Safe Speed Forums

Safe Speed issued the following PR at 11:48 this morning:

PR469: Bogus DfT road safety figures cause Police complaint

news: for immediate release

Department for Transport figures provided to the House of Commons Transport
Select Committee led to massively erroneous conclusions about the relative cost
effectiveness of speed cameras and vehicle activated signs.

The errors are so great and so dangerous that it is hard to believe that they
were not wilful. Formal complaints have been lodged with the Police and the
Parliamentary Ombudsman alleging possible misconduct or misfeasance.

While the Transport Committee claimed that speed cameras were marginally more
cost-effective than vehicle activated signs, the truth is that vehicle
activated signs are around 50 times more cost effective than speed cameras.

Mr Idris Francis noticed the discrepancy and set about:

* Finding our where the errors had come from
* Ensuring that the Transport Committee was aware of the problem
* Discovering that the errors were all originated by Department for Transport
* Discovering that the Transport Committee were, at best, unconcerned.
* Finally issuing formal complaints because the errors will inevitably cause
scarce life saving resources to be misdirected with consequent loss of life.

In particular Department for Transport...

- used a sample figure of £7,000 for speed camera cost that was the cost of the
housing and DIDN'T INCLUDE THE £35,000 COST OF THE CAMERA ITSELF.

- used a sample 1998 figure of £14,000 for TWO EXPERIMENTAL PROTOTYPE
vehicle activated signs was presented as if it were the current cost of one sign..

- used data from JUST ONE SITE of each type for the comparison when data from
hundreds of site was available and would have been much more reliable and accurate.

Paul Smith, founder of http://www.safespeed.org.uk , said: "I simply cannot
understand why Department for Transport remains firmly welded to their failed
and dangerous speed camera programme. They appear determined to defend it to
the ends of the earth, yet they must know that it was all an awful mistake."

"Department for Transport is not fit for purpose. They are not giving us the
life-saving road safety Policies we need - instead they are giving us wildly
wrong numbers, spin and bluff."

"When the errors were pointed out to the Transport Committee the indifferent
response was simply astonishing."

"Vehicle activated signs - used with care - are proven to be effective at
reducing vehicle speeds in areas of local danger. They do not come with the
dangerous side effects associated with speed cameras."

Idris Francis, retired engineer and road safety campaigner said: "No one at the
DfT, least of all Dr. Ladyman, should have believed for one moment that
speed cameras cost £7,500 pa but flashing signs £14,000 pa. It beggars belief
that they and the Commons Transport Committee still refuse to accept that these
figures were grossly misleading and that in reality signs are far more cost effective
than cameras. Do they not understand that people die on our roads when safety
policy is based on bogus data and analysis? Heads must roll."

<ends>

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

Background information and extensive document archive on:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/vas.html

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

Ooh, do tell us more!

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

No, I mean gossip from Idris etc.

And then there's the (weekly?) maintenance of the camera and costs associated with processing the film (as well as administering the FPN).

An old member of PH who was a camera operator (‘Destroyer’ who I suspect was SC - oh the fun I had with him) once let slip that the annual maintenance cost of a Gatso can be as much as the cost of the camera itself.

You don’t have to worry about any of that with VAS.

However, we all know the SCPs will do whatever possible in their pursuit of $a£ety

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

This truly is scandallous, I hope it is the rope that hangs Ladyman's career at last!

His majority at the last election was only 664 (1.6%)

_________________
Anti Road Charging Forum

http://www.traveltax.org.uk/

Would prefer disgraced to un-reelected!

If you want scandallous, he was quoted in one of the Kent papers saying something along the lines of it's immoral for eurostar to ignore a petition demanding they don't scrap Ashford services because it had a whopping 8000 signatures. Oh, the irony.