Morning:
8°c
Motorists may escape speeding fines following budget cuts
11 Nov 2009Hundreds of thousands of motorists could escape prosecution for speeding and other offences after the budget of one of Britain's largest road safety units was slashed.
Senior Metropolitan Police officers have been forced to move 45 members of staff from London's safety camera partnership.
The unit, based in Victoria Street, Westminster, is responsible for operating 900 speed and red light cameras in the capital.
Staff handed out 304,324 notices of intent to prosecute in the year 2008/09 and slightly more in each of the three previous years.
But this may fall to around 80,000 notices after Transport for London (TfL) cut funding by about £2.8 million.
And the unit faces even more uncertainty as officials at the Department for Transport (DfT) consider whether to provide any cash next year.
London Assembly member Jenny Jones said the huge drop in the use of cameras could leave the capital's roads like the "Top Gear racetrack".
She confronted London mayor Boris Johnson over the funding shortfall at a City Hall meeting earlier today.
Speaking afterwards, Ms Jones said: "The Mayor offered no evidence to support his assertion that cutting safety cameras won't risk lives.
"London's roads are not safe in his hands. This is a return to the bad old days when drivers could speed with impunity and the number of deaths and serious injuries on London's roads were horrendously high.
"People have worked hard to halve the number of fatal and serious casualties in the last 10 years.
"Yet this Mayor is risking Londoners' lives with a drastic cut to the number of functioning safety cameras in London.
"London's roads are not the Top Gear race track. The London Mayor's laissez faire attitude to road safety will damage the shift towards walking and cycling in London."
Notices of intent to prosecute are sent to motorists caught speeding, crossing red lights or stopping in yellow box junctions.
Ms Jones published correspondence between her and Anne McMeel, director of resources at the Metropolitan Police.
Ms McMeel explained how TfL announced it would reduce the amount of Government money available for the safety camera team in May.
She wrote: "We expect to redeploy some 45 members of staff and, inevitably, this will lead to a reduction in the number of cases handled from a planned 160k a year to around 80k."
The situation raised questions about the state of the safety camera team's finances because it was once expected to pay for itself through fine income.
Officials said the enforcement regime could be made harsher if not enough money came in as they set it up in 2002.
A TfL spokesman said: "With no DfT assurances on next year's funding for the safety camera partnership we are now seeking ways to ensure the partnership's work remains as efficient and effective as possible.
"The Partnership plays a vital role in cutting death and injury on London's roads and we, as well as the Met, have written to the transport secretary to press the Government to continue to support it.
"The Mayor and TfL continue to do our utmost to support the safety of cyclists and pedestrians in the capital.
"This year alone £40 million will be invested on road safety and infrastructure improvements that will benefit all road users."
Reader views (15)
Tom, London, UK
There is no evidence linking the saving of any lives on our roads to speed cameras. There is evidence to show that they have caused collisions. If pushed (very hard) the DfT will admit as much.
"It's not often recognised how much road safety has been improved by activist measures taken since the early 1990s."
-It's not often recognised because it hasn't happened!
The overwhelming majority of activists'(I take it that you are one of them) claims are based on unresearched, unsubstantiated emotive claptrap. Half of the studies that the likes of RoadPeace and BRAKE use to justify their tub thumping have never actually been carried out.
- Keith Lonsdale, Doncaster, 12/11/2009 14:50
Report abuse
More police patrols and less cameras are the answer, cameras can only detect the offence of speeding and the offence of jumping a red light. They cannot detect many of the more dangerous offences such as drunk/drugged driving, dangerous driving, tailgating, driving too fast for the conditions but still within the limit, road rage and many more. Police patrols can, and do, deal with all the offences. The cameras do not save lives, in fact, since the rules for placing them require an abnormally high number of KSI accidents which is purely an anomally any perceived reduction at a camera site is purely the anomally returning to the norm. However, there are documented cases of cameras triggering accidents by drivers unnecessarily braking when below the speed limit and being hit from behind because the driver behind is checking their speed rather than observing their surroundings. Remove all cameras and go back to proper policing. By the way I have no points on my licence, and yes, I do enjoy driving around 20,000 miles per year sometimes above the limit.
- Kevin Day, Shirebrook, UK, 12/11/2009 10:45
Report abuse
Interesting talking about 'Top Gear'. I picked my daughter up from work in the West End late last night and had to drive in 3rd gear most of the way back to the M11 due to the 30 mph speed limits and cameras along the almost empty roads. That meant having to use more revs, making more noise, and causing more harm to the environment than if I'd been cruising perfectly safely in 5th or 6th. I have no points on my license in over 30 years of driving, but I am paying out stupid amounts on tyres due to damage caused by speed humps.
- Paul, London, 12/11/2009 09:16
Report abuse
Good. They are a waste of money and there are plenty of better ways to increase road safety. As for Jenny Jones - get into the real world, have you ever tried driving in London? The speeds are more like a horse and cart track rather than top gear!
- Nickspurs, London, London, 12/11/2009 08:08
Report abuse
Hurray!
- Teddy, Islington, London, 11/11/2009 23:30
Report abuse
More waffle from Jenny Jones. With the entire capital turned into a single lane, the chances of immitating Top Gear are slim to say the least. The cameras she is anxious to protect do little for safeguarding the public and do everything to relieve motorists of there wallets.
- Mr S.Port, London, 11/11/2009 22:31
Report abuse
"Officials said the enforcement regime could be made harsher if not enough money came in as they set it up in 2002."
Wait a moment: surely they are not saying their intent is to up the revenue the cameras provide? I thought this idea had been denied and denied again? That they were safety cameras, not revenue raisers.
- Naomi, Manchester, 11/11/2009 21:50
Report abuse
"London Assembly member Jenny Jones said the huge drop in the use of cameras could leave the capital's roads like the "Top Gear racetrack""
Let's hope so. It's about time the roads were reclaimed for the ones who pay for it - the road-fund-licence payer - the motorist.
Speed doesn't cause accidents. The DfT's own figures suggest speed is only a factor in 12% of reported accidents.
The motorist has, for too long, been an easy target. It's time the tide turned.
And by the way, before I'm vilified, I have a motor-racing license and 0, yes ZERO points, on my drivers license because I drive carefully and use speed only when conditions and circumstances allow.
- Stuart Robb, London, UK, 11/11/2009 18:15
Report abuse
"Speed cameras have made no measurable improvement in road safety"
Demonstrable rubbish. They certainly haven't been responsible for every life saved on the roads, but they've made a contribution. It's not often recognised how much road safety has been improved by activist measures taken since the early 1990s.
"I expect the proposed reduction in camera prosecutions will have no adverse effect on KSI figures whatsoever."
I expect it'll be indistinguishable from the road KSI rise caused by all Boris's other unsafe proposals; open backed buses, shorter green man times (which Boris's own TfL team admit increases the number of frustrated pedestrians crossing on red by 14% during tests this year), removal of traffic lights, cancellation of gyratory removals, modal shift back to cars by penalising bus users excessively with fare rises, scrapping the WEZ, scrapping of the HGV cycle safety unit etc. He's a menace.
- Tom, London, UK, 11/11/2009 17:15
Report abuse
Road safety isn't the only criterion.
Lower noise levels and more civilised streets also are important.
- Jay, London, 11/11/2009 17:13
Report abuse
Isn't speeding fine enforcement self-financing? Something very screwed up if it isn't!
Anyway, the sensible thing to do is to raise the trigger speeds, so you have to be driving at a really dangerous speed to get snapped, rather than just 3mph over the limit.
Also move the cameras off main roads where they were placed to catch as many people as possible doing nothing much wrong, and on to residential roads, where they won't catch many people, and where the people they do catch deserve the penalty.
- Nigel, London, 11/11/2009 17:12
Report abuse
This budget cut is a good policy decision and it is only the ecomentalist anti car obsessives, like the Green party's Jones, who can't see that. Well done TfL for doing something right for once.
- Matthew, London, UK, 11/11/2009 17:12
Report abuse
Jenny Jones is wrong these cameras do little to protect life and cut accidents they are just to make money I have been on bus that have ignored the red light I have seen cars speeding down bus lans In fact more cars seem to use the bus lanes than buses.
- David Smith, london, 11/11/2009 17:07
Report abuse
Why on earth does the issuing of a speed ticket involving a digital camera require 45 people? If there was a decent system in place, this could be done with a handful of humans. Then again, this is government we are talking about...
- Nobby Clark, Perth, the Scottish one, 11/11/2009 17:03
Report abuse
Speed cameras have made no measurable improvement in road safety. In fact, the shift in emphasis from Police patrols to roadside automatons has demonstrably cost lives.
I expect the proposed reduction in camera prosecutions will have no adverse effect on KSI figures whatsoever.
- Keith Lonsdale, Doncaster, 11/11/2009 16:40
Report abuse
