Tuesday 4th October 2005

Roads police chief stands down

Richard Brunstrom admits mistakes over scameras

---

Truvelo

Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom, the man in charge of Britain's roads policing, is to stand down from his post as head of the Association of Chief Police Officers' (ACPO) road safety committee.

He gave a final interview to The Times yesterday, in which he admitted that he'd under-estimated the strength of feeling there would be about speed cameras.

He also said that he was continuing to work on increasing the flexibility of camera siting rules -- in other words, they shouldn't just be at accident black spots. He said: “Parents often write to us and ask us to put a camera outside a school because the traffic is so dangerous. It’s very difficult to write back and say, ‘Please let us know when your son is killed and then we can consider putting a camera there’.”

Among the revised siting criteria under consideration is the ability to put scameras at crash sites where there had been only slight injuries.

Road safety campaigner Paul Smith, founder of Safe Speed said: "Thank heavens that the man is finally going. He's presided over the worst road safety policy that the UK has ever seen with massive loss of traffic policing, rises in drink drive crashes and a deadly loss of the previous beneficial trend in roads fatalities."

"His policies - especially speed cameras - have caused massive damage to the Police public relationship. Let's hope the new head has the vision to see that good road safety depends on the willing co-operation of a majority of responsible drivers. The law must concentrate on minority of dangerous and irresponsible behaviours."

[jewhoo]

[quote=chief loser]Parents often write to us and ask us to put a camera outside a school because the traffic is so dangerous. It’s very difficult to write back and say, ‘Please let us know when your son is killed and then we can consider putting a camera there’.[/quote]

Yet more emotional rubbish because he has no actual argument to base this on.

[Neil_H]

Good ridance

[BliarOut]

Good riddance to bad rubbish

[oppressed mass]

[cdp]

The rules are only guidelines. The partnerships can (and frequently do) put the cameras anywhere they feel fit.

It would be more sensible if the camera partnerships had to justify each camera site on an individual basis. Possibly through public meetings using elected representatives.

That way few people would complain about the cameras by schools and playgrounds.

[Andy_L]

This is definate proof that speed cams don't work police chiefs don't stand down just because the public don't like them there is a serious flaw in the policy underlying this decision to quit and he is getting out before it is exposed.

But it's not enough how many people a have lost their lives because of this very bad policy?

An independant investigation is required at the very least.



>> Edited by Andy_L on Tuesday 4th October 12:01

[cpt]

I am sure nobody would mind a speed camera outside every school - they could re-site some of the ones from around here!

[justinp1]

jewhoo said:

chief loser said: Parents often write to us and ask us to put a camera outside a school because the traffic is so dangerous. It’s very difficult to write back and say, ‘Please let us know when your son is killed and then we can consider putting a camera there’. Yet more emotional rubbish because he has no actual argument to base this on.

I agree! The fact that that would be his response shows how single faceted his approach was. Reporting that a camera could not be put there does not help. How could have got back was to say that he was going to install a new zebra or pelican crossing so that the children could cross safely and as an addition send in a traffic officer from mobile scamming duty to explain about the harsh realities of pedestrian accidents and the right way to cross and walk along roads.

That doesnt make money though does it?

[smeggy]

....but who will replace him?

someone from another thread said:

South Yorks CC is up to replace him. He told the local paper he wants more cameras.... All hidden......

[Twincam16]

Hooray!

But will it lead to a change in attitudes towards scameras, or just some other anti-motorist headcase hell-bent on making everyone's lives miserable and making money out of it too, but in other ways.

Wouldn't surprise me if the replacement will want black boxes which sound alarms and deliver fines if you go past the limit...

[bdeng66]

"Parents often write to us and ask us to put a camera outside a school because the traffic is so dangerous. It’s very difficult to write back and say, ‘Please let us know when your son is killed and then we can consider putting a camera there"

So he accepts that speed cameras cannot save lives then. Driver education anyone?



>> Edited by bdeng66 on Tuesday 4th October 12:28

[james_j]

bdeng66 said:

"Parents often write to us and ask us to put a camera outside a school because the traffic is so dangerous. It’s very difficult to write back and say, ‘Please let us know when your son is killed and then we can consider putting a camera there" So he accepts that speed cameras cannot save lives then. Driver education anyone? >> Edited by bdeng66 on Tuesday 4th October 12:28

It would seem that he does accept that. It's a shame the parents concerned have been sufficieltly brainwashed to believe a camera would "make the traffic safe".

Oh, and he's going, but who will be his replacement, it could be someone less obviously daft but equally dangerous.

[NElmslie]

smeggy said:

....but who will replace him? someone from another thread said: South Yorks CC is up to replace him. He told the local paper he wants more cameras.... All hidden......

Mr Hughes, the CC of South Yorks is currently operating an illegal vehicle seizure and destruction policy.

[_dobbo_]

smeggy said:

....but who will replace him? someone from another thread said: South Yorks CC is up to replace him. He told the local paper he wants more cameras.... All hidden......

So Brustrom stepped down because he misjudged public feeling over cameras, then his potential replacement goes on record saying "if I get the job i'll put more cameras in".

That's the most moronic thing I've heard for a while, but considering the circumstances, i suspect it's true.

[PDM5]

Glad to hear that he admit's the camera's haven't worked out too well. We can only hope his replacement is a bit more tuned in to public opinion.
I think the best way to get rid of camera's is, if everyone who gets snapped writes to the camera parnerships and buries them in paperwork, to which they have to reply will soon cause them to become inefficient, Economics will soon prevail, and get them shut down. A national (internet) campaign to do this could work wonders.

[apache]

It won't matter a damn who is put in charge. Govt policy drives the scheme and their end goal is to get everyone on public transport, this is being done by creating an illusion whereby the car is evil (from an environmental and safety point of view)

The unproven argument of greenhouse gasses caused by the car gives the government another good reason to tax the hell out of the 'enemy' while at the same time casting cars in an evil light

Speeding is an unavoidable part of everyday driving, by making 'speeding as antisocial as drink driving' more and more pressure is being put on the motorist who, is now, becoming a pariah. The massive revenue earned from cameras helps a severly cash strapped government while at the same time reinforcing the illusion that they care about safety.

Whoever is appointed will have to toe the government line because the ultimate aim is much more than one of saving lives

[smeggy]

NElmslie said:

smeggy said: ....but who will replace him? someone from another thread said: South Yorks CC is up to replace him. He told the local paper he wants more cameras.... All hidden...... Mr Hughes, the CC of South Yorks is currently operating an illegal vehicle seizure and destruction policy.

Thanks NElmslie.



WE’RE SCREWED!

Times Online said:

The leading contender to replace him is Med Hughes, Chief Constable of South Yorkshire. Mr Hughes is also a passionate advocate of speed cameras despite having two speeding convictions.

www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1808811,00.html

yorkshireposttoday said:

THE Yorkshire police chief at the forefront of a national campaign to combat speeding has admitted twice being caught by roadside cameras. South Yorkshire Chief Constable Med Hughes, chair of the Association of Chief Police Officers' roads policing enforce-ment technology committee, has played a leading role in national speed camera policy. He is an enthusiastic supporter of speed cameras and even advocates hiding them. At present they have to be highly visible. But Mr Hughes has now admitted he picked up three penalty points and a £60 fine after he was snapped by one camera in Sheffield. He was later caught speeding in South Wales, where he began his policing career, this time by a portable camera. His speed on each occasion has not been revealed. But the chief constable, who took up his post in September, said his transgressions had only made him more determined to crack down on speeding drivers. "At least you can't call me a hypocrite," he said. "If I had my way all speed cameras would be completely hidden and mobile. If we are serious about speed cameras we will have to think about that." Mr Hughes's official chauffeur was convicted of speeding earlier this month. She is believed to have been caught while driving former chief constable Mike Hedges. And Derbyshire Chief Constable David Coleman's chauffeur is being prosecuted for allegedly doing 97mph on the M1 while driving his boss home from an official function.

www.yorkshireposttoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=55&ArticleID=892290


…and now he will have his way

[volvos70t5]

NElmslie said:

smeggy said: ....but who will replace him? someone from another thread said: South Yorks CC is up to replace him. He told the local paper he wants more cameras.... All hidden...... Mr Hughes, the CC of South Yorks is currently operating an illegal vehicle seizure and destruction policy.

Indeed. I don't hold out much hope for his future, TBH.

[jazzyjeff]

apache said:

The unproven argument of greenhouse gasses caused by the car gives the government another good reason to tax the hell out of the 'enemy' while at the same time casting cars in an evil light Speeding is an unavoidable part of everyday driving,

I don't like speed cameras or the anti-car lobby any more than the next man but comments like this do not help matters.

Greenhouse gases ARE generated by cars - just get your head into a decent engineering or chemistry book to find out the kind of poison that gets spewed from the average exhaust. Of course, this doesn't mean that anyone's found a better alternative to cars yet (plus the fact that buses emit the same muck in even greater amounts).

Please explain how speeding is an "unavoidable" part of everyday driving. Anything can be avoidable if people try. Its a bit like saying cutting up other drivers/running over pedestrians/driving like a d*ck with your fog lights blazing in broad daylight is unavoidable. To be honest I have enough trouble with tw*ts who don't pay any attention to speed limits at all - which often means me being frustrated stuck behind them doing 42mph in a safe derestricted road...a speed they continue to do between the speed humps and past the school in a 20mph zone (!!?)

>> Edited by jazzyjeff on Tuesday 4th October 13:47

[hedders]

smeggy said:

Times Online said: The leading contender to replace him is Med Hughes, Chief Constable of South Yorkshire. Mr Hughes is also a passionate advocate of speed cameras despite having two speeding convictions.

How on Earth can a repeat speeding offender get a job running the road safety department??