All they want is cash?
Discussion
Before I start - I hate the scammeras as much as the next sensible, realistic motorist.
The government made £20m from traffic cameras last year. Does anyone else think this amount is incredibly insignificant when looking at the treasury's budget - I mean they could lose more than that down their sofa and not notice? Can they really be doing all of this 'just for the money'?
The government made £20m from traffic cameras last year. Does anyone else think this amount is incredibly insignificant when looking at the treasury's budget - I mean they could lose more than that down their sofa and not notice? Can they really be doing all of this 'just for the money'?
DeltaFox said:
If its that insignificant, hand it over to me. 
Its in my other suit - sorry.
You know what I mean though - things are rarely talked about in millions, or tens of millions - but hundreds of millions and billions. Is 20 million worth losing votes for?
What I suppose I am thinking is that getting them to stop cash generation would be incredibly hard - if not impossible. If, on the other hand, they are carrying out this war on speeders with 'their hearts in the right place' (for want of a better phrase) we might stand a better chance of a reversal of policy.
Just chewing the fat though
The laws have been passed and although the evidence is that cameras are not making our roads safer the partnerships have their foot well and truely in the door. The attitude of the partnerships is that they are good value for money when compared with Trafpol and I can't see them becoming a thing of the past anytime soon. As for it being a vote loser? Well, the DfT and the partnerships have been pumping out tons and tons of propaganda to convince the voting public that their children will all be killed by satanic Godless motorists in their 4X4s unless they support the governments policies regarding road safety.
Remember if you say something often enough people will believe it!
Remember if you say something often enough people will believe it!
Remember if you say something often enough people will believe it!
Remember if you say something often enough people will believe it!
Remember if you say something often enough people will believe it!
Remember if you say something often enough people will believe it!
Remember if you say something often enough people will believe it!
Remember if you say something often enough people will believe it!
Remember if you say something often enough people will believe it!
Remember if you say something often enough people will believe it!
2.5 million tickets last year equates to £150 million for the scamera partnerships that DIDN'T come from government coffers (ie our pockets) AND they made a "profit" of £20 mill. And they expect the number of tickets to level off at about 5 million a year (that'll be £300 million "turn over" thank you very ta)
So yes, it is about the money, especially when you add in the PAYE that they take of all the employees, plus NI contributions from employees and employer.
Now does it make sense?
>> Edited by mondeoman on Tuesday 22 February 16:03
So yes, it is about the money, especially when you add in the PAYE that they take of all the employees, plus NI contributions from employees and employer.
Now does it make sense?
>> Edited by mondeoman on Tuesday 22 February 16:03
I'm sure any self-respecting partnership boss (if there are any?) would aim to cover costs and provide a small surplus to the Treasury to show willing.
We hear of plush carpets, large expense budgets, refurbishing of offices, etc, etc. They have to do something with all the money.
Doing all this means that they are:
1) employing civilians, taking people off the unemployment register
2) paying for police overtime, improving morale and taking pressure of police salary budgets
3) occupying offices, keeping up the occupancy of public buildings
4) funding magistrates courts, paying for stuff that would otherwise come from taxes
5) paying for police to do processing of fines, reducing the cost of the police on council tax.
So although the gov't doesn't benefit by much in cash, it gets huge benefits in cost avoidance and in perception of low unemployment. Is this the main purpose? Probably not, but it would be hard to turn down such benefits if they're provided free by criminals.
We hear of plush carpets, large expense budgets, refurbishing of offices, etc, etc. They have to do something with all the money.
Doing all this means that they are:
1) employing civilians, taking people off the unemployment register
2) paying for police overtime, improving morale and taking pressure of police salary budgets
3) occupying offices, keeping up the occupancy of public buildings
4) funding magistrates courts, paying for stuff that would otherwise come from taxes
5) paying for police to do processing of fines, reducing the cost of the police on council tax.
So although the gov't doesn't benefit by much in cash, it gets huge benefits in cost avoidance and in perception of low unemployment. Is this the main purpose? Probably not, but it would be hard to turn down such benefits if they're provided free by criminals.
Streetcop said:
Like i've said before....if british motorists have a little bit of self control and obey the limits for a whole month..the lack of cash will cause some problems... 
But ya can't do it, can ya..?
I suspect that if this was to occur the 10% + 2mph rule would be enforced without exception, and the number of cameras containing film would be increased to compensate. I'd also wager that the number of accidents during that month would remain aproximately the same.
if only every motorist could keep to the limits for a few months and show the current road safety policy up for the shambles it is maybe we would see a change. Streetcop said:
Like i've said before....if british motorists have a little bit of self control and obey the limits for a whole month..the lack of cash will cause some problems...
But ya can't do it, can ya..?
Come on , Street. If that happens we'll get yet more speed limit reductions and even more cynical camera placements ; didn't I read somewhere that the Police want the incredibly lax placing rules dropped altogether.....
MilnerR said:
I suspect that if this was to occur the 10% + 2mph rule would be enforced without exception
That is the case now with the majority of cameravans....
As for traffpol...I personally have a split rule...
If i'm targetting a specific area....due to complaints and especially KSI..I'm a 10%+3mph...
If on regular patrol, and just parked up for some laser work out of the car window...I go for the next 10 bracket; ie: 40 in a 30, 50 in a 40 etc.
Streetcop said:
Like i've said before....if british motorists have a little bit of self control and obey the limits for a whole month..the lack of cash will cause some problems...
But ya can't do it, can ya..?
It would be lack of self-control if all they did was watch their speedos because they believed the hype that it was safe.
james_j said:
It would be lack of self-control if all they did was watch their speedos because they believed the hype that it was safe.
are you saying that you have to 'watch your speedo' all the time to ensure you remain at or below the limit
Haven't I made this point elsewhere in the last 24 hours?
Streetcop multiple times said:
It would be lack of self-control if all they did was watch their speedos because they believed the hype that it was safe.
are you saying that you have to 'watch your speedo' all the time to ensure you remain at or below the limit
Haven't I made this point elsewhere in the last 24 hours?
IT problem Gary, or are you making your feelings on the matter fully understood?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff