Camera staff recruitment ban?

[safespeed]

Safe Speed issued the following PR at 10:29 this morning:

PR165: The beginning of the end for camera partnerships?

News: for immediate release

The Evening Standard today contains: "But an unexpected Government ban
on Safety Camera Partnerships taking on staff". Safe Speed demands to
know the reason for the ban.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) asks: "Is this the beginning of the end at
last? Have they finally realised that the greedy camera partnerships
are out of control and are making the roads more dangerous? Have they
finally realised that speed camera side effects exceed their potential
benefits?"

Safe Speed notes that two sets of figures will be available to the
government about now:

* Road casualty figures for 2004 (available to the Public in June)

* Results from the study of the 4th year of the hypothecation scheme.
(publication date not known)



Notes for editors:
=================

The evening Standard article is available here:
www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/londonnews/articles/16589452?source=Evening%20Standard

If anything is known about this sudden recruitment ban, we want to
hear about it! Please call 01862 832000.

[james_j]

Now this is interesting.

I just had to laugh at the quote "...Jenny Jones, London Assembly Green Party member, said the staff embargo "seriously undermined" the partnership. She said: "The Government might generate good headlines by going soft on speeding but these plans mean dozens of Londoners will be dead or seriously injured at the end of this year..."

What a complete prat. Has this person been living in a cave for the last few years? Have they not seen the casualty figures?

[catso]

Presumably the Gov't don't want the pratnerships to keep any more of the Revenue so are trying to cap the 'expenses', either that or it's safety related.

[Hamster]

Dare I say "Could be a Tosserban".

H

[WildCat]

Ist to do mit money, levelling off of Gatso income....und over ambitious business plans on part of the prats ...?

Wonderful response from the Green Muesli muncher here as well - classic und immortal quote!

We have saying

Lieber ein Haus im Gruenen, als einen Gruenen im Haus!

(Rather a house in the greeny (area) than a greeny in the house!)

[Peter Ward]

catso said:

Presumably the Gov't don't want the pratnerships to keep any more of the Revenue so are trying to cap the 'expenses', either that or it's safety related.

Like the thinking! Probably the former. Perhaps there's an audit going on.

[mybrainhurts]

Oh dear....does this mean old wotsisname up there in Cumbria is going to have to join the rota for toilet cleaning....?

[medicineman]

My feeling is the scameraships have hit a critical mass. Too many people been done means too many disgruntled voters who will heave them out on their backsides at the next election. This is why we do not have specs on every road. If they really believed the lie this is what would happen.

[safespeed]

A bit more info... Safe Speed issued the following further PR at 13:49 this afternoon.

PR166: DfT say camera partnership staffing review required

News: for immediate release

The DfT confirmed today that a ban on increasing staff numbers has
been issued to all camera partnerships in England and Wales. Safe
Speed hopes this is the beginning of the end of greedy and dangerous
speed camera enforcement.

The DfT spokesperson said: "It was deemed to be prudent to prevent
further increases in staff pending a review. The review will start in
April on a by-partnership basis. Letters have been sent to each
partnership."

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign said: "For
years we have been pointing out that speed cameras are making the
roads more dangerous. I hope and pray that this unexpected move is the
dawning of realisation at the DfT that all it not well with the failed
speed camera programme."

"With Notices of prosecution issued last year exceeding 3.1 million
and an increase in road deaths (up to 3,508) It should be extremely
obvious to everyone that speed camera policy is not making the roads
safer. In fact our most careful analysis indicates that speed cameras
are making the roads significantly more dangerous as the process of
driving is dumbed down and drivers have become paranoid for fear
of their licences."

Safe Speed calls for an immediate end to speed camera use on British
roads and an urgent return to the proven policies that gave us the
safest roads in the world in the first place.

<ends>

Notes for editors:
==================

3.1 million NIPs in 2003-4 from camera partnership accounts recently
issued by the DfT.

1.89 million fixed penalty notices paid.

An unknown number of fines went to court.

1.89 million is NOT the total!

[gh0st]

Wonder if Jenny Jones has any evidence that many people will be dead at the end of the year if this goes ahead.

No I thought not


Green party ... Sheeesh!!

[BliarOut]

Election date imminent

[Streetcop]

BiB on overtime will have to cope...

[ledfoot]

BliarOut said:

Election date imminent

Most definitely the reason.

Does Blair think we are all stupid ? Obviously yes.

[safespeed]

ledfoot said:

BliarOut said: Election date imminent Most definitely the reason.

It's a bit of a weak thing as an election stunt, and don't forget I had to go and dig up the information we have.

If it was a stunt they would have found a way of publicising it to their greatest benefit and not left us with the opportunity to stick the boot in.

So I really don't think so...

[GreenV8S]

Since the government is ending up with such a small piece of the scamera revenue pie, the next logical step would be a speed camera duty. That would stop the scamera operators from frittering the money away and let the government do it instead ...

[MMC]

How about this as a scenario - the one we talked about earlier on the phone Paul...

Government realises cameras are - in reality, to real people rather than scammed questionnaire-responders - about as popular as a virulant case of the clap. They want rid - and fast.

So they privatise speed enforcement - just as they have done with parking enforcement. Nice big contract to PA Consulting to sort out the tender process, the work finally awarded to Capita - of course. But, being the eager stewards of our taxpayer cash, they minimise headcount before the axe falls - cheaper redundancy that way. Also, if revenues are falling, now's the time to ditch the scammers before they start costing the Treasury money. After all, as early adopters of the business model they've made a fair bit of cash at no risk to themselves.

Sorry one and all - I've spent too much time in the lobbying world not to be the UKs' Chief Cynic. This all makes a great deal of sense to me.

So we may yet look back on these days as sunny, carefree and halcyon ones - can you just IMAGINE a privatised camera partnership run by Control Plus or Capita?

>> Edited by MMC on Monday 14th February 21:04

[nonegreen]

MMC said:

How about this as a scenario - the one we talked about earlier on the phone Paul... Government realises cameras are - in reality, to real people rather than scammed questionnaire-responders - about as popular as a virulant case of the clap. They want rid - and fast. So they privatise speed enforcement - just as they have done with parking enforcement. Nice big contract to PA Consulting to sort out the tender process, the work finally awarded to Capita - of course. But, being the eager stewards of our taxpayer cash, they minimise headcount before the axe falls - cheaper redundancy that way. Also, if revenues are falling, now's the time to ditch the scammers before they start costing the Treasury money. After all, as early adopters of the business model they've made a fair bit of cash at no risk to themselves. Sorry one and all - I've spent too much time in the lobbying world not to be the UKs' Chief Cynic. This all makes a great deal of sense to me. So we may yet look back on these days as sunny, carefree and halcyon ones - can you just IMAGINE a privatised camera partnership run by Control Plus or Capita? >> Edited by MMC on Monday 14th February 21:04

Presumably the points system will dissapear and it will just be a going quickly tax. Seems perfectly feasable to me they clearly can't manage without the money coming in to squander on yet more dancing whores and royal weddings. Presumably though we can legitimately ignore these private thieves in the same way we do the parking thieves the lib dem councils employ. Eventually they will go away and pick on the dumb and the occasional offenders?

[v8thunder]

safespeed said:

ledfoot said: BliarOut said: Election date imminent Most definitely the reason. It's a bit of a weak thing as an election stunt, and don't forget I had to go and dig up the information we have. If it was a stunt they would have found a way of publicising it to their greatest benefit and not left us with the opportunity to stick the boot in. So I really don't think so...

I don't think it's an election ploy - too low key and complicated, and not exactly in any 'pledges'. IMO it's one of two things:

1. They have actually realised that the endless plugging of scameras and their partnerships isn't doing anything other than make money.

2. They're slowly retiring the partnerships because they have something else up their sleeves to introduce surruptitiously during next parliamentary term that involves a sizeable sum of cash and these people working elsewhere.

I have a nasty feeling it's transponder chips, national congestion charge, direct cash extraction and ultimately satellite tracking. This idea was approved on the quiet a while back for 2006 and they'll be trying to keep in under wraps until after the election. If Labour get in again, expect to see them forcing ASBO-style tags on us around, well, my estimate would be January-February next year. I mean, they've already introduced this A-F car 'grading', who's to say that won't be the type of chip they'll stick in your car?

I don't trust them It's looking worrying.

[LongQ]

v8thunder said:

I mean, they've already introduced this A-F car 'grading', who's to say that won't be the type of chip they'll stick in your car? I don't trust them It's looking worrying.

?

[v8thunder]

Another thread reported it - the government have 'clarified' the tax bandings by giving cars school-style 'grades' - A for electric cars (even the Prius is a 'B') and so on. Unfortunately due to their catastrophic lack of car knowledge they seem to have put everything of 1.8 litres and above in grade 'F'. I have a feeling they'll be making chips along these lines