http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/898 ... as+scandal
HIDDEN SPEED CAMERAS SCANDAL
Wednesday June 6,2007
By John Ingham
A NEW war on drivers was declared yesterday, with Britain’s top traffic policeman backing the return of “hidden” speed cameras.
Sneaky new rules mean speed cameras no longer have to be brightly painted, but can now be disguised to trap motorists.
Meredydd Hughes, the head of Roads Policing for the Association of Chief Police Officers, said covert cameras would help cut road casualties.
But changes in the camera rules and calls for a new purge brought fierce criticism from motoring groups and camera critics. They fear such a crackdown will alienate motorists without reducing the number of accidents.
Anti-camera campaigner Paul Smith said: “There’s one certain consequence of hiding speed cameras and that’s more dead people. Don’t do it. The rules requiring speed cameras to be painted bright yellow were changed in 2001 for a very good reason. It was in response to the damage being done to relations between motorists and police.”
Mr Smith, of Safe Speed, cited research showing that a fall in road casualties recorded by official figures was not backed up by the level of hospital admissions.
Police statistics last year showed only one in 20 collisions in 2005 was caused by motorists breaking the speed limit. Instead the commonest cause of accidents – 32 per cent – was a driver failing to look properly.
The most recent official figures showed that the use of about 7,000 speed cameras failed to prevent an increase in the number of fatal road crashes last year.
Meanwhile, the steady decline in road casualties over the past few decades has levelled off in recent years.
Up until April, when the new rules were sneaked in, fixed speed cameras had to be painted bright yellow and be visible from nearly 200ft.
This was seen as enhancing their deterrent effect without alienating motorists. But the new rules mean that fixed cameras no longer need to be seen. They also no longer have to be at accident blackspots and can be used by local camera partnerships on roads seen as dangerous – for instance, outside schools.
Mr Hughes, who is the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire, now wants to exploit the new rules. He has compared telling motorists where speed cameras are with the secrecy of operations to catch burglars.
“We need to think about whether greater compliance will be delivered using technology in a less conspicuous way,” he said.
“I might put up Neighbourhood Watch signs but I don’t tell burglars when I am running an anti-crime operation.”
His proposal comes with a new offensive on motorists already under way. New digital speed cameras – which never run out of film – are expected to double the number of drivers caught to four million a year.
That would double fines to £240million a year, raising £130million for the Treasury once the £110million a year costs of the safety camera partnerships have been taken into account.
But the Institute of Advanced Motorists warned that going back to hidden cameras risked alienating motorists.
Spokesman Vince Yearley said: “We want to see the evidence that hidden speed cameras will reduce the number of accidents and not just put points on licences.”
The Department for Transport said it still regarded it as best practice for cameras to be visible with warning signs. It accepted, however, that the current system means local partnerships are free to choose whether to make the cameras visible or not.
The AA said it opposed the wholesale introduction of hidden cameras but accepted that they could be useful in some areas.
There are now thought to be up to 10million motorists with points on their licence. Insurers Direct Line estimates up to one million are on the brink of losing licences by totting up 12 points or four speeding convictions.
Last month insurance firm Swinton said it will no longer automatically penalise drivers with six points, as that tally is “nothing out of the ordinary”.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
