It’s time to switch off the speed camera ‘cash machines’

[csv8]

It’s time to switch off the speed camera ‘cash machines’

Published May 22, 2015

'Jill_Seymour.jpegUKIP Transport spokesman Jill Seymour has called for a major review of Britain’s speed camera network, on the 23rd anniversary of their launch. She said it was time to differentiate between cameras which were genuinely helping to save lives, and those which are nothing more than revenue-raising cash-machines.

“I am all in favour of speed cameras, where there is clear evidence that they are in accident blackspots and are helping to make our roads safer, both for the motorist and the pedestrian,” she said.

“But thousands of these cameras are just being cynically used to raise money from drivers, instead of saving lives.

“We need complete transparency about their effectiveness – let us see the number of accidents and casualties at each camera site, both before and after they were installed.

“And any cameras which are proved to be simply victimising motorists without making any difference to road safety should be scrapped.”

According to the website speedcamerasuk.com, there are now around 6,000 speed cameras on Britain’s roads, including some 2,500 mobile cameras.

Yet figures from the Department of Transport have shown that less than five per cent of accidents on UK roads are caused by speeding drivers.

And The Taxpayers’ Alliance published a report which showed that, since the first speed cameras were switched on in 1992, the decline in road casualty rates has actually slowed down.

Mrs Seymour, an MEP for the West Midlands, added: “In far too many instances, speed cameras don’t improve safety. They have been cynically placed to generate the maximum revenue.”
http://www.ukip.org/it_s_time_to_swi..._cash_machines

[superyob]

Do we have to do this yet again?

Ok, this report is a load of drivel because; cars safety has improved since 1992, how do we know that the casualty rate would not be higher in the absence of these cameras and how does a 'transport spokesman' who is called Jill, know which camera is doing what?

I'm sure I could expose more questionable claims if I put my mind to zzzzzzzz...

[Brazen]

Get rid of the bloody things, they do more harm than good.

Studies in Europe where they removed speed limit signs and cameras in an urban location saw decreases in accidents as people drove to the conditions and concentrated in the drive. Also flows of traffic entered a natural flow which also improved commuting efficiency.

[Trump]

Cameras cannot prevent accidents, they never have and never will.

[Giant Cranium]

If they get rid of them then how will they replace the money they net? We will all pay one way or another

[Trump]

Originally Posted by Giant Cranium

If they get rid of them then how will they replace the money they net? We will all pay one way or another

They won't need to if they got rid of their wasteful perks and rorts and cleared the dead wood out of the bureaucracy. Eliminating useless government departments would also help.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Giant Cranium

If they get rid of them then how will they replace the money they net? We will all pay one way or another

Increase taxes on alcohol, smokes and put pokies in every kindergarten

[mik]

The thing i dont like about cameras is .......... you hardly see a copper on the road anymore,
The decision makers tell us how good cameras are at curbing the road toll(no credit given to the billions spent on car safety in recent years).
but there's still no shortage of ratbags out on the road that either dont speed and yet still drive like ratbags or they just wait till the cameras are out of range ......then continue to speed and drive like ratbags .

imo cameras do zero to stop the many other bad driving habits that can only be curbed by a police presence........ Edit : of course putting patrol cars on the road doesn't fill the the piggy bank ..... but cameras on their own do ...

[aussiblue]

No!..They save lives and serious road trauma injuries.
http://journals.lww.com/jtrauma/Abst...centers.1.aspx

BACKGROUND: While studies, mostly from Europe and Australia, have examined the effect of speed cameras on motor vehicle collisions, limited data exist regarding their impact on charges and number of patients taken to Level 1 trauma centers (L1TCs). Because of conflicting perceptions and data on their value, speed cameras were implemented along select Arizona highways in 2008 but then removed in 2010. The hypotheses of our study were twofold. (1) Speed cameras reduce admissions to L1TCs, and (2) speed cameras reduce crash kinetic energy, resulting in lower Injury Severity Score (ISS), mortality, hospital costs, and length of stay (LOS).

METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients admitted to L1TCs who were injured in motor vehicle crashes along a 26-mile segment of interstate I-10 in urban Phoenix was performed. Patients were identified using both the Arizona State Trauma Registry and the Arizona Department of Transportation collision data for 2009 to 2011. This specific 26-mile segment of I-10 was selected because it contained at least one speed camera within 1 mile along its entire length from October 2008 to October 2010. Two time frames were evaluated: January 1 to December 31, 2009, when cameras were in place (2009 camera group) and January 1 to December 31, 2011, when no cameras were in place (2011 no-camera group). Variables analyzed include number of collisions, number of injuries, on-scene mortality, trauma center admissions, number of collisions with admissions, in-hospital mortality, ISS, hospital charges, LOS, age, sex, race, and ethnicity. Five confounding variables were eliminated. Analysis was performed using Fisher’s exact test and linear regression.

RESULTS: Camera removal was associated with a twofold increase in L1TC admissions as well as increased resource use. There were no significant differences between the two time frames for ISS, mortality, median charges, or median LOS.

CONCLUSION: In this study, removal of speed cameras resulted in increased trauma center admissions and resource use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Care management study, level IV.

Also see http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...25753513001781 etc

And it also appear most people support their use http://acrs.org.au/files/arsrpe/full-paper_2114.pdf

[MercurySilver]

im happy for them to stay



























because ive been really good about sticking to the speed limit and havent copped anything in years, so im not out of pocket to the bastards
if they get rid of them theyll find some other way to get the money theyve been used to sucking in and itll prob be something that effects me like rego or license going up

******

[b0son]

I don't have an issue with cameras, if they're targeting the problem drivers.

Drivers doing 3kph over the limit are not problem drivers.....

[aussie muscle]

the problem is the state government is addicted to the revenue. Ask a junkie to cut back his supply...

[mik]

I`m happy for cameras to stay as long as they dont rely on camaeras alone to sort out problem drivers,
i have been behaving myself for many years now (im old and learned a right time and place for everything),
at the same time there seems to be bugger all police presence on the road these days ,
A drive across melbourne you might get most still doing the speed limit where cameras are , yet still plenty are driving like rat bags
where cameras are bloody useless and police are needed.

[XB GS 351 Coupe]

Originally Posted by MercurySilver

im happy for them to stay

because ive been really good about sticking to the speed limit and havent copped anything in years, so im not out of pocket to the bastards
if they get rid of them theyll find some other way to get the money theyve been used to sucking in and itll prob be something that effects me like rego or license going up

I agree 200%, if they get rid of cameras, the revenue will have to be replaced, which means they will find another way to get more money from the innocents.

I call speed camera fines 'Voluntary contributions to the Governments Christmas fund', I choose not to contribute, by driving sensibly.

If any other drivers choose to contribute then it is up to them. At the end of the day it is up to the individual driver to decide weather or not they want to contribute, and it's controlled by the link between your brain and your right foot. So I am happy that others are filling the Governments coffers by their own decision, and I can spend my money on other more worth while things like buying more XB's

[GTBenny]

If the Government was serious about saving lives they'd implement better driver training and more regular testing. Educating drivers and teaching them to prevent an accident will always be better than fining them for doing the wrong thing. The problem with this approach is it will cost money not make money.

Benny.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by XB GS 351 Coupe

I agree 200%, if they get rid of cameras, the revenue will have to be replaced, which means they will find another way to get more money from the innocents.

I call speed camera fines 'Voluntary contributions to the Governments Christmas fund', I choose not to contribute, by driving sensibly.

If any other drivers choose to contribute then it is up to them. At the end of the day it is up to the individual driver to decide weather or not they want to contribute, and it's controlled by the link between your brain and your right foot. So I am happy that others are filling the Governments coffers by their own decision, and I can spend my money on other more worth while things like buying more XB's

A worthy pursuit indeed. Best looking Falcon ever, 4 door or 2 door...

[csv8]

The problem is how they are used. If they were used as originally intended, ok. But they aren't.I know three places in Rockhampton where they are used, hasn't been a fatal for a very long time. BUT they are on the main road into and out of Rockhampton. Thats not road safety thats revenue raising..

[Franco Cozzo]

Mind you I speed everywhere and I'm yet to cop a fine.

You think I don't know that new Captiva or Commodore wagon on the side of the road isn't a speed camera?

If you look at the front of them they've got a nudge bar and a light spaced out way to the side of the bar.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by csv8

The problem is how they are used. If they were used as originally intended, ok. But they aren't.I know three places in Rockhampton where they are used, hasn't been a fatal for a very long time. BUT they are on the main road into and out of Rockhampton. Thats not road safety thats revenue raising..

Nothing to do with the cameras?

[csv8]

superyob..no..they are placed on a high flow traffic road for one reason, revenue ...how does getting a happy snap of your car, 3 weeks later stop you from speeding???????you could drive 5kms up the road from a camera and have an accident..Camera did nothing.....Road safety needs a total rethink..speeding only accounts for about 25% of accidents but the amount spent on speed detection is out of proportion to the other causes of road accidents. Why ? because its the easiest to police......off my soap box..

[b0son]

Originally Posted by csv8

speeding only accounts for about 25% of accidents

try <10% (if by speeding you mean exceeding the posted limit)

[2011G6E]

Road toll is the lowest for nearly seventy years...

There's not enough speed cameras to claim they're the cause of that.

[irish2]

Originally Posted by superyob

Do we have to do this yet again?

Ok, this report is a load of drivel because; cars safety has improved since 1992, how do we know that the casualty rate would not be higher in the absence of these cameras and how does a 'transport spokesman' who is called Jill, know which camera is doing what?

I'm sure I could expose more questionable claims if I put my mind to zzzzzzzz...

Did you not read the article?

"And The Taxpayers’ Alliance published a report which showed that, since the first speed cameras were switched on in 1992, the decline in road casualty rates has actually slowed down."

Drivers are fixated on speed at the cost of being safe. Anyone who drives a car can observe this. Politicians in chauffeur driven vehicles do not see this.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by irish2

Did you not read the article?

"And The Taxpayers’ Alliance published a report which showed that, since the first speed cameras were switched on in 1992, the decline in road casualty rates has actually slowed down."

Drivers are fixated on speed at the cost of being safe. Anyone who drives a car can observe this. Politicians in chauffeur driven vehicles do not see this.

Agreed irish2, what I was pointing out is the unexplained claims (for or against) evident in this 'report'. For example, the above claim gives no reason why...

[LTDHO]

Originally Posted by mik

The thing i dont like about cameras is .......... you hardly see a copper on the road anymore,
The decision makers tell us how good cameras are at curbing the road toll(no credit given to the billions spent on car safety in recent years).
but there's still no shortage of ratbags out on the road that either dont speed and yet still drive like ratbags or they just wait till the cameras are out of range ......then continue to speed and drive like ratbags .

imo cameras do zero to stop the many other bad driving habits that can only be curbed by a police presence........ Edit : of course putting patrol cars on the road doesn't fill the the piggy bank ..... but cameras on their own do ...

Personally more police on the road would make it safer than any speed camera.
Fact is one makes money whilst the other costs money, so naturally the decision is economical, not based on safety.
It's frustrating that they are referred to as "safety cameras". When they are clearly not there for that purpose.

[Sabantien]

One thing i've noticed is people know where fixed speed cameras are. Drop to 10-20k below the speed limit, then open up again as soon as they go past.

On a road I used to drive to work they would park vans or motorcycle cops would get their radar guns out, and they'd always do it in different spots, so the people who drove the road regularly would chug along at the speed limit, while the guy tailgating you and swerving from side to side before zooming past, you'd see him pulled over just up the road.

I'd like to see more police on the road. It tends to make people around do the right thing, not JUST do the speed limit. There's so much more not being enforced, whether it's driving while holding a mobile phone, or heck, even driving with fog lights on (what's with that? You pay $500 for the option and gosh darn you're gonna use 'em?). It almost seems like nothing else is enforced.

[aussiblue]

"Did you not read the article?

And The Taxpayers’ Alliance published a report which showed that, since the first speed cameras were switched on in 1992, the decline in road casualty rates has actually slowed down."

Drivers are fixated on speed at the cost of being safe. Anyone who drives a car can observe this. Politicians in chauffeur driven vehicles do not see this.

People with vested interests, biases and a cause; not objective research. A UKIP right wing populist politician chasing cheap votes and a pressure group pushing for lower taxes etc. And when you start believing in what fringe group pollies from the UK (or perhaps any polly) say over objective research you are in real trouble.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by aussiblue

And when you start believing in what fringe group pollies from the UK (or perhaps any polly) say over objective research you are in real trouble.

The thing about objective research is, the devil is in the detail.

When they trialled 50 zones for the first time in Sydney, they were declared a huge success, with a significant reduction in pedestrian impacts. However, car speeds in most cases dropped by <1-2kph, far too small to account for the change.

What they never accounted for in the research was that at the same time as the trial, many councils were going through a traffic-calming program, installing speed humps on a lot of the back roads that the 50 zones were being trialled on.

The improvement in crash stats was due not to the 50 zones, but due to a reduction in traffic volumes as drivers started avoiding these roads (including me). And therein lies the problem. There are a lot of variables that affect crash rates... I've seen crash stats trend with the weather, and even with the relative strength of the economy (eg. economic downturn, people cut down car usage and unnecessary travel). Its pretty difficult to compare stats over one period with another. You really need to employ a cross-over strategy with two cohorts simultaneously, otherwise you just cant be certain that what you're seeing is down to the reduction in travel speeds, or some other factor.

And then occasionally, you catch researchers deliberately twisting the stats to arrive at a predetermined conclusion (eg. Lambert's re-analysis of Kloeden's data which does not support Kloeden's conclusion that every 5kph over the limit doubles your crash risk, rather, its travel speed relative to the traffic that is the determinant).

Lies, damned lies, and statistics...

[aussiblue]

That is what peer review and follow up research is all about; making sure that there are no errors or bias (intended or not) and I will go with research over a fringe pollies claims any day.

[steve.zissou]

your average brainless muppet believes what the govt advertising tells them - like the signs in sydney saying speed cameras reduce fatalities by 90%. (seriously WTF)

It wont happen here. Australians don't fight for anything anymore. they just take it and in some cases try and justify being lied to and ripped off (like saying that if they get rid of cameras they will just get the cash from somewhere else - so that makes being feed bs OK then).

No wonder politicians treat voters like crap. For example, ask yourself when was the last time you wrote a letter to a member of parliament.

When the day comes that they put gps trackers in every car (and that day will come) people will make excuses and justify that too. Sure some might complain and some might even protest but the majority will just go with the flow.

May be i should go with the flow too and basically drive with my eyes closed, but as long as I am under the speed limit every thing will be awesome.

Sorry, spent too much time in the city today - need to get back to that country air where there is this thing called personal responsibility.