F.F.S. Revenue creation!
Discussion
Speed cameras to double
by Phil Mills
The number of speed cameras in Sussex will more than double in the next two years.
The total of 36 will rise to 78 and drivers who break speed limits will foot the bill for them instead of local taxpayers.
Sussex councils and police have won approval from the Government to recover the cost of new cameras from money held by the Treasury for speeding and other safety fines.
The partnership intends installing 18 new cameras at accident blackspots in the county between now and next April and a further 24 the following year.
More traffic light cameras are also planned.
Cameras have come under fire for adding more restrictions for motorists but Tony Reid, transport councillor for East Sussex County Council, said safety was paramount.
He said: "Sussex is a beautiful place to live, work and visit and we would prefer people to admire the scenery rather than become part of it."
East Sussex has seen a 19 per cent reduction in fatal and serious crashes over the past year and is aiming to meet Government targets to halve them by 2010.
East Sussex has highlighted 41 accident black spots and wants to introduce cameras first at four locations - the A259 in Eversfield Place, Hastings, the A2021 in Kings Drive, Eastbourne, the A22 Eastbourne Road at Halland and in London Road, Uckfield.
Brighton and Hove City Council has earmarked Coldean Lane as its first choice for a camera.
West Sussex County Council has a list of 53 potential sites but no decision has been made on which will be first to have cameras.
The councils' partnership, which includes magistrates' courts and the Highways Agency, is to make cameras more visible with more yellow boxes and signs on the approaches to sites.
Simon Battle, Brighton and Hove's transport councillor, said: "The scheme is designed to save lives, not fill local authority coffers. Any surplus must be returned to central government.
"Ultimately, we would like to see this project run at a loss. That would mean drivers were travelling at appropriate speeds and not being fined for breaking the limits.
The Sussex safety camera scheme will run for a trial period of six months.
The partnership is aiming to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on Sussex roads by at least 30 in the next three years.
Last year there were 980, 68 more than in 2000/2001.
Sergeant Paul Huntley, of Sussex Police traffic division, said cameras slowed traffic and made drivers think about their speed.
"Driving is a skill like any other and you need to be focused on it to be safe."
by Phil Mills
The number of speed cameras in Sussex will more than double in the next two years.
The total of 36 will rise to 78 and drivers who break speed limits will foot the bill for them instead of local taxpayers.
Sussex councils and police have won approval from the Government to recover the cost of new cameras from money held by the Treasury for speeding and other safety fines.
The partnership intends installing 18 new cameras at accident blackspots in the county between now and next April and a further 24 the following year.
More traffic light cameras are also planned.
Cameras have come under fire for adding more restrictions for motorists but Tony Reid, transport councillor for East Sussex County Council, said safety was paramount.
He said: "Sussex is a beautiful place to live, work and visit and we would prefer people to admire the scenery rather than become part of it."
East Sussex has seen a 19 per cent reduction in fatal and serious crashes over the past year and is aiming to meet Government targets to halve them by 2010.
East Sussex has highlighted 41 accident black spots and wants to introduce cameras first at four locations - the A259 in Eversfield Place, Hastings, the A2021 in Kings Drive, Eastbourne, the A22 Eastbourne Road at Halland and in London Road, Uckfield.
Brighton and Hove City Council has earmarked Coldean Lane as its first choice for a camera.
West Sussex County Council has a list of 53 potential sites but no decision has been made on which will be first to have cameras.
The councils' partnership, which includes magistrates' courts and the Highways Agency, is to make cameras more visible with more yellow boxes and signs on the approaches to sites.
Simon Battle, Brighton and Hove's transport councillor, said: "The scheme is designed to save lives, not fill local authority coffers. Any surplus must be returned to central government.
"Ultimately, we would like to see this project run at a loss. That would mean drivers were travelling at appropriate speeds and not being fined for breaking the limits.
The Sussex safety camera scheme will run for a trial period of six months.
The partnership is aiming to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on Sussex roads by at least 30 in the next three years.
Last year there were 980, 68 more than in 2000/2001.
Sergeant Paul Huntley, of Sussex Police traffic division, said cameras slowed traffic and made drivers think about their speed.
"Driving is a skill like any other and you need to be focused on it to be safe."
quote:
Yep and not taking your eyes off the road to constantly moniter your speedo or be looking for tax boxes on sticks
Too right Denny. And helicopters, and wheely bins with cameras. Just get outta my way! I haven't got time when travelling at warp speed to look for all these extra distractions !!
quote:
He said: "Sussex is a beautiful place to live, work and visit and we would prefer people to admire the scenery rather than become part of it."
so we're going to ruin it with big yellow boxes, huge signs and god knows what all else paraphanallia (sp?)
quote:
East Sussex has seen a 19 per cent reduction in fatal and serious crashes over the past year and is aiming to meet Government targets to halve them by 2010. .........
The partnership is aiming to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on Sussex roads by at least 30 in the next three years.
Last year there were 980, 68 more than in 2000/2001.
Anyone else spot the contradiction??
quote:
quote:
Brighton and Hove City Council has earmarked Coldean Lane as its first choice for a camera.
A speed camera outside my house, oh joy. To be fair it is one of the most dangerous roads in Brighton and loads of tw@ts just fly down at 60-70 (it's a 40 with blind bends + junctions)
Loads of people drive down my road at night at very high speed and when they put a revenue camera there it will be upright for less than 12 hours. Promise
quote:
quote:
Brighton and Hove City Council has earmarked Coldean Lane as its first choice for a camera.
A speed camera outside my house, oh joy. To be fair it is one of the most dangerous roads in Brighton and loads of tw@ts just fly down at 60-70 (it's a 40 with blind bends + junctions)
And a complete pain in the arse if you get caught behind a bus or truck going up it!
quote:
loads of tw@ts just fly down at 60-70 (it's a 40 with blind bends + junctions)
It it? Bloody Hell - Let us know if they put a camera up! (Im not quite a 60-70mph twat)
Just a small point :
Just look at the maths here. We have 980 people injured / killed this year. 68 more than the year before.
So we have
2001 - 980 persons injured / killed
2000 - (980 - 68) = 912 persons injured killed.
So on average using the data we have in Sussex the average number of persons injured killed is :
(980 + 912) / 2 = 946
So if we assume next year is 'average' 946 persons will be injured killed in Sussex.
If next year is an 'average' year, road conditions remain stable and no cameras are added then we will see a reduction in injuries / deaths of 36.
Hey presto target of reduction of deaths met without lifting a finger.
Obviously with a small sample this is rather limiting, but it does beg one question :
Surely if speed cameras are so effective at preventing injuries / deaths then the council should have a far more ambitious target of reductions than one that is only 30 people. By their own statistics this is less than 1/2 of their quoted yearly statistical variation.
Not very impressive at all, in fact it suggests that the cameras are probably largely ineffective at preventing road deaths.
You obviously need more data over a long period to see if they are effective (and to measure a 3% shift when the variation is 7%!), but the limited faith put in the cameras by those quoted, suggest that they are far less effective than we are constantly told...
Lies damn lies and statistics...
Edited because I'm a numpty
>> Edited by mr_tony on Friday 4th October 12:07
quote:
The partnership is aiming to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on Sussex roads by at least 30 in the next three years.
Last year there were 980, 68 more than in 2000/2001.
Just look at the maths here. We have 980 people injured / killed this year. 68 more than the year before.
So we have
2001 - 980 persons injured / killed
2000 - (980 - 68) = 912 persons injured killed.
So on average using the data we have in Sussex the average number of persons injured killed is :
(980 + 912) / 2 = 946
So if we assume next year is 'average' 946 persons will be injured killed in Sussex.
If next year is an 'average' year, road conditions remain stable and no cameras are added then we will see a reduction in injuries / deaths of 36.
Hey presto target of reduction of deaths met without lifting a finger.
Obviously with a small sample this is rather limiting, but it does beg one question :
Surely if speed cameras are so effective at preventing injuries / deaths then the council should have a far more ambitious target of reductions than one that is only 30 people. By their own statistics this is less than 1/2 of their quoted yearly statistical variation.
Not very impressive at all, in fact it suggests that the cameras are probably largely ineffective at preventing road deaths.
You obviously need more data over a long period to see if they are effective (and to measure a 3% shift when the variation is 7%!), but the limited faith put in the cameras by those quoted, suggest that they are far less effective than we are constantly told...
Lies damn lies and statistics...
Edited because I'm a numpty
>> Edited by mr_tony on Friday 4th October 12:07
Speed Matters | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff