Safe Speed Forums

Safe Speed issued the following PR at 02:52 this Morning:

PR228: TRL says speed cameras useless at motorway roadworks

News: for immediate release

Safe Speed issued a Freedom of Information request to the DfT on July 5th
regarding motorway roadworks safety. The results have just been published.
One document makes it crystal clear that speed cameras have no influence on
the rate of injury.

In a study carried out for the Highways Agency by TRL Limited and published in
2004 it is revealed that roads works are no more dangerous than open motorways
and that speed cameras have no effect on accident rates.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "When this sort of information is available, why
are camera partnerships allowed to continue to fleece motorists with no safety
benefit?"

"It is outrageous that partnerships continue to operate speed cameras in
motorway roadworks claiming that they are required to 'protect the workforce',
when science clearly tells us that motorway road works are not specially
dangerous and speed cameras don't help at all."

"The greedy camera partnerships frequently lie to us about the 'benefits' of
speed cameras. False information in road safety costs lives because it causes
life saving resources are misallocated. The partnerships must be disbanded
because they are working against the long term interests of road safety. They
are 21st century snake oil salesmen."

"Why on earth does it take the Freedom of Information act to uncover important
information like this?"

TRL Report says: "The study showed that there was no significant difference in
the rate of PIAs (Personal Injury Accidents) when road works were present on
the motorway."

TRL Report says: "No significant difference was observed in the PIA rate for
sites with and without speed cameras."

<ends>


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

DfT Page regarding Safe Speed's Freedom of Information Request:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... 39530.hcsp

TRL Report summary containing quotes above:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/d ... 039535.pdf
==================================

This follows the FoI request discussed in thread:
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3473
I started a new thread because the topic has drifted.

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

Further Pr issued at 11:33 this morning:

PR229: Motorway road works speed cameras: legalised extortion

News: for immediate release

Following Safe Speed's revelations earlier today that motorway road works
speed cameras do nothing to improve safety, motorists will be absolutely livid
to learn that they have been fined for no safety benefit.

The TRL report stating with absolute clarity that speed cameras do NOTHING to
improve road works safety on motorways was completed over 18 months ago. The
Highways agency did not make it public and continued to slap up speed cameras
at motorway roadworks sites.

Any member of the public wishing to read the report would have had to pay £40
to do so. Not even a summary has been previously published as far as we can
tell. It took a request under the Freedom of Information Act to dig it up.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "Hundreds of thousands of motorists who have been
fined for exceeding the speed limit in roadworks in the last 18 months are
going to be livid. The Highways Agency knew that cameras did nothing for
safety - all they have been doing is spreading misery and raising revenue.
These cameras are legalised extortion - no more and no less."

"This has to stop and it has to stop now. Speed cameras do nothing for safety.
The official claims are bunk. But far worse than that, those claims cause
live-saving resources to be misallocated and cause extra deaths indirectly."

"How dare they keep this information hidden for 18 months. Since the Freedom
of Information Act came into force the wheels are coming off the speed camera
bandwagon. The abuses of information are outrageous and heads must roll."

<ends>


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

Safe Speed PR issued earlier today:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SafeSpeedPR/message/76

Includes reference to TRL report which includes:

"The study showed that there was no significant difference in the rate of PIAs
(Personal Injury Accidents) when road works were present on the motorway."

"No significant difference was observed in the PIA rate for sites with and
without speed cameras."

========================================

I've had little pickup on either PR so far (which isn't really surprising on a Sunday).

But if anyone has any press or broadcasting contacts AT ALL please send them these two links:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SafeSpeedPR/message/76
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SafeSpeedPR/message/77

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

Something funny here:

http://www.trl.co.uk/publications.htm

When you click to get the Summary of TRL595 (the report mentioned in these PRs) the links is incorrect and you get the summary for TRL594 instead.

Surely this is just a mistake... isn't it?

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

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_foi/documents/page/dft_foi_039535.pdf
Is this what you are looking for?

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Yep. That's what the FoI uncovered. But I'd REALLY like to know why the TRL link is broken...

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

Probably a conspiracy ...

Mind you, not a very good one, the correct report is obtained by just suitably modifying the URL to the required number, in this case:
http://www.trl.co.uk/abstracts/595summary.pdf

Maybe just incompetence

It's for sale at £40 per copy

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Hi Paul,
On various threads people have been talking about research to prove the RTTM link to normal camera placement criteria.

As Roadworks are placed somewhat randomly does this mean that the RTTM effect in this data is virtually 0 ?

So the results that the cameras have no effect would seem to bear out that normal placement relies on RTTM for the percieved reductions ?

Richard

Yes - that's my guess as well. It's possible to get a benefit illusion at road works by placing a camera after a couple of crashes at the location. I'll be studying the materials to see if we have any examples. I'll have a full copy of TRL595 later today.

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

I knew it had to be b*locks!!!

Any pickup today Paul? Just curious, as this clearly has so much potential to provoke thought on the subject. It strikes me as the sort of thing Jeremy Clarkson would love to rant about on Top Gear (shame it was the last ep of the series at the weekend).

I've had a couple of press phone calls. It was in the Daily Mail today. I do think it'll go, but maybe it's a bit of a slow burn.

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