Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue Jun 30, 2026 20:45

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2005 18:08 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
Looks like a re-hash of old news but worth a post I think

http://www.prestontoday.net/ViewArticle2.aspx?sectionid=73&articleid=1283361

Quote:
The Government is poised to back track on its war on motorists by insisting that revenue from speeding fines can only be used to erect more speed cameras as a last resort.
Money raised from speeding fines will instead be mostly used for road safety schemes such as better road layouts.
The changes, set to be announced by Transport Secretary Alistair Darling, will stop the further expansion of the number of speed cameras.
Under Mr Darling's plans, instead of the partnerships spending the money raised on cameras and then the surplus going to the Treasury, cash will be picked up by central government and then some handed back to the partnerships for safety schemes.
The move comes amid concern that motorists have lost faith in the system and feel that they are being persecuted.
Conservative transport spokesman Chris Grayling said: "We will support the Government if they intend to make the speed camera regime more sensible.
"We have long said the number of speed cameras is excessive.
"The massive growth in their number has been caused by the system Labour put in place which encourages safety camera partnerships to install as many cameras as possible to get as much money as possible."
Around £120m was raised in fines last year from two million prosecutions of drivers caught on the nation's 6,000 speed cameras.

From 2003 to 2004, cameras in Lancashire brought in £5.1m in fines. £3.4m covered running costs of Lancashire Partnership for Road Safety, and £1.7m was profit.
Speed cameras have made headlines in Lancashire almost from the day they were introduced.
In July 2005 we revealed the number of police officers patrolling Lancashire's roads had dropped by a fifth since 1995.
But controversy was sparked when it emerged the reduction overlapped with the introduction of nearly 300 speed cameras in the county.

The Evening Post's outspoken campaign claimed victory the same month when Government bosses confirmed no new cameras would be installed – until it is proved Gatsos save lives.
The Department for Transport said applications for new sites will not be granted until an independent review of the cameras' effectiveness is complete.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 12, 2005 20:24 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 01:42
Posts: 686
Looks like some common sense is being exercised at last. That's good to hear.

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 17:11 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 19:19
Posts: 1050
this is worrying because it makes the role of the scamerati vague and hard to unpick. Until now it was clear - enforce the speed limit and make money doing it. Now they seem to be able to claim some sort of different agenda.

what the DfT don't say quite so publicly is that the scheme's must be speed management related and about getting drivers to slow down. Genuine road safety schemes are still excluded.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 19:48 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Similar item in the Sunday times relating to all uk

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 03,00.html

Bit about the pooling of fines.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 03:25 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 01:42
Posts: 686
diy wrote:
what the DfT don't say quite so publicly is that the scheme's must be speed management related and about getting drivers to slow down. Genuine road safety schemes are still excluded.


This says "speed humps" to me. Yet the press release clearly mentions "improving road junctions" and "more visible warning signs".

Which is it?

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:13 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 16:12
Posts: 1040
Location: West Midlands
Perhaps they are going to copy the "improvements" used in the Solihull area. The improvement is the create a large (and tall) speed table that covers the junction, and of course provide no warning except for a white painted triangle that is quickly covered in dirt and partially scraped off but bits of vehicles being damaged by the bloody things.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 47 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 : 0.013s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]