Help required for ongoing debate

[Mannginger]

Here at work (BBC) we have an employee forum for a free exchange of ideas. Anyway a thread about the T2000 comments on Top gear has spiralled massively into a debate on Speed Cameras.

It's going ok so far, in the face of some pretty tough competitors.

Anyway, what I was positing was that the no's of speed cameras have actually reduced the no's of trafpol.

Neither I or my counterparts can find figures one way or another that show cause and effect - can anyone help out or is it going to be a case of "We can't prove that one way or another"

Cheers in advance

Phil

[$lowpoke]

Have you had a look at Paul Smith's SafeSpeed site?

Lots of info on it, might have what you're looking for.

Sorry, no link handy, but someone should be along in a moment that'll have it.

[bryan35]

that'll be mannp50 then?

[supraman2954]

Mannginger, please point the pro-scameraites to the direction of PH; we'll see if we can't convert all of them before the week is out. We'll certainly have fun trying. Now THAT would be entertainment!

[Mannginger]

bryan35 said:

that'll be mannp50 then?

Phil

[safespeed]

[quote=$lowpoke]Have you had a look at Paul Smith's SafeSpeed site?

Lots of info on it, might have what you're looking for.

Sorry, no link handy, but someone should be along in a moment that'll have it.[/quote]

www.safespeed.org.uk

[Dwight VanDriver]

You will find no precise data on this assumption but comparing stats i.e. increase in number of cameras and decline in traffic police there appears to be a correlation.

But if you take N Yorks Police, their Traffic Division (or should I be PC and say Road Policing Unit) has declined to what it was in the old days but it does not support fixed scameras.

No doubt when Chief Constables have to work out their budgets with the introduction of ANPR and other electronic traffic monitoring devices,then they bring more revenue in than out. Plus extra responsibilites for Plod then Traffic appears a good source for the chop.

DVD

[Mannginger]

Hmmm - I must admit to coming out and saying it without having any real figures to back me up - it sounded good to me! One of my counterparts insists that trafpol numbers are up as a whole though.

That should be available on line somewhere - must google...

Phil

[Mannginger]

Oh and Bryan35 - I can only assume that you work or the Beeb too - either that or their security is for S**t!

Where are you based? London?

Cheers

Phil

[silverback mike]

Mannginger said:

Hmmm - I must admit to coming out and saying it without having any real figures to back me up - it sounded good to me! One of my counterparts insists that trafpol numbers are up as a whole though. That should be available on line somewhere - must google... Phil

Hello Phil,
DVD is absolutely right, there are no figures to corroborate your theory.
In our force trafpol numbers are up from what they were five years ago. Maybe we are in the minority. I think the spawning of camera units are in addition to front line officers.

If you need any other figures then I am shortly going to be in a decent position to provide them for you.

Mike.

[cuneus]

For the Met:

1980 Met Traffic officers = 1500
Feb 2004 638 (just 375 actually on road policing duties)
50 short of target roll call, additional 20 in the recruitment process.

Out of those 375, cover is provided for major sporting & cultural events. eg 30-40 every Saturday during footy season, 24 for rugby matches @ Twickers, & e.g.150 for Notting Hill Carnival.

Of the remainder 138 are sergeants and inspectors in supervisory roles and 125 are dedicated fatal accident investigators

[Flat in Fifth]

cuneus said:

For the Met: 1980 Met Traffic officers = 1500 Feb 2004 638 (just 375 actually on road policing duties) 50 short of target roll call, additional 20 in the recruitment process. Out of those 375, cover is provided for major sporting & cultural events. eg 30-40 every Saturday during footy season, 24 for rugby matches @ Twickers, & e.g.150 for Notting Hill Carnival. Of the remainder 138 are sergeants and inspectors in supervisory roles and 125 are dedicated fatal accident investigators

plagiarist!

Only kidding mate thanks for reminding me about my post on this thread

That do you mannginger? Go kick some ass my man!

FiF

[cuneus]

Guitly M'lud

but it was good info

[autismuk]

You can't *show* cause and effect. The same error the Pratnerships make all the time.

Because A came after B, it doesn't show that A was caused by B.

This does not mean, of course, that Trafpol are not being elbowed aside for more cameras.

"Proving" it is as impossible as "proving" Cameras save lives, i.e. almost impossible.

(The Scumera Pratnerships statisticians are well aware they are lying through their teeth. Or they haven't done A level maths !)

Don't I recall something (Cheshire ?) where they were closing the trafpol division and replacing it with Scumeras ?


>> Edited by autismuk on Friday 15th April 10:57

[Mannginger]

Thanks for the extra help folks.

Also Bryan35 - I've just realised I'm being as daft as a brush! I'm not p50 I'm P03!

P50 is Philip Mann @ Cambridge, but then we do tend to get mixed up a fair bit. I'm Phil on the internal system!

Cheers

Phil

[_Dobbo_]

silverback mike said:

In our force trafpol numbers are up from what they were five years ago. Maybe we are in the minority.

Mike, it's interesting to read that - but I'm quite certain that volume of traffic is up as well - so what percentage increase is there in volume of traffic vs. increase in trafpol numbers?

[Flat in Fifth]

One more thing, make sure that in the debate someone doesn't include HATOs in the traffpol numbers just as PCSOs and civvies are included when Home Office etc start quoting increased numbers of plod.

Just a thought.

Now off out for a blatt.