How cameras can help reduce speeding
...the leading contributory factor in fatal crashes and the most common type of anti-social behaviour ...
• Speeding is endemic in our society, not just a problem at a few sites.
• On 30 mph roads, where the majority of people killed or seriously injured, over half of drivers speed (53%).
• Speeding is the leading factor in fatal crashes and reported in 28-30% of fatal crashes.
• Fixed speed cameras can only be located at sites where 1) there have been four or more fatal or serious injury collisions in the past three years 2) 20% of drivers exceed the speed limit 3) there is no practical alternative measure
• Government requires drivers to be forewarned that safety cameras are being used and fixed speed cameras must be painted bright yellow.
• Two- thirds of safety cameras are located on 30 mph roads.
• Less than 1% of the road network has its speed limit enforced by active cameras.
• For every safety camera, there are 400 CCTV cameras. These are not restricted to sites of repeated death and injury, nor even burglaries. Why are the criteria for casualty prevention so much stricter than those for property protection?
• Of the £120 million collected in speeding fines last year, only £20 million (less than the equivalent of VAT) went into the Treasury, with £100 million invested in camera operations and safety measures.
• Benefits to society from the crashes avoided (£221 million) outweighed the 'excess' revenue earned from cameras by 11:1.
• Total camera revenue is equal to 10% of total Department for Transport spend on road safety (£1.2 billion or 11% of its total £11 billion budget) and less than 1% of the estimated total cost of crashes (over £18 billion).
• Set at £60, the fine for camera detected speeding is less than that proposed for littering or graffiti.
• Fines are not recommended to those exceeding the speed limit by less than 5 mph and speed awareness courses are available to many first time offenders found speeding 5-9 mph over the limit. They pay for the course and in return do not receive any penalty points.
• The most recent camera evaluation reviewed 2300 sites in 24 Safety Camera Partnerships. It estimated that 770 people had escaped death and serious injury, including at least 100 road deaths avoided.
• Fixed speed cameras are more effective than mobile cameras and reduce speeding by 71%. Mobile cameras decrease speeding by 21%.
• Fixed speed cameras halve the number of killed and seriously injured (51%) at camera sites, while mobile cameras reduce fatalities and serious injuries by 28%.
• As with other road safety interventions which are chosen on the basis of high collision numbers, their impact may be affected by the regression to mean effect. However, casualty reduction has been documented with camera use after accounting for regression to mean.
• Speed cameras could be even more effective if they were allowed to be inconspicuous. In addition, there is concern, and emerging evidence, that the rules on publicising the locations of cameras and making the cameras conspicuous are encouraging drivers and motorcyclists to take greater risks on roads where there are no cameras.
• Public support for safety cameras has been consistently high, over 67%.
• Demand for cameras is also high and the current rules deny communities the protection they seek from speeding drivers.
• Speeding traffic was the leading anti-social behaviour identified by a recent British Crime Survey.
• Public support is useful but not necessary for governments to do the right thing.
• Speed is the leading contributory factor in fatal road crashes, and accounts for twice as many deaths as does drink driving.
• Speed will aggravate the outcome, including the severity, of all crashes. By enforcing speed limit the Government saves much more from avoided death and injury than it receives in fines.
• Automated speed limit enforcement frees police for other road traffic duties. It is the low priority placed on traffic law inforcement which has led to a reduction in traffic police. Cameras have helped compensate, not cause, this problem.
• The real question is how many crashes and casualties would be avoided if we reduced speed, rather than how many are ‘caused’ by speed. The controversy around cameras is leading to deaths and injuries which could be prevented if speed limits were more widely enforced.
What is Needed
• The Department for Transport's casualty quota for safety cameras should be dropped. Cameras should be used more widely to prevent casualties, especially at sites of community concern.
• Covert cameras should be used and evaluated. Even the Motorists’ Forum has acknowledged the need for covert cameras on road stretches where speeding is persistent.
• Greater priority and investment should be given to tackling speeding – the most common contributing factor in violent death and top anti-social behaviour concern.
Read the complete briefing here. (155kb pdf)
|RoadPeace & SSI safety camera info pack.pdf||154.78 KB|