Safe Speed Forums

No clear pattern to the burning of speed vans
The Irish Times - Saturday, April 16, 2011
Fast burn: the remains of the speed-camera van set on fire near Arklow, Co Wicklow, last month. Photograph: Garry O'NeillFast burn: the remains of the speed-camera van set on fire near Arklow, Co Wicklow, last month.

Three recent arson attacks on speed-detection vans were too far apart to be linked, write CONOR LALLY and MICHAEL McALEER

IF YOU GO online you might conclude from internet discussion boards that a string of arson attacks on speed-camera vans over the past six months is the logical result of motorists’ anger about punitive fines and misplaced speed limits. But those messages ignore the fact that the vans are driven by employees of GoSafe, a consortium that has been asked to try to save lives on our roads.

The first incident occurred in Co Louth last November. The driver had parked his survey van at Milltown, on the Carrickmacross-Dundalk road, in the early hours of November 26th to assess the area’s suitability to be used by a working speed-camera van. The attacker smashed the front window and set the vehicle on fire.

On the evening of March 13th another GoSafe van was destroyed by fire during a similar incident when it was checking speeds on the old N11, south of Arklow. Most recently, early last Saturday morning a van was destroyed in an arson attack at Cashel in Co Donegal, on the Carndonagh–Quigley’s Point road. In each case the occupant scrambled to safety.

The investigation into the case in Co Wicklow is said to be progressing well, and gardaí there are hopeful of an imminent development. In Co Donegal gardaí believe that a detailed description of the vehicle used by the attackers, a blue Peugeot Boxer-style van with a 10-LK registration, may help solve the crime. The investigation into the incident in Co Louth is proving more difficult.

Garda sources say that the attacks are too far apart geographically to represent a pattern. “Having said that, it’s very possible that people involved in the republican movement were involved in the Louth and Donegal incidents,” says one source. “Both are in the Border regions, and because the vans effectively act as CCTV some people involved in smuggling and other crimes linked to republicans wouldn’t want them there.”

Extra security is being considered: the vans’ undercarriages could be fortified and made fire-resistant; mesh could be put over the windows. But gardaí are wary, feeling that a fleet of heavily fortified vans could alienate the public. “They’d be seen as the enemy, trying to catch people out rather than trying to make them safer and saving lives,” says a senior garda.

Evidence suggests that public support for the speed-camera programme is strong. Conor Faughnan of AA Ireland says that 68 per cent of motorists support the GoSafe campaign.

But he adds that this backing depends on continued efforts to tackle three issues that annoy the public: where the cameras are placed, the seemingly inconsistent speeds that trigger them, and the perception that the cameras are designed to make money.

On the first point, Faughnan says, the cameras are generally in the right places: vans are sent to black spots, and the Garda website shows where these are.

It is possible that the 44 GoSafe vans are being confused with the eight Garda vans that can be sent anywhere, including, some would say, locations that prove lucrative.
“It raises public cynicism and frustration. It’s that sort of thing that destroys the reputation of speed cameras in the UK,” says Faughnan. “Our surveys consistently show about 20 per cent of motorists remain cynical and simply cannot be shaken from the view that the cameras are a money-making exercise. It’s a minority voice but not a negligible one.
“The fact is, the contract is for hours worked and bears no relationship to how many fines are issued. During the debates about the introduction of cameras, of which I was a part, there were calls within government to ensure the cameras were self-financing, but we strongly argued against it. The argument that clinched it was the work done by Peter Bacon on the economic cost of a road death. He estimated that it cost the economy about €3 million, while each speed fine netted about €80 to the State . . . If a speed camera prevents one death happening, its economic benefit is greater than 37,500 speeding fines, so the Government savings are made through saving lives, not speeding fines.”

After the attack in Co Louth Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan said: “GoSafe’s work at the side of the country’s roads helps to save many in our communities from the tragedy and pain of the loss of family and friends in road collisions. It is so wrong that this vital work directed at making our community safer for everyone should be the subject of such mindless attacks.”

Faughnan, who describes the attacks as pure thuggery, says: “The perpetrators might attach a bit of bravado to it, or some self- justification, but there is absolutely no way ordinary motorists support that type of action.”

Three held over speed van burning
The Irish Times - Tuesday, May 10, 2011
TWO MEN and a juvenile have been arrested by gardaí in Gorey, Co Wexford, as part of their investigation into the burning of a Go-safe van nearly two months ago.

The speed camera van was set on fire at Ashwood, just south of Arklow town, on March 13th. The operator managed to escape from the blaze uninjured.

The van was extensively damaged by the fire, which is believed to have been started deliberately.

Gardaí at Gorey carried out a number of searches yesterday and arrested three people. Two of the men, who are in their late teens, were detained for questioning at Wexford Garda station.

The third person, a juvenile, was detained at Gorey Garda station. All three were being detained under section 4 of the Criminal Justice Act 1984.