DfT expected to engage neutral as cameras blunder on
Discussion
www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1920103,00.html
Speed camera rise to be curbed
Dipesh Gadher, Transport Correspondent
PLANS to curb the relentless rise in the number of speed cameras on Britain’s roads are expected to be announced by the government this week.
Alistair Darling, the transport secretary, is likely to scrap existing funding arrangements whereby revenue from speeding tickets is ploughed back into new cameras.
The move will mean that the number of camera sites in the country - about 6,000 at the moment - could finally level off.
Ministers are concerned that motorists have lost faith in the system and perceive the devices as primarily a means of generating income rather than saving lives.
The number of £60 fines issued to speeding drivers has increased tenfold in the past decade from 200,000 in 1995 to more than 2m last year.
The country's 38 camera partnerships, which consist of police forces and local authorities, are currently allowed to keep a proportion of the money raised through fines as long as it is reinvested in more cameras. Any surplus revenue goes to the Treasury. Last year this sum was £22m.
The government wants the partnerships to consider alternative means of improving road safety, such as better layouts at junctions and more visible warning signs, and only to erect speed cameras as a last resort.
Darling is expected to announce that revenue generated by the devices will in future be collected centrally and redistributed to partnerships for a variety of road safety schemes.
Earlier this year the Department for Transport announced a moratorium on the installation of cameras at new sites, blocking applications for 500 devices.
The decision was prompted by a review of performance at Britain's camera sites. The results of this study may also be unveiled by Darling this week, and are likely to show that cameras are an effective means of reducing casualties.
"There is no doubt that safety cameras save lives," said a government source.
According to guidelines, fixed cameras may only be installed at sites where there have been four crashes resulting in death or serious injury in the previous three years.
The partnerships argue that not all of these accident blackspots are yet covered.
Last month, however, it emerged that ministers regard Lincolnshire as a model for a new approach to road safety. In that county, officials have managed to reduce casualties while issuing fewer fines.
Local authorities have already been urged by Stephen Ladyman, the road safety minister, to ensure that speed limits are set at "appropriate" levels.
Motorists who are caught marginally over a 30mph limit will have their licences endorsed with just two penalty points rather than the present three, under provisions laid out in the Road Safety Bill, currently going through parliament.
(edited to remove control codes)
>> Edited by safespeed on Monday 12th December 04:15
Speed camera rise to be curbed
Dipesh Gadher, Transport Correspondent
PLANS to curb the relentless rise in the number of speed cameras on Britain’s roads are expected to be announced by the government this week.
Alistair Darling, the transport secretary, is likely to scrap existing funding arrangements whereby revenue from speeding tickets is ploughed back into new cameras.
The move will mean that the number of camera sites in the country - about 6,000 at the moment - could finally level off.
Ministers are concerned that motorists have lost faith in the system and perceive the devices as primarily a means of generating income rather than saving lives.
The number of £60 fines issued to speeding drivers has increased tenfold in the past decade from 200,000 in 1995 to more than 2m last year.
The country's 38 camera partnerships, which consist of police forces and local authorities, are currently allowed to keep a proportion of the money raised through fines as long as it is reinvested in more cameras. Any surplus revenue goes to the Treasury. Last year this sum was £22m.
The government wants the partnerships to consider alternative means of improving road safety, such as better layouts at junctions and more visible warning signs, and only to erect speed cameras as a last resort.
Darling is expected to announce that revenue generated by the devices will in future be collected centrally and redistributed to partnerships for a variety of road safety schemes.
Earlier this year the Department for Transport announced a moratorium on the installation of cameras at new sites, blocking applications for 500 devices.
The decision was prompted by a review of performance at Britain's camera sites. The results of this study may also be unveiled by Darling this week, and are likely to show that cameras are an effective means of reducing casualties.
"There is no doubt that safety cameras save lives," said a government source.
According to guidelines, fixed cameras may only be installed at sites where there have been four crashes resulting in death or serious injury in the previous three years.
The partnerships argue that not all of these accident blackspots are yet covered.
Last month, however, it emerged that ministers regard Lincolnshire as a model for a new approach to road safety. In that county, officials have managed to reduce casualties while issuing fewer fines.
Local authorities have already been urged by Stephen Ladyman, the road safety minister, to ensure that speed limits are set at "appropriate" levels.
Motorists who are caught marginally over a 30mph limit will have their licences endorsed with just two penalty points rather than the present three, under provisions laid out in the Road Safety Bill, currently going through parliament.
(edited to remove control codes)
>> Edited by safespeed on Monday 12th December 04:15
safespeed said:
Speed camera rise to be curbed
safespeed said:
The move will mean that the number of camera sites in the country - about 6,000 at the moment - could finally level off.
safespeed said:
The partnerships argue that not all of these accident blackspots are yet covered.
Mixed news then. Gordon is so strapped for cash that possibly the Treasury will really turn the screws on the Scamera partnerships to cough up without getting much returned. They in turn will 'trim' the scamera settings causing more flak for politicians. And so it goes on..
Parrot of doom said:
Motorists who are caught marginally over a 30mph limit will have their licences endorsed with just two penalty points rather than the present three, under provisions laid out in the Road Safety Bill, currently going through parliament.
Thats more money in fines then.
But, Shirley, if you believe the government's own figures (that show the fastest roads to be the safest), then 30-limited roads ought to be the ones with less leeway and infringing the limits on DCs and motorways ought to result in a lesser penalty?
[/Devil's Advocate]
pdV6 said:
Motorists who are caught marginally over a 30mph limit will have their licences endorsed with just two penalty points rather than the present three, under provisions laid out in the Road Safety Bill, currently going through parliament.
Thats more money in fines then.
But, Shirley, if you believe the government's own figures (that show the fastest roads to be the safest), then 30-limited roads ought to be the ones with less leeway and infringing the limits on DCs and motorways ought to result in a lesser penalty?
[/Devil's Advocate]
Mr Devil you're right of course. Surely, ought, ought, ought, etc, etc. If I were designing a road safety policy I wouldn't start from here. But can you imagine the backlash if all the partnerships were disbanded now? T2k, Brake and the rest would be shouting and yelling, and there'd be thousands more on the dole just at the time that Gordon's chickens are coming home to roost. So not likely then.
Let's imagine what might instead happen. The same number of cameras, set at lower thresholds, plus more mobile ones. No money going into new cameras, and every partnership office now with £1000/m2 carpet so no more opportunity to "invest" it. The odd roundabout has new lines painted on it but it's chickenfeed compared to the income. Hence Gordon gets more. If motorists grumble about more fines, the government reminds us we're lucky only to be getting 2 points now, they're not adding any more cameras, and of course deaths are down "at camera sites". Everyone benefits.
Just think of the alternatives: yet more robbery of north sea oil revenue or another pension fund grab. Which would you prefer? Forget the KSIs, count the ££££.
Not the way I see it, pegging drivers for 'just over the limit' equals more fines, more points and more lost licenses. Counter productive for everyone as this will remove drivers from the roads rapidly and the whole circus starts to generate less revenue.
Does this mean cameras 'fallen in combat' do not get replaced either I wonder
Does this mean cameras 'fallen in combat' do not get replaced either I wonder
apache said:
Not the way I see it, pegging drivers for 'just over the limit' equals more fines, more points and more lost licenses. Counter productive for everyone as this will remove drivers from the roads rapidly and the whole circus starts to generate less revenue.
Does this mean cameras 'fallen in combat' do not get replaced either I wonder
I don't know, but the first Gatso you pass on the A1 southbound at Elkesley (near Retford) was looking very blackened and sorry for itself (I'm delighted to say) for several months. Eventually it got cleaned up and re-painted etc. but I don't know if it is in working order.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff