Morning:
14°c
Town axes fixed speed cameras 'to reduce accidents'
31.07.09
A town's motorists are driving to work without fear of fixed-point speed cameras today as a controversial plan to switch them off comes into action.
The five permanent cameras remaining in Swindon, Wiltshire, are being deactivated today as part of a "fresh look" at reducing accidents.
The cameras will be covered over with orange bags marked "not in use".
The estimated £320,000 they cost to run is being put into other measures that the borough council hopes will cut crashes.
These include car-activated warning signs at three sites where yellow boxes currently operate. Some mobile cameras will still be on the prowl, however.
The move follows the decision by Swindon Borough Council to "challenge the status quo" in regard to accident prevention.
Peter Greenhalgh, the council's cabinet member for transport said: "I'm very pleased at the positive way in which the police and our other partners have risen to the challenge we set.
"In Swindon we are developing a reputation for challenging the status quo and being at the forefront of new thinking. Our sole aim is to find new and more effective ways to reduce road accidents within our current budget.
"Not only have our partners responded positively to the removal of fixed cameras, they've also led in reshaping the Road Safety Partnership into a model that's attracting interest from elsewhere."
In October last year Swindon became the first town in the UK to vote to ban the fixed-point cameras.
But road safety groups accused the Conservative-run council of putting lives at risk.
The national road safety charity, Brake, called the decision "reckless" and and a "dangerous experiment."
Mr Greenhalgh said then that 70 people were killed in 2007/08 and that speed cameras were not making roads safer.
Last night Wiltshire police stressed that mobile speed cameras would continue to operate around the town famous for its intricate Magic Roundabout.
David Ainsworth, deputy chief constable of Wiltshire Police, said: "I am grateful for the work the council has done in looking at fresh ways of improving safety and this must be an ongoing process.
"The council has produced a timetable of phased actions which includes monitoring of changes to ensure they can be shown to be working and the first parts of that programme will be in place and functioning before the deactivation of the fixed cameras tomorrow.
"We will not compromise on public safety or in our drive to help make Wiltshire the safest county in the country and we remain committed to the use of a variety of casualty reduction methods, including cameras, in speed enforcement.
"Cameras are an effective means to help achieve a reduction in deaths and injuries and as such are an invaluable part of our casualty reduction strategy and they will continue to be used.
"The use of Safety Cameras has contributed to improved levels of road safety across the whole Force area and has helped to prevent many deaths and injuries.
"I am especially pleased that the council, as a key member of the Wiltshire and Swindon Road Safety Partnership, remain committed to the fact that the mobile speed safety camera units which are part of that partnership will continue as normal in their mobile speed camera enforcement across Swindon where necessary.
"We will continue to work with the council in assisting to monitor the impact of the new vehicle activated signs in order to achieve our joint objective of improving public safety but any assumption that speed cameras will no longer be used in Swindon is plainly incorrect".
Reader views (24)
Driving at the speed limit is neither difficult or complicated - if you can't perform this simple function in a vehicle you should consider handing your license in because you do not have the intellectual capacity or motor skills needed for this easy task.
- Bob H, Streatham
I think there is only five cams in Swindon and they are totally ineffective, never seen one go off although people speed right past them , but the mobile units are far more effective, also these static cams should be relocated near schools and shop parades where the elderly and young have to regularly run the gauntlet of speeding cars.
- Brian, Wiltshire
"In Swindon we are developing a reputation for challenging the status quo and being at the forefront of new thinking... Ha ha ha, you mean you're living up to your reputation for being a town of carrot crunching west country village idiots.
And of course speed doesn't kill, it makes no difference being run over at 30mph or 70mph, everyone knows that.... in Swindon anyway.
- Jj, London
Not to worry, in a couple of short years there will be smart roads and integrated tech that will govern a cars speed. You will never be able to drive over the limit.
Unless you are of the exempted classes: MPs, other pols, listed celebrities, etc etc etc
- Trunk, US
put them on housing estates weve all seen pratts driving on them 45 mph plus usually on the mobile phone
- C May, bromley
"Safety" cameras can work but only in the right locations. Over 90% of Speed Cameras are situated where they can raise most revenue and is another stealth tax imposed by this disreputable government. Better road maintainence, sight lines, traffic calming (not speed bumps which damage vehicles) etc are far more effective at reducing accident rates. Well done Swindon and may many more follow.
- Roger, Winchester, England
@ Pselley - Stevenage re any accidents at these junctions, "Who is responsible. Councillors or officers.????"
Neither of the two above, it's the motorists involved, , , as it should be.
- Frank H., London UK.
Ditch the cameras and get traffic police back out on the roads that way we get the speeding, non seatbelt wearing, mobile phone using and law breaking all in one fell swoop.
- Bob, Cheam
Anil Glos; You have just unwittingly demonstrated what is wrong with speed cameras and the twisted statistics used to justify their existence.
3 young people killed before the camera, none after its installation. The conclusion? The camera has saved lives. Nonsense. For a start, the deaths you describe occurred in a single event. How many fatal collisions were there before that one? None I suspect.
What you have described is "regression to the mean" i.e. the return to normality after an uncharacteristic event.
The KSI statistics bear testament to post-scamera failure. Britain had the largest annual percentage fall in KSIs in Europe, prior to the introduction of speed scameras. This annual fall has reduced since. The fact is that, had trends continued as per pre scamera days, there would have been several thousand fewer fatalities on our roads.
95% of collisions DO NOT have speed (excess or innapropriate) as a causal factor. They are caused by driver behaviour and hazards that are NOT detected by scameras. Yet, the entire basis of DfT road saftey campaingns rotates around vehicle speed, despite the fact that their own research has shown that they have made our roads more dangerous.
- Keith Lonsdale, Doncaster
Commonsense wouldn't be to turn them off. It woould be to send a warning letter (no penalty) to those caught exceeding the speed limit by a small amount, to fine those exceeding it by a serious amount (say more than 10mph), and to prosecute for dangerous driving those exceeding it by more than 20mph. If they were used sensibly I'd even be happy for them to go back to being concealed.
It's fining people for going just a few mph over the limit that brings speed cameras into disrepute. It also forces people to drive with their eyes on their speedometer rather than on the road, which probably causes accidents rather than preventing them.
And on busy main roads, why won't they paint the speed limit on the camera? Many times I've been behind someone who brakes suddenly on seeing a camera, thinking it's a 40 limit when it's 50, or 50 when it's 70. This can cause a major pile-up.
- Nigel, London
To Colin from Bristol:
Instead of repairing the potholes in city streets, maybe the council should dig more, much wider and deeper ones. That would stop people speeding over them, wouldn't it?
- Paul H, London, UK
Interesting logic. Maybe disbanding the Police force would lead to more criminals helping old ladies across the road and volunteering for community projects, instead of robbing banks, pimping prostitutes and taking part in muggings.
Wonder what odds Ladbrokes are offering on the cameras in question being reactivated withing days of the next child in Swindon to be flattened by a speeding vehicle.
- Paul H, London, UK
I applaud this council. Common sense at last. As for Brake, this anticar lunatic organisation continues to spout its nonsense. Speed does not kill. Inappropriate use of speed without regard for the conditions kills.
- Matt, Ruthin
Ever seen a muppett overtake on a blind bend or before the brough of a dip.
Of course you have.
No camera there .
Which is odd because most accidents occur on "country lanes",
No cameras.
Why ?
No revenue.
- Colin, Corby
Well done Swindon. Hopefully the rest will follow. Speed cameras don't save lives. They just shift accidents.
- Adam, Harrow, UK
I will always contend that if roads were maintained in a more satisfactory manner,ie no potholed bumpy bone jarring road repairs,the standard of driving would increase.Cameras,width restrictions,ridiculous 'traffic calming',don't do anything of the sort.Right of way is ignored and its beat to other coming the other way to the 'hole'.It's ridiculous nonsense making driving steer towards each other and it would be obviously safer if the money spent on 'consultants','safety bodies' and committees,was spent on improving the road surfaces.Cameras and traffic calming are dangerous.
- Safety Last, St Neots Cambs
Driving standards are apalling in the westcountry. People either drive too slow - eg. like they are the only ones using the road or way too fast. They are not used to bus priority schemes, bus lanes or similar.
I live in a small village. In the next one, they introduced a speed limit and camera 4 years ago. Since then, there have been no accidents. Months before the camera was installed, 3 young people, all under 30, lost their lives in a head-on collision. Accident investigators found that one car was travelling at 85 mph on a S bend.
- Anil, glos
How stupid. What happens when a serious collision occurs at the location where the safety camera was placed. What measures are they using instead to address the collision pattern they originally identified. If any?? Who is responsible. Councillors or officers.????
- Pselley, stevenage
I agree with Richard,I do hope other Councils follow Swindon's lead,a further way to improve road safety is to improve road surfaces,here in Bristol we have potholes so deep that one could be forgiven for mistaking them for the entrance to an underground car park.
- Colin, Bristol
Good for Swindon. It's about time the accepted 'wisdom' that speed cameras save lives was challenged. The reduction in road deaths over the years has been due to improved technology, courtesy of the car companies, and not through any fixed road-side cameras. Airbags, improved braking performance, better car design, more lightweight chassis and numerous other improvements contribute far more to public safety than hair-brained schemes involving cameras. It is a proven fact that excess speed(ie drivers breaking the speed limit) cause only 5% of road deaths- which means we need alternative schemes in place to reduce the vast majority of deaths where illegal speeding wasn't a factor.
- Richard, London
Pedestrains need to take more responsibility for their actions as well, rather than just blaming the motorists. A new law which prohibits jay walking should be introduced, £1000 for crossing on a red sounds about right.
- Chris, Rochester
Now watch the mobile camera fines revenue rise. Theyre not stupid, now people know where every fixed camera is theyre not catching anyone and making any money....
- Dac - Ealing, London
I agree. The sudden braking and diving into the nearside lane when a camera is spotted is far more dangerous than the few mph over the limit. BUT, speeding in town and city streets in general, must be discouraged by much heavier fines. Those who flout the law and put pedestrians in danger especially as there seems to be so many people walking the streets with impaired mobility these days. Running a red light at pedestrian crossing should be rewarded with a £1,000 and two-year ban.
- Albert Hall, hove england
A council using common sense, now that is a first.
- Jimbob, Kensington
