|
|
|
| Speed
Cameras: Life Savers or Cash Cows? |
| I
|
| I |

|
| Introduction. |
| Lies: damned
Lies: and Statistics. |
| Speed Cameras. |
| The Speed
Issue. |
| The Measure of
Success. |
| The Bottom
Line. |
| A Viable
Alternative? |
| I |
| I
|
| Introduction. |
|
I
|
|
2008: with
the introduction of the 'Gatso' Speed Camera in some 47 different
countries we suspect they are going to be in the News for quite some time to
come. In Britain their use is already a very contentious issue which is
all set to explode over the next couple of years as various factions take up
differing positions. There are two main opposing groups...
|
|
I
|
|
Group
1 consists of... the current Labour Government: a number of Police
Forces: Local Authorities: various anti-car Organisations: and possibly, the addition of the EU
Transport Commissioner: [who wants to halve Europe's annual road death toll
of 40,000 by 2010] all committed to a massive increase in Speed Cameras.
|
|
I
|
|
Group 2 consists of... the Conservative Party: various
pro-motoring Organisations: a few senior Police Officers: and a number of National
Newspapers who are committed to having their numbers reduced and their use
restricted to places such as Schools: Hospitals: and known Accident
Blackspots.
|
|
I
|
|
Confusion... Not surprisingly, all the varying Statistics and
arguments leave many ordinary members of the public very confused... unsure
what to believe or which group to support. Every sensible person wants to see the Roads as safe as
is humanly possible... but more and more people are coming to view this as
just a cynical
exercise to raise Revenue. Britain is now heading down a road
that other countries have already tried, without success... so,
does this Government think that it can succeed where others have failed?
Is
it really a bold political initiative aimed at reducing the Fatality Rate? Or is it simply
another New Labour Stealth-Tax? Is it a straight forward case of Truth v Spin? Safety v Revenue?
Or
something more complicated? [See blinkx
Videos for more Information and News Stories on this subject.]
|
I
I
|
|
Lies: damned Lies: and Statistics.
|
|
I
|
|
Truth or Spin? Unfortunately 'Statistics'
can be used to 'prove' almost anything... and the British Labour Government further
enhanced their dubious reputation for Spin when they started their 'Trial' on Speed
Cameras. Look at any graph showing the number of road deaths in
a small area and the line will go up and down quite dramatically... some years are
much worse than others... for no particular reason.
|
|
I
|
|
So for their 'Trial' the
Government picked out 6 different Policing Areas: [5 Counties... Cleveland:
Essex: Lincolnshire: Northamptonshire: Nottinghamshire: + Thames Valley] and by some strange
coincidence most of the Areas they selected had just had unusually bad
years. With almost complete certainty, you could say that the
following year the total for these 6 Areas would be notably better, even if you did absolutely nothing.
[While the trend for England as a whole was clearly down... the overall
trend for these 6 Areas was sharply up.] Surprise! Surprise! the following year the figures
were down...
their 'Trial' was a complete success... and this 'proves' that Speed Cameras
do save lives.
|
|
I
|
|
Government Trials... If the purpose of the Trial was to genuinely
find out whether Speed Cameras reduced accidents, it would never have been
carried out in such a fashion. A successful outcome could have been
due to... normal Statistical variation: general
safety improvements in vehicle construction: physical changes in the road
environment throughout the Counties: [i.e. speed humps: roundabouts:
traffic lights: by-passes: pedestrian crossings: etc. etc.] unusually good
weather: changes in Policing methods: some other road safety campaign: or any combination of
the above. And yet, they loudly proclaim that
the entire reduction was due to the introduction of their Speed Cameras.
|
|
I
|
|
Of
course the
'Trial' proved absolutely nothing! [if you compare the figures against the
average for those Counties over the previous decade rather than just the
previous year, any perceived improvement disappears.] There is only one reason you are
going to conduct a 'Trial' in such a manner and that is if you have already
made up your mind about the outcome. All the
indications are that this was a cynical Trial which
was just going to be used to justify a cynical Policy.
|
|
I
|
|
|
|
I
|
| Example...
Essex County: for 2003 they had a massive increase in Speed Cameras:
issuing 94,537 Fines: which netted them £5,672,220. And the
Result? in 2002 there were 92 Fatalities: in 2003 there were 116
Fatalities: a rise of 25%. An unbiased conclusion might be that
the Cameras were making no noticeable difference... and it was all a waste of Time and Money. The Authority's Conclusion?
the County obviously needs more Speed Cameras! Strange how any
decrease is due to Speed Cameras... but any increase is nothing to do with Speed Cameras! |
|
I
I
|
|
Safety or Revenue? March 2003:
saw the
results of a research Project which compared the effectiveness of
Speed Cameras to an Electronic Warning Sign: [which are about one
fifth of the price.] The Warning Signs also measure the speed
of vehicles... and if necessary will flash up a Warning Sign... saying 'Reduce
Speed: 30mph' [or similar.] This was found to be much more
effective at reducing drivers' speed than sending them a Fine
through the post a week after the event. So... are Police
Authorities queuing up to use the new Warning Signs... which are more
effective... but generate no Revenue? It would appear
not!
|
|
I
|
- Result: Safety 0 Revenue 1.
|
|
I
|
| Feb, 2008.
The Government say that the number of people Killed or Seriously
Injured [KSI] reduced from 79.7 per 100,000 to 54 per 100,000 between
1996 and 2004. A very significant reduction... which they claim
is due to the introduction of Speed Cameras. However, Hospitals
also collect Data on road accidents and their figures are quite
different... showing an increase from 88.8 per 100,000 to 90.1 per
100,000. So who should we believe? Actual deaths have
reduced by about 11% since the introduction of Speed Cameras... but if
the number of accidents has not been reduced then this means that
serious accidents have become more survivable... and the experts put
this down to better safety features on new cars. Basically, the
Government are trying to take the credit for work done by other
people. |
|
|
I
|
|
|
If Government Statistics and
Spin are not to be trusted...
then what do we know with any degree of certainty?
|
|
I
|
|
Placements. Where have they
sited these Speed Cameras? Well... we know for a fact that the 10 most dangerous
stretches of road in the country only have 4 cameras between them.
From a survey... [Summer 2003,] we know that there are 33 per cent more cameras on
Britain's 50 safest stretches of road than there are on the 50 most
dangerous... and we also know that there are many cameras which have been
placed at sites that are not particularly dangerous... but generate an enormous amount of
Revenue. A recent survey of London's cameras found that 80 out of 400
had been placed contrary to the Governments own guidelines. There can only be one explanation for these types of
placements!
|
|
I
|
- Result: Safety 0 Revenue 1.
|
|
I
|
|
Visibility. This is yet another area of
contention for the Authorities... if they
make a camera highly visible... they slow traffic down... but generate little
Revenue. If they hide a camera... they don't slow vehicles down... but
they do produce a good Revenue... so on that basis a camera should be highly
visible. However... there is also a broader counter-argument to
consider... if drivers know when they are approaching a camera
they can slow down and then immediately speed up again... but if they don't
know where the cameras are then they will have to stay under the speed limit
all the time. This is one very debatable aspect of their use... but, the Government has committed itself to making
cameras highly visible... although there are still countless examples where the
responsible Authorities have deliberately obscured cameras in contravention
of Government guidelines.
|
|
I
|
- Result:
Safety 1 Revenue 2.
|
|
I
|
|
The Right Problem? When interviewed,
senior Police are always careful to
qualify their
statements on Speed... using such phrases as excessive Speed... or inappropriate
Speed... is a contributing factor in 30% of accidents. These words
may reflect the reality of the situation... but they are not what is being
targeted... it
is Speed pure and simple... exceeding a Speed Limit! A Speed Camera never
qualifies a prosecution... it is basically, an 'Idiot Box'... it only measures
the Speed...
it will not and cannot take any other factors into consideration.
|
|
I
|
|
There are
a whole range of serious problems on the roads... by reducing patrols and relying on
cameras the Police are neglecting such
things as Drink-Driving: Dangerous Driving: Tailgating: Illegal Drivers: etc. which are now on the
increase. If they are concentrating all their efforts on this one
issue of Speed then you
would at least expect them to do it effectively... but as this has been confined to drivers
simply exceeding Speed Limits... then even this is being done badly.
However... it is very easy to understand why they would target this one
offence...
and rely on cameras... if
their primary objective was simply to generate Revenue.
|
|
I
|
- Result: Safety 0 Revenue 1.
|
|
I
|
|
The Right People?
Undoubtedly... the most serious and persistent offenders are those that operate at the very
edge of the Law and beyond. Particularly, those that just buy an old Vehicle
and...
don't Register it in their own Name or Address: have no MOT: no Insurance: pay no Tax:
don't maintain the vehicle: don't pay Fines: may not have a driving licence: and completely ignore
any driving Bans. In the unlikely event that they are stopped they will
just give a false Name and Address... or claim that they have only just bought the car. They are also much more
likely to... try and flee the scene of an Accident: or dump a broken down
vehicle at the side of the road... leaving others to
clear up their mess. [A recent survey concluded that these drivers are
up to nine times more likely to be involved in an accident than drivers who
have all their documentation in order.]
|
|
I
|
| And what does the Government do about them? the
worst offenders! Well, the
answer is... not very much! They require to much effort! But, ordinary law-abiding citizens
are much more compliant... they will pay their
Fines: serve any driving Bans: so, they simply go for the easy targets... and ignore the real
problems. Something of a
pattern developing here!
|

|
|
|
I
|
-
Result: Safety 0 Revenue 2.
|
|
I
|
|
Revenue?
The Authorities say this is
not about Revenue... they don't want peoples' money they want to save
lives. As was recently noted... Avon and Somerset Police have already built
£6,000,000 into their annual budget... which they intend to raise by Fining 150,000 drivers
for Speeding Offences. Nearly every driver exceeds the Speed Limits to
some extent... so they have every intention of handing out these Fines
whether people drive safely or not!
|
|
I
|
- Result: Safety 0 Revenue
6,000,000.
|
|
I
|
|
Conclusion.
|
|
|
Welcome to the perverse world of New
Labour! A world where the Government is so weak-willed and inept that
they persecute those who try to obey the law... and excuse those who
wilfully break it. They can't catch real criminals so they simply
criminalize those that are easy to catch... the law-abiding majority.
|
|
I
|
| The
Bottom Line... Officials will claim that speed humps save lives:
that having thousands of cameras saves lives: that issuing millions of
fines saves lives: and yet, they publish the annual Road Toll [2003 =
3,508: up 77] and there is no improvement. If cameras save lives
but the figures are static then they must be neglecting other areas:
[like Police patrols... down 11% since '96] or unintentionally creating
other problems like increasing the number of illegal drivers
[hit-and-run up 62% since '99.] Road Safety policy must be judged
in its entirety... the Bottom Line is the only reliable statistic... and
that says they have achieved absolutely nothing! Read this short
newspaper article... Speed Cameras 'pointless',
says Top Cop |
|
I
I
|
|
Stealth-Tax? It is openly admitted that much of the
Revenue from
Fines
ends up in Government coffers and is not used in connection with road safety
issues...
so whichever way you look at it, that means people are being Taxed without
being made aware of the fact... i.e. this is a Stealth-Tax!
[See Article:
Speed
Cameras: the Twisted Truth.
Extract from a book by Christopher
Booker and Richard North.]
|
|
I
|
|
|
|
I
I
|
|
Speed Cameras.
|
|
I
|
| The
Speed Camera experience is not a new one... they
have already been used to extreme in other countries so the effects of over-use
are not just predictable they are known. The negative
effects are many... while the benefits are few!
This is how we would expect this latest British attempt to breakdown... and ultimately
fail... based on experiences elsewhere.
|
I
I
|
|
Revenue Raising.
|
|
| Many drivers come to the conclusion that
it is just a cynical exercise to raise more Revenue... and not without some
justification. If you see Police operating a mobile speed camera... booking
hundreds of drivers on a busy road... which is straight and wide... and where the traffic is flowing at a nice
steady even pace: [an ideal situation] but slightly over the speed limit... it's very easy to reach the
conclusion that this is more about Money than Road Safety. Senior Police will
say that their aim is not to raise Revenue but to make drivers slow down... but if
they have been promised a share of the Revenue... and on this basis have
'Invested' a
lot of their budget in expensive Speed Cameras... they'd probably be rather
disappointed if their little 'Investments' didn't pay off! |
|
I
|
| The Speed Camera
gravy-train... Many groups and
individuals have now jumped aboard the Speed Camera gravy-train... they have
become an industry in their own right... and many of these people will
continue to support their use even if it is proved beyond doubt that
these cameras have little or nothing to contribute. This is
probably the biggest single factor that will lead to a breakdown in relations
between the Police and the general law-abiding majority... the belief that they are out raising
'Taxes'...
instead of fighting Crime! |
|
I
I
|
|
Professional Drivers.
|
|
|
It is a known fact... those who are most at risk of losing
their licences are those that drive for a living... [either
directly: i.e. Truck Drivers: or indirectly: i.e. Sales Reps. or anyone who spends
a lot of
their time on the road.] These may be some of the best drivers around...
good experienced drivers who haven't had an Accident... or been Fined for anything
in years... but by virtue of the fact they drive such high mileages each year they
will be at serious risk. In the course of driving 30: 40: 50,000 miles a
year...
a driver will pass
Speed Cameras, literally, thousands of times... and they only need to be caught in one per year and
they'd be on the
point of losing their livelihood.
|
|
I
|
|
|
|
I
|
|
Driver Interaction... Even being the safest driver in the world
will not save you from the Speed Cameras... because safety is primarily, about how you
'Interact' with other road users...
it means concentrating on what is happening all around you and altering your speed as circumstances
change. It is much safer for
drivers to stay within the main body of traffic and just 'go with the
flow' than it is to drive around obsessively watching their speedometer
and 'resisting the flow' even if this means slightly exceeding a speed
limit. An experienced driver should be able to drive around all day
long... in every kind of road and
traffic conditions... and in perfect safety... without ever needing to look at
their speedometer.
|
I
I
|
|
Local Drivers.
|
|
|
Many drivers [doing an average 10-12,000 miles
per annum] do the same few journeys over and over again... home to work: trips
to shops: family: friends: clubs: etc. and rarely venture out of their local
area. They soon get to know the exact location of every fixed camera
in their area. If you take the example of a very high-risk driver
who... drives to fast: jumps red lights: is aggressive: tailgates: overtakes
in a dangerous way: etc. etc. etc. what difference will a few cameras in the
area make to this type of individual?
|
|
I
|
|
Officials will give out some
dubious statistics about how cameras have "reduced accidents at the
locations where the cameras are sited". Even if this is so... the
only effect they have had is to slow down local drivers for 1-200 metres and
then they immediately return to their usual way of driving... they will not
have reduced the chances of this individual from having an accident one
iota... instead of driving 12,000 miles in a high-risk style... they drive 11,900!
|
|
I
|
| Regression
to the Mean. One of the conditions for installing new
cameras is that there must have been 3? or 4? accidents along a
stretch of road in the last year. If there wasn't a camera there
already it's because there weren't that many accidents in previous
years... and unless something has changed... there probably won't be
that many accidents in coming years either. It is just a
'statistical blip'. 'Regression to the Mean'... is an expression
used to describe this phenomenon. Meaning that you would expect
those statistics to 'Return to the Average' in the coming years.
It is possible to identify many such 'statistical blips' around the
country each year. But, the Authorities choose that moment to
place a Camera... then claim that this was the reason for the
reductions where cameras have been sited. It isn't! |
|
I
I
|
|
Illegal Drivers.
|
|
| It may be that
one of the 'unintended consequences' of handing out millions of Fines is
that there is a dramatic rise in illegal drivers. The most serious
and persistent offenders will very quickly
find that they lose [or are on the point of losing] their licences.
Initially, they may try and get Family or Friends without previous
convictions to accept the blame for them. Often, their solution is to
join the growing ranks of drivers who just buy an old vehicle... don't
Register it... and run it
into the ground. Then they don't need to worry about it being... Unroadworthy: Untaxed:
Uninsured: etc. and any Parking Tickets: or Speeding Fines: will never catch up with
them. |
|
I
|
| You may
even find... that many drivers who have never
contemplated breaking the law before will consider the option when faced with
these circumstances. Lose their job or take a chance: buy an old
car, don't Register it and pray they don't get stopped. Yet another set of laws that are very effective against the law-abiding
majority... and totally useless against the habitual law-breaker!
|
|
I
I
|
| Increases
Stress.
|
|
| For many people driving is already a fairly stressful
experience... having to contend with dozens of Speed Cameras on a daily
basis only makes this
worse. Drivers should be concentrating on other traffic around them...
keeping their eyes on the road, not looking out for Speed Cameras and obsessively
watching their speedometer. There is also the extra stress associated with being Fined: having to appear in
Court: being banned from driving: and the fear of losing their jobs.
|
|
I
|
|
This problem becomes very noticeable when a driver has clocked up quite a
few points... they know that just one more slip and they could be off the road for
months. Their only course of action is to be extra careful and keep well
under the speed limit at all times... regardless of the conditions. Of
course... this is also stressful
and can be very disruptive for other traffic... a driver should be encouraged to 'go with the
flow' of the majority... to try and 'Interact' with other road users in a smooth, even
way...
this is the most important thing!
|
I
I
|
|
Disrupts Traffic.
|
|
|
In moderate-heavy traffic the ideal
situation is to have traffic evenly spaced... all travelling at a similar
speed...
and as little braking as possible. These cameras actually create a
situation that ensures this never happens. When travelling down a road that has permanent cameras every
few miles the most noticeable effect is that there is a 'wave' of brake lights
coming towards you as some drivers check their speed to make sure they are under
the limit... and everyone else has to brake as a consequence.
|
|
I
|
|
Those drivers
already on a high points total will often drive slightly slower than the
main body of traffic... just to make sure. Meanwhile... 'Local'
drivers, who travel these routes daily... come to know the exact location of
cameras... so will Speed between cameras... brake as they approach
them... and then
immediately speed up again: [a practice known as 'surfing'.] And
finally... the most serious offenders who haven't registered the vehicle in
their own name can Speed with impunity... which all seriously undermines the
whole concept of 'Safe
Interaction' as individuals just drive according to their personal
circumstances and create a critical disparity between vehicle speeds.
|
|
I
|
|
Vandalism.
As Fines and Bans are increasingly handed out in their
thousands... or millions... more and more drivers who are feeling aggrieved and hard done
by are
likely to take their frustration out on these 21st Century "Dick
Turpins". Speed Cameras are easy targets and will increasingly be
subjected to a campaign of destruction, including being... burnt out:
knocked down: pulled over: locks broken: paint being sprayed over the lenses:
etc. etc.
|
|
|
I
|
| British
Drivers. Going on a trip or just want to check out the
location of Speed Cameras in your area? Click Here:
and the link
will take you to the website of SpeedCamerasUK which contains an
extensive database where visitors can...
find out where cameras are located in any UK county: add missing camera sites: and change current speed camera
location details. |
|
I
I
|
|
Deteriorating Relations. Most
ordinary law-abiding
citizens have
very little contact with the Police. The most common point of contact is
out on the roads when being pulled over for a relatively minor traffic
offence. If drivers start to develop the view that the Police are spending
their time 'harassing ordinary people... instead of catching real
criminals'... are more interested in filling Quotas... or raising Revenue... then
relations between the Police and the Public can start to deteriorate very
quickly... and when it does it is not confined to this one area... it
affects the whole relationship. Police may become viewed as anything
from glorified Tax-Collectors to Highway Robbers!
|
|
I
|
|
Peace of Mind...
If things are working properly the ordinary citizen should feel
pleased and reassured at the sight of a Police car rather than apprehensive... but
this is the case in some countries where the Police Force is viewed as something
which is there to enforce the will of the State... rather than serve the
people... the whole concept of 'Policing by Consent' starts to evaporate.
|
|
I
I
|
|
Police...
setting up 'mobile units' will find that drivers will flash each
other to warn of their presence. In effect... the general public [who are
all in favour of safer roads] will
openly conspire with each other to undo the work of their own Police Force.
Once this happens it is safe to say that the Authorities have completely 'lost the
plot'. Eventually... Police Chiefs will find themselves becoming increasingly
isolated... little support from the general Public... even less from their own
rank and
file Officers... and finally a change in their Political Masters... who will be more
than happy to attack them and their discredited policies.
|
I
I
|
|
Conclusion.
|
|
|
Compared to the human brain the Speed
Camera
is nothing more than an 'Idiot Box'... it is capable of doing one thing... and one
thing only... measuring the speed of a moving object. While it may have a role to
play it is certainly not worthy of having an entire 'Road Safety Policy'
bestowed upon it... which is what Group 1 seems intent on
doing.
Our conclusion is that drivers should support the position of Group 2... the use of Speed Cameras in
places where there is a clear need to keep Speed under control such as near
to Schools: Hospitals: and known Accident Blackspots: and cameras should be
clearly signposted in order to slow drivers down rather than generate
Revenue.
|
|
I
|
| Public Support... Any scheme such as this is absolutely reliant on the support of the
general public for whom Police officers are employed to serve. It is
quite probable the Authorities [Group 1] will never get wide spread support for
this scheme... simply because their whole strategy is based on a simplistic
lie... i.e.
their great slogan 'Speed
Kills'. There is no doubt that there is a problem with Speed... but it
is a far more complex problem than just drivers exceeding Speed Limits...
and even the most inexperienced drivers know it. |
|
I
I
|
|
The Speed Issue.
|
|
I
|
|
Of course there is an 'Issue' with Speed... but it is a complex issue and cannot possibly be reduced to a single catchy
slogan of 'Speed Kills'. If that were true you would only need to
know the speed of a vehicle to know how dangerous it was... and quite clearly that
would be nowhere near enough information to make a judgement... in some
circumstances 30 m.p.h. might be too fast... and in others 90 m.p.h. might be perfectly
safe. Or as the
Police might have it... 'Exceeding a Speed Limit Kills'... possibly a little more
accurate... but still a long way from the truth of the situation. It is quite
possible to drive dangerously within a Speed Limit... and it is equally possible to
drive safely in circumstances where a Speed Limit is being exceeded.
|
|
I
|
| In
effect... their 'Road Safety
Policy' comes down to this one
simple strategy... slow all Traffic down and the
Accident Rate will fall: [you
don't really need to be a genius to work this one out!] and if you follow this
line to its logical conclusion... why not just make Traffic go slower and
slower and slower... then eventually the Accident Rate would be
reduced to virtually zero. It's certainly a much easier
solution to slow Traffic down than it is to raise the standard of
driving...
although this would
rather seem to defeat the point of having vehicles in the first place.
|
|
I
|
|
|
|
|
|
I
|
|
Their Strategy for defending this Policy on 'Speed' generally comes down
to two things. Firstly... to prove what a good job they are doing by producing
some dubious statistical evidence... [about Accident Rates being down... and *Fines massively
increased.] Secondly... they try to stifle any
debate on the effectiveness of their Policy by making an
immediate rush for the moral high ground... i.e. "We're doing it for the
victims" [and anyone that disagrees with them doesn't care about the 'victims' and are
only interested in themselves.]
|
|
I
|
|
Victims... As
we look towards the next decade none of us can know which of us will be the
'Victims' [to take the example of a young male riding a high-powered
motorbike... his most likely 'Victim' is himself.] 'Victims' are not a separate group of
people...
they are our Friends! they are our Family! 'Victims R Us'!! So...
message to Police 'Spokesmen'... "get off your moral high horses!" anyone should
be entitled
to express an opinion about their Road Safety Policy without having their motives
questioned!
|
|
I
|
| *A couple of
problems
with this... One: handing out millions of Fines to your own
Citizens is not something to be proud of... it is not a 'Measure of Success'. Two:
at best, figures
will only go down for a few years. Accidents happen for a whole variety of
reasons... you cannot have a continuous reduction by
targeting one single offence... so the reductions [even if they are 'genuine'
reductions]
will quickly tail off to nothing... but the
Fines go on... and on... and on.
|
|
I
I
|
|
A Safe Speed... When deciding on an 'appropriate speed'
the factors that drivers need to take
into consideration are... their own capabilities as a driver: their state of
mind: the type of vehicle
being driven: the prevailing road conditions: weather conditions: visibility:
traffic density: vulnerable road users: and any other potential hazards. Drivers
should be prepared to adjust their speed as and when these conditions change...
'Interacting' with other traffic in a smooth, even way: leaving a good margin of error: and always able to stop
comfortably, on their own side of the
road, within the distance that they know to be clear.
|
|
|
I
|
|
Many Drivers...
manage to do this very well... and can literally cover
hundreds of thousands of miles
over many years without
ever having an accident... though in the process they might have exceeded Speed
Limits on
countless occasions. The problem is not simply
'Speed'... it is the
'Inappropriate use of Speed'... or Speed combined with other offences... like
Tailgating... which is something very different.
|
|
I
|
| Although
an... 'Inappropriate use of Speed' many be hard to define: [and
impossible for an 'Idiot Box' to recognise] it is relatively easy for
experienced drivers to identify... and it is their skills that need to
be harnessed. Technology on its own is not the answer... it needs
'People and Technology!' The Internet now makes it possible to
bring these two elements together. |
|
I
I
|
|
If 'Speed' were the only issue...
then it would be fair to conclude that
those countries that drive the fastest would also have the highest 'Fatality
Rates'. Probably, the fastest roads in the world are in Germany. When travelling on the
German autobahns [i.e. Motorways: Freeways: mile for mile the safest type of
roads in the world] at 100mph. [160kph.] there will often be a continuous
stream of traffic passing by... when conditions allow.
|
|
I
|
|
A look at the
'Fatality' statistics will show that Germany by no means has the worst
figures...
which is because they have good Roads: a high proportion of cars in the 'Luxury'
bracket: [Audi: B.M.W. Mercedes: Porsche] capable of travelling at high speeds:
and most importantly, very disciplined drivers who comply with the Rules... and
operate with a good margin of error. Which means that although you might be travelling very fast
you do not have the feeling that you are in a dangerous situation because you
are 'Interacting' with other traffic in a smooth, even way.
|
|
I
|
|
What is an
everyday occurrence
for many Germans is considered by some in Britain to be almost a hanging offence!
[although that may change shortly if the E.U. has its way.] In many countries which do not have these
conditions... travelling at such speeds would be
nothing short of suicidal!
|
|
I
|
|
|
[Read... BMW
Report. by... Frank Detlef: Joachim Sumpf: Stephan
Bujnoch: (they conclude that drivers exceeding speed limits are
responsible for 4% of accidents.) This Report was originally
entitled... "Prerequisites
to Improving Traffic Safety"... done for the BMW Group: Germany.]
|
|
|
I
|
|
Speed
Limits. In general... even if it was safe to raise some Speed Limits
we do not believe it would not be worth
the effort. This may rather seem to contradict what we have said
earlier... but there are a couple of reasons for this.
|
|
I
|
- Firstly:
it can be a major undertaking to re-examine thousands of Roads... and put up new
Sign Posts.
|
- Secondly: if you were to raise
the Speed Limit on [for instance] a British Motorway from 70mph to
80mph... your fundamental Situation... and Problem... would not have changed
one little bit.
|
- The 'Situation' is... that a 'Safe' Speed varies
enormously with the different Road and Traffic conditions.
|
- The
'Problem' is... that some drivers fail to take into account these ever
changing circumstances... and/or combine a multitude of other offences
with Speed to create dangerous conditions.
|
- If you only raise
the Speed Limits then the same bad drivers carry on with the same
bad habits... but are even less likely to be pulled over by the
Police... and
when they are they will inevitably protest... "but I wasn't breaking the
Speed Limit".
|
- What you need is a system that targets
dangerous drivers rather than those that just exceed the Speed
Limits...
such as a kind of Road Supervisor Network.
|
|
I
|
|
Speeding Offences. |
|
| Clearly not all
Speeding Offences are equally bad. A Government could issue a set of
guidelines so that Speeding Offences could be placed in a number of different
categories. As a rough example... let's say there were 5 different
categories... with Group A being the worst. Police could just tick
boxes on a Penalty Notice concerning... the Driver: Vehicle: Road
Conditions: Traffic Density: Visibility: Weather Conditions: Hazards: etc.
plus any other poor driving/offences [i.e. tailgating: no signals] and
then calculate which Group the offence fell into. Perhaps Groups A-B would require a Court
appearance... but Drivers should be able to agree
with the assessment and pay a fixed penalty on Groups C-E: [or contest it
in Court and risk a bigger penalty.] |
| I
|
| Group A:
would be the very worst offences where nearly everything was bad:
i.e. Excessive Speed near a School: Young Driver: Poor Vehicle: Children Crossing: Parked Vehicles: Heavy Traffic: Raining: Wet
Road: Poor Visibility: etc. |
| I
|
| Group
E:
would be the least serious: only Exceeding the Speed Limit... but,
Experienced Driver: Good Vehicle: No Pedestrians: No Hazards: No
Traffic: Dry Road: Good Visibility: etc. |
| I
|
|
Category. |
|
|
| Group
A. |
Group
B. |
Group
C. |
Group
D. |
Group
E. |
|
| No leeway: Heavy Fine:
£100 and 10 points for every 1 mph over the limit. |
No leeway: Fairly Heavy Fine:
£50 and 5 points for every 1 mph over the limit. |
10% leeway: Moderate Fine:
£25 and 3 points for every 1 mph over the limit. |
25% leeway: Moderate Fine:
£25 and 3 points for every 1 mph over the limit. |
50% Leeway: Moderate
Fine: £25 and 3 points for every 1 mph over the limit. |
|
| Example...
caught doing 40mph in a 30mph zone near a School: [under a new 100
point system.] |
|
| £1000 Fine. |
£500 |
£175 |
£50 |
No Fine. |
| 100 Points. |
50 Points. |
21 Points. |
6 Points. |
No Points. |
|
|
| I
|
| [Note... this is
just an example and could easily vary if policy was to Fine wealthy individuals at
higher rates. Something which already happens in some European
Countries.] |
I
I
|
| The
Measure of Success. |
| I
|
|
Changing laws can save lives but the major
problem is drivers flouting existing laws... effective 'Enforcement' is what is
really
required. When enforcing Legislation... what should be considered a 'Measure
of Success'? Each measure that is imposed has the potential to do something
good... or something bad... for each individual... so a balance needs to be found.
|
| I
|
| Below we lay out
six different categories... as an individual you would not wish to become a
'Statistic' of any of them, because they would all have an adverse affect on your
life. So... the view we are taking is... there are no real
Measures of Success... only varying 'Degrees of Failure'.
|
| I
|
|
Six Categories of Failure... Accidents: Injuries: Deaths: Fines: Driving Bans: and Imprisonment. As a driver
looking to the decade ahead... can any of us say for sure which of us will be affected by
each of these six categories? Would you be happy to trade a slightly lower
chance of having an Accident for a much higher chance of losing your driver's
licence: [and possibly your livelihood with it?] Whatever the Authorities
say...
handing out millions of Fines to your own Citizens is not something to be proud
of! it cannot be considered a
'Measure of Success'... a low
rate of Fines: Driving Bans: and Imprisonment: should be a goal... just as low rates
of Accidents: Injuries: and Deaths are... and that means finding ways to make
everyone comply with the rules we already have!
|
| I
|
| Year. |
Fines. |
Fatalities. |
|
| 1995 |
206,900 |
3,213 |
| 1996 |
262,200 |
3,440 |
| 1997 |
336,700 |
3,222 |
| 1998 |
403,800 |
3,036 |
| 1999 |
498,600 |
3,113 |
| 2000 |
699,400 |
3,084 |
| 2001 |
1,014,600 |
3,096 |
| 2002 |
1,235,500 |
3,127 |
| 2003 |
1,784,500 |
3,177 |
|
|
I
I
|
| The
Government dish up statistic in every way conceivable... invariably,
proving what a good job they are doing. But, the bottom line is...
Fines are going through the roof... the Fatality rate remains
steady. For all the misery they serve up... their achievement is
Zero!! The
true 'Measure of Success' should be in creating a more 'Law-abiding
Society'... rather than handing out more and more 'Punishments' of every kind!
|
| I
|
| Fines...
When
you hand out a Fine you are saying to that person that Society finds their
behaviour unacceptable and that they need to be Punished in some
way. If you are just in a long line of Traffic, doing the same speed as
everyone else then quite clearly your behaviour is acceptable to all those
people around you that you are sharing the road with... drivers should never be Fined in such circumstances! We have now reached the point where the Authorities no
longer seem to consider themselves to be the Servants of the People... wielding
power on behalf of its citizens. It would appear the 'Servants' now consider themselves to be
the 'Masters'. |
|
I
I
|
| A
different perspective... The Government might, as an example... claim
that they have saved 100 lives with their actions... but unlike a straight
forward Rescue... they can never positively identify the individuals which have been
saved. In fact it is not straight forward at all... if you just
interfere with the Traffic flow by slowing it down, then relatively, all
vehicles end up travelling in a slightly different place. It is a bit like shuffling a pack of cards one more
time... everyone
now gets dealt a different hand. There will still be a similar number
of good hands and bad hands... but the bad hands [Accidents] will now be dealt
to different People... in
different Places... at different Times. For a Country like Britain... Road
Fatalities might be reduced from 3,500 to 3,400 [which of course is a good
thing] but they are not all going to be the same People. To take this
example to its extreme.... 3,500 People might be saved...
and a completely different 3,400 People might be killed. |
| I
|
|
|
|
|
| I
|
| The Point
being...
for the 3,400 people who are killed: [and all those injured] your policy has
failed... there is still the same level of misery as far as their Family and
Friends are concerned. The 100 lives that you have saved
[statistically] are
blissfully unaware of their escape. In fact... as we look to the years
ahead, the only thing a Government can offer to each of us as individuals is a
slightly better statistical chance that we will not become a Road
Fatality...
in effect, they achieve something very small for millions of people...
rather than something great for 100 unidentified individuals. |
| I
|
| For each of us... the
chances of being killed in a road accident might be reduced from something
like... 5.89 deaths per 100,000 people to 5.72 per 100,000... hardly a Statistic
which will make
you sleep more soundly at night! On the other hand... people have to
contend with Speed Cameras on a daily basis... with Fines being
handed out by the millions... and Driving Bans currently running at about
268,000... they are certainly going to cause a lot of sleepless
nights for a lot of people. In other words... the positive effect of
this policy does not improve one single person's life to any noticeable
degree... but the
negative effects are clearly there for all to experience.
|
| I
|
| Using the Roads...
always involves a
certain amount of risk... none of us can be 100% safe... but all the major risk
factors are already under your own control. If safety is a real
priority, then make sure you are a low-risk driver... choose a vehicle
with a lot of safety features, such as a Volvo: [second-hand Volvos are not
that expensive] take an advanced driving course: learn defensive
driving techniques: refrain from high-risk driving practices: maintain
your concentration: keep a good margin of error: and avoid getting involved in
personal conflicts with other drivers. If you actively take control
of
your own personal safety then anything the Government has to offer you with
their Speed Camera campaign will become [statistically] inconsequential and
irrelevant! |
|
I
I
|
| The
Bottom Line... |
| I
|
| When Speed Cameras
were first introduced it was not just about the Money...
it was a Road Safety Strategy that had some Financial benefits... but now it
seems to have developed into a Financial Strategy that might also
have a few Road Safety benefits.
There are a lot of reasons why people might continue to support this
Strategy... some may actually believe the Spin: some are
anti-car and want people off the roads: some believe it is better than
doing nothing: others are desperate to give the appearance that they are doing
something: while others are direct beneficiaries of the Speed Camera
gravy-train. At the end of the day there is only one Statistic that
people need to look at... the total number of Fatalities for the year... and
despite all the Fines and Driving Bans... that figure is not likely to improve
very much... and even if it does you cannot say
that it is simply due to the introduction of Speed Cameras... there could
be many other reasons for a reduction. |
| I
|
|
Our conclusion...
is that public support will inevitably drain away. Their promise is
that they will provide us with a better service... i.e. safer, less congested
Roads: [you can always
get support for better Services: or lower Taxes] but
this means paying higher Taxes... a Stealth-Tax through Fines... major disruption to
Lives... and a service that
to all intensive purposes appears exactly the same.
For all their effort, the Government will never be able to produce one
single person who's life has been noticeably improved. If it wasn't for the fact that
these Statistics were being publish... people would be completely unaware of any
improvements of any kind.
|
| I
|
|
|
| I
|
| The Authorities have dug themselves into a
hole...
those who have backed this scheme must continue to do so otherwise this
gravy-train will hit the buffers... they will have to admit that they have
spent millions... disrupted innumerable lives... and achieved absolutely
nothing! So... we can expect them to keep spinning the figures in any
way they can to try and protect their own interests and justify their
existence.
|
| I
|
| A
few more Statistics... the number of people killed or injured by
hit-and-run drivers on Britain's roads grew to 14,897 in 2003... and
increase of 62% in just 5 years. And the reason? up to 2.0
million vehicles with no tax: insurance: MOT's [a roadworthy
certificate] unregistered: and drivers without licences or serving
driving bans. Meanwhile traffic police patrols have dropped
about 11% since 1996: if stopped, illegal drivers are often just
given a ticket: inevitably, they don't pay them and they don't turn
up for Court appearances. If the Police seize a death-trap
vehicle these drivers will just go out and replace it with some
other heap of rubbish within days and at minimal cost. |
|
I
I
|
| They have
neglected a whole range of other serious problems in order to concentrate
on the single issue of Speed... trying to justify their decisions with a few dodgy
Statistics. Having made the decision... they proceed to deal with this
Issue in an extremely ineffective way... they target drivers who exceed
Speed Limits: [which are not necessarily a problem] rather than drivers
who use excessive or inappropriate Speed: [which is always a problem.] They have entrust their entire Road Safety strategy into
the hands of an Idiot Box... something which should never have more than a
very minor part to play has been given the starring role. Time and
again they chose something that generates Revenue over something which
would increase Safety. There is no prospect of this strategy making
the roads significantly safer... it is by any definition little more than
a cheap Money Grab! |
| I
|
|
| Should
ordinary citizens support the Authorities in this campaign? |
| I
|
| Our
assessment is that they are... |
| I
|
- Targeting the wrong offence.
|
- Rely to heavily
on Speed Cameras.
|
- Will never achieve any significant
reductions.
|
- Are using
simplistic Strategies.
|
- Are persecuting the law-abiding
majority.
|
- Are
failing to tackle criminals.
|
- Encouraging even more law-breaking.
|
- Are destroying the relationship between the
Police and the Public.
|
- And are generally motivated by
the desire for a quick fix.
|
| I
|
| The whole thinking behind this campaign
is totally perverse... the Government and the Police do not deserve any
support whatsoever from ordinary law-abiding members of the Public. In
fact... the
sooner this sorry episode is brought to a close the better... ordinary citizens should do everything in their power to
ensure this
Policy is discarded!
|
I
I
|
| Political
Developments. |
|
| As expected this issue is becoming a Political
football at the National level. At
the end of December 2003 the Conservative Party said... if elected they
would review the current speed camera policy... assess which cameras reduced
accidents and which simply generate Revenue... and only carry a Fine plus
Points at the most dangerous locations. The Labour Government
quickly responded by saying that they would consider the Conservative
proposals and in the meantime would be writing to all local authorities
telling them that cameras must contribute to road safety or be removed...
simply using them to raise Revenue was not allowed.
|
| I
|
| It remains to be
seen what the outcome will be... but anyone with an ounce of cynicism in
their bones will suspect that this is nothing more that a bit of Political
manoeuvring by Labour and the end result will be the publication of more
dodgy statistics proving that nearly all the cameras do contribute to road
safety... rather than their removal.
|
| I
|
| Post
script... Labour have since reported in a very low-key way that all speed
cameras have been sited in places which prevent accidents and no changes
will be made... surprise! surprise! surprise!
|
|
I
I
|
| At the local
Government level... as an example, Lambeth council in South
London are increasing their cameras in order to target drivers who stray
into bus lanes on minor roads that they control, predicting a ten-fold
increase in Fine-Revenue... while at the same time cameras targeting the
same offence on major roads through the Borough will be generating Revenue
for the Greater London Authority. When the Government's new force of
'Super Wardens' comes into force they will be able to issue Fines of up to
£100 for a whole range of moving offences generating even more Revenue
for local councils. Again, the explanation is that it will improve
safety and traffic flow... but even if that is the genuine intention of the
Government, the end-result will inevitably be 'Super Wardens' being
given quotas as a means of measuring their effectiveness and in order to
generate Revenue for local councils. |
| I
|
| Meanwhile: the
European Union... is planning a blitz on drivers with a massive network of
speed cameras right across the Continent. Britain already has about
5-6,000 cameras but could be ordered to install even more if it fails to
meet safety targets set by EU transport commissioner Loyola de
Palacio. She wants to halve Europe's road death toll of 40,000 by
2010 and has called for an even greater network of sophisticated
electronic devices, with speeding offenders and drunk drivers facing
prosecution in any EU country as part of a pan-European enforcement
plan. Britain already has one of the toughest enforcement regimes in
Europe and one of the lowest fatality rates... so depending on how reduction
targets are worked out Britain could find itself being unfairly targeted
with even more cameras of every kind. |
| I
|
| At every level of
Government... Local: City: National: or International there are plans to
target drivers and punish them in one way or another. In many cases
it is just a blatant money-grab... and even when it isn't the Revenue issue
usually becomes a major part of the equation. The pattern has been
established... targets are set: minor
infringements get prosecuted: the law-abiding pay up: and serious offenders
are allowed to slip through the net. |
|
I
I |
| A
Viable Alternative? |
| I
|
| Many
people will support the use of Speed Cameras if the only alternative
appears to be... doing nothing! But clearly there are other ways of
using modern Technology to prevent Road Accidents particularly if you are
prepared to engage drivers in a pro-active way. It is our belief
that the Road Safety issue could be dealt with far more effectively than
it is at present by developing a sophisticated Information based system of
Law Enforcement which uses modern Technology to harness the Skills:
Knowledge: and Experience: of those drivers who use the road network on a
daily basis. |
| I
|
| Social
Interaction v Stricter Regulation.
|
| I
|
| We
believe a significant reduction in road accidents
is a real possibility... but, [and it's a very large but,] you
will have to approach the problem in a radically different
way. Just changing the odd law: increasing fines: concentrating on
single issues: or trying to use Technology in simplistic ways in order to solve complex
problems: will make little difference. Road
Safety needs to be an integral part of the system, from start to finish:
and that means engaging drivers in a pro-active way. Drivers may
be our biggest problem, but they are also our greatest asset! They have a
depth of knowledge and understanding that no 'Idiot Box' could ever start to
replicate... and it is this asset that we need to utilise.
|
| I
|
| Read
this Article...
'The Road Supervisor
Process' which looks at one single issue... Drivers going too fast
past a School. It looks at the effectiveness of having a Speed
Camera... compared to having a Road Supervisor type system.
|
|
I
I
|
| Every sensible person... is
in favour of safer roads... but we are now in
the 21st Century so it is about time the Authorities packed in their
patronising lectures and put some effort into developing a Plan which is a
little most sophisticated than some of the garbage they are peddling at the
moment. You
cannot develop a higher standard of driving for a whole country by simply
Punishing people in ever greater numbers... their strategies are
ill-conceived... simplistic... and unworthy of public support. |
I
I
I |