Treasury makes £20m on speed cameras!
Discussion
KERCHING...
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/02/02/ncam02.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/02/02/ixnewstop.html
Treasury makes £20m on speed cameras
By Brendan Carlin, Political Correspondent
(Filed: 02/02/2005)
Speed cameras are generating profits of more than £20 million a year for the Chancellor, new figures show.
The number of fixed penalty fines issued in England and Wales has soared seven-fold from about 260,000 in 2000-2001 to 1.8 million in 2003-2004.
Last night the Tories renewed their call for a review of what they called "a stealth tax" on motorists.
As the result of a decision by the Government to promote speed camera installation by allowing councils to retain fines revenue to cover costs, there are now about 6,000 cameras across the country, 2,500 of them mobile units.
From April, only two areas in England - Co Durham and North Yorkshire - will not be covered by "safety camera partnerships", made up of councils and police, which oversee installation of devices.
The cameras, which first appeared on English roads in 1992, have to be sited in areas with a history of road safety problems.
Under the scheme, councils cannot profit from the revenue and any surpluses that arise go into Gordon Brown's Treasury consolidated fund.
The Government insists that speed cameras are good for safety, with an independent report last year claiming that the expanding network was saving 100 lives a year.
Alistair Darling, the Transport Secretary, said the vast majority of cameras had brought "real benefits in safety and prove that they are justified".
Motorists caught by the cameras have three points added to their licence and pay a £60 fixed penalty.
Plans to introduce variable fees, lowering them to £40 for less serious breaches but raising them to £100 for graver ones, may be included in the Road Safety Bill.
David Jamieson, the road safety minister, said that in 2000-1, with only seven safety partnership schemes operating, receipts from fixed penalty notices - then £40 a time - totalled £10.3 million. After taking into account £8.9 million expenses on installation and running costs, the Treasury made a £1.3 million profit.
But by 2002-03 the rapid spread of camera partnerships and the rise in fines to £60 resulted in a £68 million fines income and a Government profit of £14 million.
Provisional figures for the most recent year available, 2003-04, show that revenue has leapt to £112.2 million across the 35 camera partnerships. An estimated £20 million profit will go to the Treasury when the £91.8 million cost of installation and maintenance is deducted.
Last year John Redwood, the Tories' deregulation spokesman, raised the prospect of a Conservative government scrapping unnecessary cameras as part of wider plans to stop motoring being "regulated to death".
Tim Yeo, the shadow transport secretary, stressed yesterday that the Tories were not against cameras when they helped to save lives.
But he raised fears that the scale of Government profits meant that camera fines were becoming "a stealth tax".
An RAC survey, to be published next week, will say that motorists remain unhappy about the cameras. In a poll of drivers last year, the organisation found that 72 per cent of motorists thought speed cameras were "more about raising revenue" than safety.
The Department for Transport said the income from fines should eventually drop off as the cameras encouraged more people to drive safely.
• English councils raised nearly £1 billion from parking charges in 2002-3, 50 per cent more than when Labour came to power.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/02/02/ncam02.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/02/02/ixnewstop.html
Treasury makes £20m on speed cameras
By Brendan Carlin, Political Correspondent
(Filed: 02/02/2005)
Speed cameras are generating profits of more than £20 million a year for the Chancellor, new figures show.
The number of fixed penalty fines issued in England and Wales has soared seven-fold from about 260,000 in 2000-2001 to 1.8 million in 2003-2004.
Last night the Tories renewed their call for a review of what they called "a stealth tax" on motorists.
As the result of a decision by the Government to promote speed camera installation by allowing councils to retain fines revenue to cover costs, there are now about 6,000 cameras across the country, 2,500 of them mobile units.
From April, only two areas in England - Co Durham and North Yorkshire - will not be covered by "safety camera partnerships", made up of councils and police, which oversee installation of devices.
The cameras, which first appeared on English roads in 1992, have to be sited in areas with a history of road safety problems.
Under the scheme, councils cannot profit from the revenue and any surpluses that arise go into Gordon Brown's Treasury consolidated fund.
The Government insists that speed cameras are good for safety, with an independent report last year claiming that the expanding network was saving 100 lives a year.
Alistair Darling, the Transport Secretary, said the vast majority of cameras had brought "real benefits in safety and prove that they are justified".
Motorists caught by the cameras have three points added to their licence and pay a £60 fixed penalty.
Plans to introduce variable fees, lowering them to £40 for less serious breaches but raising them to £100 for graver ones, may be included in the Road Safety Bill.
David Jamieson, the road safety minister, said that in 2000-1, with only seven safety partnership schemes operating, receipts from fixed penalty notices - then £40 a time - totalled £10.3 million. After taking into account £8.9 million expenses on installation and running costs, the Treasury made a £1.3 million profit.
But by 2002-03 the rapid spread of camera partnerships and the rise in fines to £60 resulted in a £68 million fines income and a Government profit of £14 million.
Provisional figures for the most recent year available, 2003-04, show that revenue has leapt to £112.2 million across the 35 camera partnerships. An estimated £20 million profit will go to the Treasury when the £91.8 million cost of installation and maintenance is deducted.
Last year John Redwood, the Tories' deregulation spokesman, raised the prospect of a Conservative government scrapping unnecessary cameras as part of wider plans to stop motoring being "regulated to death".
Tim Yeo, the shadow transport secretary, stressed yesterday that the Tories were not against cameras when they helped to save lives.
But he raised fears that the scale of Government profits meant that camera fines were becoming "a stealth tax".
An RAC survey, to be published next week, will say that motorists remain unhappy about the cameras. In a poll of drivers last year, the organisation found that 72 per cent of motorists thought speed cameras were "more about raising revenue" than safety.
The Department for Transport said the income from fines should eventually drop off as the cameras encouraged more people to drive safely.
• English councils raised nearly £1 billion from parking charges in 2002-3, 50 per cent more than when Labour came to power.
Streetcop said:Doesn't matter; councils have a habit of unnecessarily dropping speed limits to well below natural driving speeds. I'm sure we can all give prime examples of these
What about everyone sticking to the speed limits for a while...
Say 2 months...
The drop in revenue should trip em up...
Bet ya all can't do it though...Nah..thought not..
supraman2954 said:
What about everyone sticking to the speed limits for a while...
Say 2 months...
The drop in revenue should trip em up...
Bet ya all can't do it though...Nah..thought not..
Doesn't matter; councils have a habit of unnecessarily dropping speed limits to well below natural driving speeds. I'm sure we can all give prime examples of these
I think the vast majority of roads - of all types - now have speed limits below the natural driving speed.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
catso said:
Treasury makes £20m on speed cameras
It's interesting but in terms of treasury income (which gets employers NI, employees NI, income tax, VAT and duty or over 50% of everyones income) it's vanishingly small.
Begging the questions is £20m a sum worth alienating the public and risking law and order for.
and if the answer is no (which is appears it is), the question is why do the government was to alienate the public - is it just a sadistic experiment to find out how much crxp people can take, to predict their breaking point (i.e. will people snap when they invade Iran?).
It seems we have to rely on public spirited people making cameras safe. Real speed enforcement and safety can only be done automatically by speed sensitive traffic lights - cameras not only don't work but don;t seem to earn much money either.
The Scamera scheme: A giant plan to p1ss of the public at large, much like parking fines...
Globulators said:
Treasury makes £20m on speed cameras
It's interesting but in terms of treasury income (which gets employers NI, employees NI, income tax, VAT and duty or over 50% of everyones income) it's vanishingly small.
Begging the questions is £20m a sum worth alienating the public and risking law and order for.
and if the answer is no (which is appears it is), the question is why do the government was to alienate the public - is it just a sadistic experiment to find out how much crxp people can take, to predict their breaking point (i.e. will people snap when they invade Iran?).
It seems we have to rely on public spirited people making cameras safe. Real speed enforcement and safety can only be done automatically by speed sensitive traffic lights - cameras not only don't work but don;t seem to earn much money either.
The Scamera scheme: A giant plan to p1ss of the public at large, much like parking fines...
They do support a bunch of pointless, and otherwise unemployable, little hitlers in scamera partnerships, and allow them to take expensive polis off the roads and still be seen to be doing something about roads policing. In addition to which I am firmly convinced that a major am of this government is to make driving as unpleasant as possible in order to try and force us all to use public transport, even though ther isn't any.
Streetcop said:
What about everyone sticking to the speed limits for a while...
Say 2 months...
The drop in revenue should trip em up...
Bet ya all can't do it though...Nah..thought not..
You're absolutely right, 98% of people couldn't drive for 2 days, let alone 2 months, at or below the posted limit.
But what does that prove? That everyone is a dangerous maniac on the road?
Or that the posted limit might be wrong.
Or that doing 34 in a 30 might not be the most dangerous thing you could do on the road?
Let's face it, with things like they are, you're much more likely to get a NIP for doing 34 than getting pulled for being 5 times over the limit...
Raify said:
Or that doing 34 in a 30 might not be the most dangerous thing you could do on the road? .
While I and the majority of my colleague enforce the speed limits 'appropriately'....you have to draw the line somewhere...
If the limit was 34 and people did 41..should they not be prosecuted....
We all know the limit on the road that we are on..should we agree with it or not...
If we boot it and get caught..tough..we're adults....We'll have done it 1000s of times before and not been caught..
I couldnt drive at the speed limit for 5 mins , i would fall asleep , dont you feel soo much safer on the roads thanks to dick turpin in a scudo van hiding on a bridge over a free flowing motorway .
speaking of which one was parked on the verge of the parkway through plymouth today , hope he gets stuck
speaking of which one was parked on the verge of the parkway through plymouth today , hope he gets stuck
Yugguy said:
Dont have a problem with doing 30 in towns, but I hate having to slow down to 70 on a clear motorway when there's a police car or camera there.
The problem on motorways is when some greedy Scamera Pratnerships put their talivans on the motorways. They should leave the motorways (and good dual carriageways) alone and just let an let trafpol do the job instead.
The current policy is doing an excellent job of alienating the public, myself included as it is a threat to my livelihood!
come on streetcop!! Streetcop said:
What about everyone sticking to the speed limits for a while...
Say 2 months...
The drop in revenue should trip em up...
Bet ya all can't do it though...Nah..thought not..
Would probably be better to just start a few riots to keep you lot busy then rip every camera out by the root in one night. That way it sends a very definate message to the vermin that think they are a good idea.
Commit it to memory Cameras Kill
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff