certain that speed cameras make road safety worse. This is not a situation that
can be allowed to continue and proper independent investigations are essential
right now. I am extremely confident that the necessary investigations will
reveal that speed cameras are no better than 21st century snake oil."

A Safe Speed supporter said: "It all works like a mafia and the government are
in on it. It’s a feeding frenzy by greedy people who are only looking after
their own interests."

<ends>

Notes for editors
=================

This 'spin off' news story gives you the opportunity to report on the Mail on
Sunday revelations, free of liability issues.

Mail on Sunday article:
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/liv ... =NEWS&ct=5

Snake Oil cartoon:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/snakeoil.jpg
(Safe Speed owns all rights to this original cartoon, and has a high res
version available for print.)

_________________
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 Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 15, 2006 17:45 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Mail editorial:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a ... _a_source=

Speed cameras and the milking of an innocent public

Last updated at 15:44pm on 15th October 2006

How appropriate that the people who operate the nasty and oppressive speed-camera system should themselves have been caught in a trap and captured on film. Thinking they were speaking to fellow sharks, they unwisely revealed their teeth, and their greedy appetites.

We now know for certain that their pretended concern for road safety is almost entirely faked. These devices are there to raise money, first for the 'partnerships' that operate them and then for the ever-hungry Treasury. And it is not just a little money but 'buckets of it', so much so that the courts can barely cope with the burden of collecting it all.

Goals for the number of prosecutions are set in advance. Businessmen and school-run mothers are deliberately targeted as they struggle to keep the economy going on our congested, roadworksinfested highways.

Perhaps the most cynical detail is the revelation that speed checks are sometimes deliberately set up on quiet roads, so that 'partnerships' can avoid over-running their quotas.

The Mail on Sunday has argued from the start that the speed-camera network is a tax masquerading as a safety measure.

Since it was inaugurated, proper police traffic patrols have virtually vanished and all forms of dangerous and inconsiderate driving have increased, while hundreds of thousands of responsible, careful motorists have been unfairly criminalised for what are often trivial breaches of arbitrary speed limits.

Pious lectures on the supposed safety benefits of cameras can no longer have any force. The truth is out. While it may well be that some cameras save lives, many more are machines for milking the innocent public. The whole policy needs to be urgently re-examined in the light of these revelations.

_________________
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 Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 23:58 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Teletraffic statement: http://www.teletrafficuk.com/comment_fr ... raffic.htm

Comment from Tele-Traffic (UK) Ltd. on The Mail on Sunday article 15th October 2006

On Tuesday, 10th October 2006, the Chief Executive Officer of Tele-Traffic (UK) Ltd., the suppliers of laser based speed enforcement equipment in the UK and Ireland, held a private, confidential business meeting with two men who claimed to represent the Russian Federation and wished to establish a comprehensive road safety programme in Russia to tackle escalating road death and injuries. They stated that the Russian Government were keen to adopt the UK model for tackling road casualties because of the UK’s proven track record and the successes that had been achieved in driving down the number of people killed and injured on our roads.

The Russian representatives were keen to speak to Tele-Traffic as the leading supplier of safety camera technology and because of our comprehensive knowledge and expertise in developing road safety solutions. The meeting lasted over three hours and the men also visited our factory at Warwick the following day for a further meeting and demonstration of our products.

It is now abundantly clear that the two men did not represent the Russian Government and that these contrived meetings were a deliberate and sophisticated sting.

The subsequent reporting of the meetings has been deliberately foreshortened and taken completely out of context to achieve the sensationalist headlines that were clearly at the heart of the operation.

Jon Bond, Chief Executive Officer of Tele-Traffic, comments “We met these individuals in good faith to promote the most successful road casualty reduction system in the world and feel betrayed in the way our comprehensive discussions have been reported with the sole intention of discrediting all the outstanding work being done to keep people safe on our roads.”

The meeting commenced with a comprehensive description of the road safety model for the UK based on the three key principles of education, engineering and enforcement; yet these principles have been completely ignored in the biased and one sided article in which it was clear that there was only a single agenda.

It was explained, in detail, the modelling for the UK system based upon collision data and speed surveys to ensure only collision hot spots with a proven history of speeding problems were targeted, it was this discussion that led to the commentary that detections for speeding were a secondary consideration and that on occasions cameras may operate at a selected site yet not detect any offences; the purpose was as much about deterrence as issuing penalties.

Tele-Traffic offered to assist in gathering collision and speed survey data to enable informed judgements to be made to establish monitoring sites. Again this part of the discussions has been ignored in the article. We also volunteered our services in preparing a report to the Russian ministers to ensure it was factually accurate and covered all the issues surrounding the establishment of a comprehensive road safety system which incorporated all aspects of collision reduction, not just enforcement.

It seemed perfectly reasonable that in establishing a road safety system that a major nation would wish to have an understanding of the economic model to support the operation of such a system. Despite the article’s claims, there is nothing secret or underhand in this financial model, which is controlled by strict guidelines issued by the Department for Transport on behalf of the Government. Tele-Traffic explained the workings of the financial model and the details of the operational cases that the country’s safety camera partnerships submit on an annual basis for approval. We do not deny that we informed the men that the model was self sufficient and generated sufficient funding to support the safety camera operations; this is at the heart of the success of the operation to enable it to continue and drive down road casualties.

The men claimed to be particularly concerned about corruption in the operation of safety camera technology and asked what safeguards were built into the scheme. It was this point which has been referred to in the article about targeting ‘businessmen in the morning and school run mums in the afternoon’. The actual context of this part of the discussion was that the safety cameras are completely non-discriminatory and that provided drivers obeyed speed limits there was no mechanism to allow the corrupt operation of the systems. We offered to supply monitoring equipment that provided an audit trial to demonstrate the correct operation of the systems and highlight poor operating practice.

Despite its claims there is nothing new in the ‘allegations’ banded in the Mail’s article, there is nothing secret in the UK’s operation of safety camera technology - information about the partnership’s operations is freely available to everyone, as are the rules under which the partnerships operate. This deliberate attempt by the Mail to hijack the road safety agenda is deplorable and will only lead to more people being killed and seriously injured on the UK’s roads.

Jon Bond comments, “For thirty years as a police officer I experienced first hand the misery and suffering that road collisions cause. I am also very proud to have played my part in introducing schemes that reduced the toll of death and injury and I am proud to be associated with Tele-Traffic in continuing to deliver the best available technology to support road safety. I find it incongruous that a national paper should seek to outlaw the very systems that keep people alive.”

As for the ‘sting’ operation he says, “It shows how low and underhand the media is prepared to stoop in search of a story. In good faith we met these men to further the cause of road safety and promote the best model in the world only to be betrayed and belittled.”

Issued By Tele-Traffic (UK) Ltd.
Harris Road
Warwick
CV34 5JU

_________________
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 Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 00:53 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 01:48
Posts: 526
Location: Netherlands
SafeSpeed wrote:
Teletraffic statement:

<long, not very successful attempt to brush some of the dirt off>

Ahh diddums. They seem to be a little bothered by the articles.
I almost feel sorry for them.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2006 03:45 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:01
Posts: 4815
Location: Essex
If TT was talking to the reporters about an audit system t. prevent the blank cheque book scenario and it has been quoted out of context, I truly do feel sorry for them.

The full data I guess would be available from MoS if forced into a corner?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 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 can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.086s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]