M4 camera body in revenue row
Why the scameras? That info will cost you.
 Camera van |
|
Image courtesy |
The Camera Partnership behind the revenue-generating speed cameras on the M4 has been caught trying to rake in more money -- by charging for information on the causes of accidents on the motorway.
As soon as the M4 cameras were announced, the Association of British Drivers (ABD) approached speed camera bosses to find out what had caused the accidents that justified them. The Wiltshire and Swindon Speed Camera Partnership (WSSCP) initially told the group that they did not hold data on what causes crashes, an admission which the ABD called "astonishing", and calls into question the WSSCP's claim that the cameras were installed for safety reasons.
When the ABD pressed the point, the partnership said that it would have to search its database - and would charge £111.63 "per positive search result".
The ABD said it believed the Partnership may be deliberately trying to conceal the causes of crashes on the M4, perhaps because so few of them were due to drivers exceeding limits.
ABD road safety spokesman Mark McArthur-Christie said, "Many people are unaware that Partnerships are allowed to impose cameras no matter what the causes of accidents -- even where they have not been caused by exceeding a speed limit. But it is stunning that first they admit they don't know what causes crashes, then they try to charge £111 to reveal information that should already be in the public domain. They should have these figures at their fingertips. What are they trying to hide?"
ABD Chairman Brian Gregory said, "We've found time and again that camera partnerships will do anything to conceal the causes of crashes, because so few are down to exceeding a speed limit. It's time for the Partnerships to end their culture of secrecy and spin and just come clean. We want to see each partnership showing on their Web sites the causes of accidents that have led to cameras."
The ABD said that this shows that camera partnerships are unaccountable and running out of control. McArthur-Christie said, "The UK's road safety policy has become obsessed with speed to the detriment of everything else. Having a camera policy which runs down traffic police departments and takes no account of the causes of crashes is like abolishing the NHS and replacing it with machines in every high street that just dispense aspirin no matter what the patient's complaint, and about as effective."
www.wiltshire.gov.uk/mainindex/aboutus/freedomofinformation/freedomofinformationfees.htm
Here they charge £25 per hour to find the information. They must charge for the time used so if it takes only 1 hour to find the info, they may not charge any more than £25 (plus meterials).
They are quoting £111 to provide the information. I would assume that this means that they would take 4 hours to find the info requested, otherwise they are extorting money if it takes less than 4 hours.
If the costs exceed £450 they will refuse to provide the information - nice get out clause.
I don't know if any of these are any help, but some have no charge associated with them www.wiltshire.gov.uk/foi/foi_search.php?item=5.05
BBC Website quoted Partnership Idiot with an iq of 5 said said:
Sgt Nick Blencowe, from the £artnership, said: "We have about 12% of all people being killed and seriously injured on Wiltshire roads happening on this stretch of £otorway and that's quite unacceptable.
"We are charged with reducing death and injury on the roads. If we ignore the motorway we are ignoring a major part of that problem."
Sensible Motorist with a normal IQ said said said:
Well maybe if the £artneships read the accident reports they can't find, they'd find the problem is'nt £peed related in which case you are ignoring it Sgt Nick Blencowe, doh!!!!!
Serious Question? : Can a civilian bring a case of gross negligence upon a police officer charged with not performing their duty by ingnoring all the other causation factors?
>> Edited by cptsideways on Tuesday 3rd May 12:04
Their shameless positioning on motorway bridges etc. is a clear sign that they are there purely to rob the motorist and boost local council revenues.
No one can argue with putting a fixed camera in an accident blackspot or built up area, but on an open stretch of motorway with an excellent safety record the only justifiable reason left is revenue generation.
More specifically - the Conservatives would use this lunacy for a prime example of "Blairs Britian" 
I was going to say "unbelieveable", but of course it's not.
It's what any clear-thinking person would expect of such organisations baseing their whole reason for existence on a false premise.
Not a lot I would guess, other than "I would never do that". 1-(1) Any person making a request for information to a public authority is entitled;
a) to be informed in writing by the public
authority whether it holds information of
the description specified in the request,and
b) if that is the case to have that information
communicated to him.
There are opt out clauses however, these are generally if they have no knowledge of where the information is kept, although if your reply to the fact then they would have to address the matter and supply the requested information.
Why are the police intent on running people who need to travelout of business, fines, restrictions and penalties which are harsh by anyones standards.
This alongside the rise and rise in fuel costs. Just seems to be another way for the UK to tax it's citizens even harder.
Whilst inner city crime and general living conditions become worse. I understand and agree that we do need some cameras on some stretches off road, but what are the police worried about that they will not let an independant group vet decesions on placement.
sorry to moan just I love driving and I pay my insurance and tax, just to see my car stolen my insurance go up, the car found burnt out and the people who stole it free to walk down my drive too do it all again with no punishment, yet my mother is caught speeding and treated like a master criminal. Do we realy have our priorities the right way round
spindrift said:
Jeez, just don't speed and you will not get done. The cameras have been proven time and again to save lives, what is your problem with that?
Err...thats the point I do not believe they have been shown to save lives on motorways. (With the possible exception of roadworks where slower speeds give roadside workers more time to dive out of the way).
Spindrift - please visit the SafeSpeed website, and until you understand road safety... shut up!
Edited to correct Spindrift's sex - not that she gets any
>> Edited by puggit on Tuesday 3rd May 18:59
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff