The speed camera goldmine

A Freedom of Information request made by campaigners has revealed that one speed camera alone generated half a million pounds on the M11 in Essex. The high amount of revenue from a single speed camera has given considerable clout to the argument- made by the campaigners who issued the request- that speed cameras are just another means to milk the motorist. Furthermore figures released by the police show that accidents are up by a quarter on the stretch of road in the last five years.

So why does the camera remain on the road if it is not delivering on its purported objective of  reducing the number of accidents? Paul Pearson, who runs the website penaltychargenotice.co.uk, said

“No wonder they haven't removed the camera that is causing these accidents. It is just raising too much money and they clearly want to keep it there.”

The high number of accidents appears to be due to the sudden change in speed limits from 70mph to 50mph without adequate prior warning. The motorway also goes from 3 lanes down to 2. Many argue that the sudden change in speed limit, lane reduction and the speed camera causes drivers to brake suddenly and cause car pile- ups. A spokesman from Essex police stated

“Cameras do not cause collisions, poor driving does.”

The police spokesman’s point is very insightful – and if poor driving is the problem makes you wonder why public policy is obsessed with cutting speeds.  But, it is unforgiveable not to acknowledge that dangerous changes in road conditions can increase the likelihood of road accidents. It is only now that the police have introduced speed indicator signs before the camera and camera warning signs. These methods have a proven record of positively affecting drivers’ behaviour and reducing accidents.

Road safety is an issue of great importance and it is paramount that the most effective and fair measures are used to reduce road collisions. With such high levels of fines coming from this camera and an increase in accidents at the camera site this particular speed camera on the M11 is failing on both counts.  

Comments

[Steve Robson]

have you considered NOT SPEEDING as a response to this so called goldmine.

Clearly you think its somehow the government's fault if you pay this "tax", not your own. Whatever happened to you right wing notions of individual responsibility.

Bizarre!

[AdrianS]

IN many places speed limits are set very low.
Why is it safe to drive on some parts of the German Autobahn at 140 mph but not 80mph on a UK motorway?
Bearing in mind cars have got so much safer for occupants, casuality rates have not changed much since the advent of greed cameras. Of course traffic has got denser, probably in many cases as a result of our artificially stimulated population levels and the more people using a road network -- the more accidents. In addition after peak high accidents rates in sites with cameras, they usually drop back down normally ( regression to the mean). Lack of police patrolling the roads has meant driving standards have slipped and modern cars can give a false sense of security. I ride a motorcycle and suffer so many near misses from car drivers as a result of bad driving--- not excess speed

[Penni Change]

Speed cameras are revenue raising devices - shock horror! Ok - so they are - so what? The law states you are not supposed to break the speed limit. If you do, why should money not be raised for other causes if you do? If you stay within the law, there's no "extra tax" for you to pay.

More interesting to question and seek and answer for is how do we improve the overall standard of driving? Sadly, I don't think you can do it through law and fines, you have to go to the heart of the problem, namely many people now think they are above the law because they see others have become that way, and what is good for the goose etc. We want our rights, but no responsibilities. So with the right to drive your car, you have the responsibility to drive safely and within the law. Do that and this problem goes away.

Let's look at changes to our culture, society and beliefs (the cause) before we campaign against the symptoms?

[Unbiased]

I'm pleased that this speed camera is bringing in so much money. I drive because I can afford a car. Ten years ago, I earned a salary of less than £10,000 and the idea of owning a car was a distant dream.

Therefore, if it is a tax in disguise, at least it is progressive in that the very poorest in society (and, I'll admit, wealthy committed greens) do not pay it.

I'll also admit that I got stung for £60 for doing 35 in a 30. I don't care - I should have been doing the speed I drove when I passed my test!

There is something frankly pathetic about people who bang on about speed cameras (if you obejct to the fines that much, simply obey the law!) and therefore it is no suprise to see the TPA take the issue to their bosom.

[franhill]

I agree with the comment on driving within the law and speed limitations, however, ALL our roads should carry speed limit signage yes ALL that includes 30 mph. Quite apart from selfish drivers or those that don't care.Its a guessing game. Limits swing from 30, 40, 50 to unrestricted ( or so called national speed limit )Some counties provide 300 to 100 yard warnings, elsewhere its just bang from one limit to the next. Cameras by all means but first let us know just what speed restriction is in force and with plenty of timing for speed adjustment.
Speaking of which, ROAD MARKINGS, especially at roundabouts they are a nightmare. Yorkshire - in a given stretch of some six odd miles each roundabout has different lane markings no two being consistant often marked only at the point of the junction and with no signage to warn of lane priorities. How's that for road safety Mr Minister of Transport? MOTORWAYS mark them all with a speed limit and plenty of cameras, make ALL trucks drive no less than 200 metres apart instead of their everyday racing tailgating practices. Keep the heavies in the nearside only unless on a four lane system and restrict their overtaking blocking the motorway habits.
Catch the 80 90 100 mph driver, create a steady traffic flow then we can once more get enjoyment from our daily travel.

[Steve Robson]

I'm afraid it costs money to put signs up, that has to be raised from taxes and the TPA are against tax.

So no signs!

[Baffled]

It seems apparent that some of the comments are raised by people who have not taken their test for a very long time or have no common sense whatsoever. If you're driving down a road, in a town with street lights with no max speed limit signs, surely common sense would tell you to continue on at 30mph.
Maybe speed cameras aren’t apparently reducing accidents; however statistics should be taken with a pinch of salt. As the number of cars on the road increases, the number of accidents will continue to increase, speed cameras or not.
Take responsibility for your actions, stop complaining and drive responsibly.

[steve newton]

Yep. If we all drove to the speed limit imposed then they wouldnt collect any fines. The problem is that speed limits are imposed below the 'natural' speed of a road. All roads have a 'natural' speed, according to width, overall visibility, amount of parking, gradient of bends, etc., which the average driver could safely drive at and still feel that they were making reasonable progress. This the criteria the police and highway people use. Then, unless there are overriding cicumstances, they take ten miles an hour off the 'natural speed', and thats your speed limit(to the nearest, lowest, 30, 40, 50,etc. Built in frustration, built in fines.
Time for a change? I'm voting UKIP!