Tories blitz 'cash-maker' cameras

[Don]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3529864.stm

bbc web site said:

Tories blitz 'cash-maker' cameras The Conservatives have accused the government of "waging a war on drivers" by using speed cameras to make money rather than to save lives. The party has pledged to review all cameras in England and Wales and scrap those which have not reduced accidents if they come to power. Speed limits could also be increased on motorways and cut in areas around schools and hospitals, the Tories said. The transport plans are, they say "on the side of the responsible driver". Damian Green said: We want to make driving less of a misery Shadow Secretary of State for Transport Damian Green Shadow Secretary of State for Transport Damian Green said the Tory measures would encourage safer driving by introducing realistic speed limits and targeting dangerous drivers. He said: "We want to make driving less of a misery. "What we are proposing today is a series of common sense practical measures which will get the government off the back of the sensible driver and restore confidence in the way we enforce the speed limit." 'Cash-guzzling' Prime Minister Tony Blair has backed speed cameras, saying they prevent about 900 deaths and serious injuries a year. But the Tories claim the Treasury received more than £15m from fines last year, with millions more going to 42 safety camera partnerships across England and Wales. The party describes the partnerships, set up to administer the cameras and fines, as "cash-guzzling" bureaucracies. It plans to audit the position of all 5,000 cameras and remove those where accident rates have not dropped. The Tories also propose increasing the speed limit on some motorway stretches to 80mph, while reducing it to 20mph near schools and hospitals. The party claims motorists are often confused about what speed limit is in place and pledges to make signs clearer. The Conservatives also argue that resources should be spent targeting "criminals in cars" rather than on cameras, promising to put more traffic police on patrol. This would help detect unsafe vehicles and "rogue drivers" who are uninsured, untaxed or without a licence. BBC political correspondent Jonathan Beale said: "Most of these policies have already been unveiled. "Presented together, though, the Tories hope they will prove popular as drivers head for the roads this summer." But, he said, the Conservatives were likely to be accused by the government of being irresponsible. A Department for Transport survey published in June, whose findings were supported by Mr Blair, showed about 100 lives a year were saved by speed cameras.

Sensible policies at last? Or just what we want to hear?


>>> Edited by Don on Tuesday 3rd August 07:14

[Deester]

bbc web site said:

The party has pledged to review all cameras in England and Wales and scrap those which have not reduced accidents if they come to power.

What about Scotland!!!

[blademan]

Don said:

<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3529864.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3529864.stm</a> bbc web site said: Tories blitz 'cash-maker' cameras The Conservatives have accused the government of "waging a war on drivers" by using speed cameras to make money rather than to save lives. The party has pledged to review all cameras in England and Wales and scrap those which have not reduced accidents if they come to power. Speed limits could also be increased on motorways and cut in areas around schools and hospitals, the Tories said. The transport plans are, they say "on the side of the responsible driver". Damian Green said: We want to make driving less of a misery Shadow Secretary of State for Transport Damian Green Shadow Secretary of State for Transport Damian Green said the Tory measures would encourage safer driving by introducing realistic speed limits and targeting dangerous drivers. He said: "We want to make driving less of a misery. "What we are proposing today is a series of common sense practical measures which will get the government off the back of the sensible driver and restore confidence in the way we enforce the speed limit." 'Cash-guzzling' Prime Minister Tony Blair has backed speed cameras, saying they prevent about 900 deaths and serious injuries a year. But the Tories claim the Treasury received more than £15m from fines last year, with millions more going to 42 safety camera partnerships across England and Wales. The party describes the partnerships, set up to administer the cameras and fines, as "cash-guzzling" bureaucracies. It plans to audit the position of all 5,000 cameras and remove those where accident rates have not dropped. The Tories also propose increasing the speed limit on some motorway stretches to 80mph, while reducing it to 20mph near schools and hospitals. The party claims motorists are often confused about what speed limit is in place and pledges to make signs clearer. The Conservatives also argue that resources should be spent targeting "criminals in cars" rather than on cameras, promising to put more traffic police on patrol. This would help detect unsafe vehicles and "rogue drivers" who are uninsured, untaxed or without a licence. BBC political correspondent Jonathan Beale said: "Most of these policies have already been unveiled. "Presented together, though, the Tories hope they will prove popular as drivers head for the roads this summer." But, he said, the Conservatives were likely to be accused by the government of being irresponsible. A Department for Transport survey published in June, whose findings were supported by Mr Blair, showed about 100 lives a year were saved by speed cameras. Sensible policies at last? Or just what we want to hear? >>> Edited by Don on Tuesday 3rd August 07:14

It's so much of what we want to hear that it makes you wonder if the Tories are reading PH forums. Gotta be better than more scams though. We will have to wait and see. Definately a vote winner though eh

[supraman2954]

bbcnews said:

Prime Minister Tony Blair has backed speed cameras, saying they prevent about 900 deaths and serious injuries a year.

hmmm, I thought B-liar/SCPs said the cameras saved 100 lives last year?

[regmolehusband]

I'm quite sure the government and shadow government DO read forums such as this as one way to gauge public opinion.

Damien Green was saying things on tv this morning that suggest he might have had somebody swotting up on here in recent days!

I thought Green did an excellent job when Jamieson was spouting the usual 40% drivel and talking about children being alive etc etc. Though Damien Green didn't remind him that actual deaths, as opposed to KSI's haven't decreased in recent years.

Things look brighter under the Conservatives and anybody on here who doesn't vote for them because they think they're all liars............is a prat, for want of a more intelligent description.

[safespeed]

The full Tory PR is here:

www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=786

And the Safe Speed response is here:

www.safespeed.org.uk/pr135.html

[piccy mate]

supraman2954 said:

bbcnews said: Prime Minister Tony Blair has backed speed cameras, saying they prevent about 900 deaths and serious injuries a year. hmmm, I thought B-liar/SCPs said the cameras saved 100 lives last year?

HM government spokesman later said B. Liar was refering to the 870 Deaths * and * injuries saved each year.
B. Liar is not above twisting any figure to suit his purposes and later slipping out an retraction if he gets found out.
Pity no figures were quoted this morning of the far greater number of deaths per year caused by other pursuits etc.
Personally I retched when the Labour transport guy pressed the emotive button re children - I nearly threw the nearest bunny at the telly when he said it again.
Dave

[ftasb]

Well it all sounds good regarding the Conservatives ideas, but would they ever do it if they got in power?

The tired old argument from the Labour loonie defending their cash cow cameras is getting boring and reduces their credibility (? if they ever had any?) every time they pedal it out. The figures prove it doesn't work and they still keep repeating them.

More proper policemen nicking bad drivers etc., responsible speed limits on open roads, crucify speeders in built up areas, and crush all un MOT'ed, uninsured cars.(With a car thief or "joy" rider in every one. Ghengis Kahn was far too moderate. )

[autismuk]

supraman2954 said:

bbcnews said: Prime Minister Tony Blair has backed speed cameras, saying they prevent about 900 deaths and serious injuries a year. hmmm, I thought B-liar/SCPs said the cameras saved 100 lives last year?

They are made up extrapolations. Because you can vary the points from which you extrapolate and the criteria you use, you can generate any number you like.

e.g. Fatal Accident rates at a Camera

1997 3
1998 2
1999 4
2000 11 (a nasty multiple pile up)
2001 3
2002 3
2003 3 (Camera in)
2004 4

Now , a common sense view would say that there are about 3 deaths a year at this point, and in 2000 there was a freakish smash (which happens)

Both these statements below are "true" in the sense they are not false statements.

But they are both laughably misleading, and the extension in both cases is utterly indefensible.

"Compared with accident rates in the last four years, the death toll has been cut by 20%. This shows that over the entire country cameras will save 1000 lives"

(20 accidents in four years, 5 per year, a 20% cut. Assuming a base of 5000 road deaths which I've made up)

"Compared with accident rates in the last three years, the death toll has been increased by 33%. This shows over the entire country cameras will kill over 1300 more people"

(9 accidents in 3 years, a 33% increase).

This does not account of course for the infamous RTTM, which makes it much more likely that a camera will be placed where there has been a spike in the data, and that it will be close to the camera installation date.

The real truth in this example is that you have absolutely no idea what has happened. You simply cannot make such extrapolations, such judgements.

Any competent analysis system should specify and explain IN ADVANCE the criteria for success, otherwise people will cheat.



>> Edited by autismuk on Tuesday 3rd August 09:22

[Don]

The abolition of the SCPs is a very welcome move. The formation of what are, essentially, businesses milking a rich cash cow (US) was to my mind the final nail in the coffin of any respect the public may have had for the GATSO movement.

The problem with SCPs is that they are allowed to keep the money to fund their activities. This means the more NIPs issued the greater level of funding, and therefore jobs, importance, plush offices, PR officers, technologists, nice contracts with suppliers there can be. The whole business is therefore fundamentally driven by the profit motive.

Naff all to do with safety.

Which is why they simply should not exist. Speed enforcement should be performed solely on safety merit NOT cash generation and this can only be done by an organisation that recieves its funding totally independently of any punishments issued to transgressors. i.e. Plod.

Indeed - if the Tories pledge to bring an end to "Fat Government" and start getting rid of these unwanted and unnecessary civil servants - well I'll be voting to give them the chance to do it.

[Apache]

That they believe they can generate votes from the subject is more telling than anything. If it has become such a vote winner then there must be a lot of people voicing displeasure to pollsters/MPs etc

[bryan35]

they've got my vote.
I don't give a monkeys what the rest of their policies are to be honest.

[TripleS]

Don said:

The abolition of the SCPs is a very welcome move. The formation of what are, essentially, businesses milking a rich cash cow (US) was to my mind the final nail in the coffin of any respect the public may have had for the GATSO movement. The problem with SCPs is that they are allowed to keep the money to fund their activities. This means the more NIPs issued the greater level of funding, and therefore jobs, importance, plush offices, PR officers, technologists, nice contracts with suppliers there can be. The whole business is therefore fundamentally driven by the profit motive. Naff all to do with safety. Which is why they simply should not exist. Speed enforcement should be performed solely on safety merit NOT cash generation and this can only be done by an organisation that recieves its funding totally independently of any punishments issued to transgressors. i.e. Plod. Indeed - if the Tories pledge to bring an end to "Fat Government" and start getting rid of these unwanted and unnecessary civil servants - well I'll be voting to give them the chance to do it.

Yes Don I fully agree, and by the way, YHM - or you should have unless I've cocked something up.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Don]

TripleS - I replied yesterday. Did you get the 'mail? I haven't had a non-delivery message or anything...

[Streetcop]

We'll see if enough people are fed-up with SCP and Gatsos at the next election and if they have the balls to let the 'X' in the box to the talking...or will the UK public be all talk as usual.


Street blue in uniform, blue in vote....

[TripleS]

Don said:

TripleS - I replied yesterday. Did you get the 'mail? I haven't had a non-delivery message or anything...

Hello Don.

Many thanks for your reply, but your email hasn't appeared here yet. We are failing to receive various emails so it seems as if there is a problem somewhere in the system at present.

Best wishes Don, and everyone,
Dave.

[Streetcop]

Good Evening Dave..
Hope all is well..
Have you been travelling much recently?

Street

[deltaf]

Theyll get my vote on that policy alone.
The look on Beth Mitcheson, Steve Callaghan etc faces when they get the bubble will be payback enough for me.

Byesy bye scammmers!

[Artisan]

The next 8 months is a golden opportunity to really have some impact on the future of speed cameras by influencing the policy makers through the electorate.

For the greatest impact, the Labour marginal seats need to be targetted. In many cases only a few hundred votes could lead to the incumbent Labour MP looking for a new job or taking up his generous pension.

I reckon that a coordinated effort to drop single page leaflets through the doors of potential swing voters in these key areas could reap big rewards. Let's bring the real facts to the people and let them decide. Once the Labour MP's or their pollsters begin to realise that what they are doing is a vote loser then there will be a rapid change in policy.

What's needed is a simple message that speed cameras aren't working and are just a revenue generator.

How many speed tickets were issued in 2003? How much did it cost the motorists? By how many did the fatalities GO UP? How many extra people were employed in this non-productive activity? How many lives could have been saved if the money had been better spent?

If a constituency had 30,000 homes and 100 people could be recruited in each constituency then they would only have to deliver 300 leaflets each. That's about 3 hours work. Sounds practical to me.

Unfortunately I live in one of the safest Tory held seats so it would be a pointless exercise here, but I'd be glad to help in one of the surrounding areas.

[Artisan]

Here's a list of the 20 most marginal Labour seats at the last General Election, with their MP and their majority:

Dorset South: Jim Knight: 153
Braintree: Alan Hurst: 358
Monmouth: Huw Edwards: 384
Lancaster & Wyre: Hilton Dawson: 481
Cardiff Central: Jon Owen Jones: 659
Kettering: Phil Sawford: 665
Ynys Mon: Albert Owen: 800
Northampton South: Tony Clarke: 885
Western Isles: Calum MacDonald: 1074
Clwyd West: Gareth Thomas: 1115
Welwyn Hatfield: Melanie Johnson: 1196
Shipley: Christopher Leslie: 1428
Bexleyheath & Crayford: Nigel Beard: 1472
Hornchurch: John Cryer: 1482
Edinburgh Pentlands: Lynda Clark: 1742
Thanet South: Stephen Ladyman: 1792
Milton Keynes North East: Brian White: 1829
Hammersmith & Fulham: Iain Coleman: 2015
Forest of Dean: Diana Organ: 2049
Ilford North: Linda Perham: 2115


Hartlepool in the autumn could be a good area for a trial run