Safety fears voiced after Tories propose scrapping cameras
ROAD safety campaigners say Tory plans to withdraw money for speed cameras in Derby could result in an increase in accidents.
Councillor Harvey Jennings, Conservative group leader on the city council, said the money now spent on mobile and fixed cameras – about £230,000 – would instead go into other road safety measures, such as vehicle-activated speed signs.
The cuts, which form part of the group's manifesto ahead of the local elections, was part of a common-sense approach to Derby's transport, he claimed.
But Derby and Derbyshire Road Safety Partnership, which operates the cameras, says the move would have a huge impact on its ability to keep the 15 fixed cameras and 18 mobile camera routes in the city going.
Mr Jennings said: "We believe speed cameras have had their day and that we need to be looking at alternative speed reduction and safety measures.
"One example is the speed signs which illuminate if you drive towards them too quickly. They are effective."
Both Derby City Council and Derbyshire County Council give funding to the road safety partnership each year, which it uses on a variety of schemes, including speed cameras.
Last year the city council gave the partnership £338,000, which is 30% of its funding. The remainder comes from the county council.
Robert Hill, partnership manager, said: "If we turned off fixed cameras at those locations, we would see, I believe, an increase in road casualties because at those sites there has been over a 40% decrease in the number of casualties since the cameras were introduced."
Mr Hill said the number of fines being handed out for speeding has reduced from 60,000 in 2003 to 15,000 in 2009 because more people are complying with speed limits.
Kevin Clinton, head of road safety for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, said cameras were valuable.
"Speed cameras are proven to be effective at reducing casualties," he said.
"As such they should be part of an overall speed reduction strategy that also includes such traffic-calming measures as speed humps and speed-activated signs."
The Liberal Democrat cabinet member for highways, Councillor Lucy Care, said the cameras were working and should be kept.
"My concern is that if we remove cameras people will drive faster," she said
Labour group leader Councillor Chris Williamson said the move would be populist but possibly dangerous.
"Speed cameras are not loved by the general public but they are contributing to improving safety and it would be wrong if unnecessary casualties resulted."
9 Comments
View all
by Shakeel, Normanton
Wednesday, March 03 2010, 3:03PM
“Of course the Derby and Derbyshire Road Safety Partnership will object. It threatens their easy life sitting in a sneaky unmarked van printing money.
Do speed cameras catch un-insured drivers & un-roadworthy vehicles?
Divert the money for more Traffic Police.”
by ian, derby
Wednesday, March 03 2010, 2:50PM
“observer2 just out of interest how any people have EVER been killed on the A52 Clifton flyover, either before or after the 50mph limit was imposed ?(which I think has been in place for at least 10 years - way before the poliferation of speed cameras
And have cameras ever been put head to head with other methods such as flashing signs and been proven without doubt to be the most effective measure?
Do you have ANY stats to back up your thread
(BTW I am neither opposed or in favour of speed cameras myself)”
by observer2, Derby
Wednesday, March 03 2010, 2:12PM
“Speed cameras may be unpopular with some sections of society, but they have been proven to be highly effective in reducing deaths and serious injury from speeding related accidents.
This comes across as yet another "populist" proposal to gain kudos in the short term.
As ever, priorities like winning easy votes, over public health and accident prevention are clear.
Flashing signs are good- but speeding is not optional- it should be clamped down on hard, by whatever measures.
Witness the A52 during rush hour between Nottingham and Derby in the fast lane- a death trap.
Compare that to the Clifton Flyover(A52)- where a speed restriction of 50 mph has been imposed in sections- and the death rate has been massively reduced.Even "hardliners" against cameras can't deny this.
It actually works.FACT.
Does this matter to Mr Jennings?
Or where do his priorities lie?
Politicians, please show some integrity. For a change!!!”
by Dave, Long Eaton
Wednesday, March 03 2010, 12:46PM
“Mark, Ashbourne, you are talking out of your butt. It is more of an infringement of human rights to be persecuted and fined for harmless technicalities, which is what the Speed Camera Partnerships have been doing for the past few years. Excessive speed is causes only 5% of accidents, and exceeding an arbitrary and unrealistic speed limit is NOT the same as excessive speed. The death rate on our roads, which had been falling steadily, actually STOPPED falling when Labour blanketed the country with speed cameras ten years ago. Speed cameras are nothing more than Supplementary Tax Collectors.”
by t, derbyshire
Wednesday, March 03 2010, 10:10AM
“good.
who cares about guys who make there earnings from drivers.
they can go in a normal job and leave us alone.
they not fear more accidents, they fear the loosing there income.
thats all.
vote for the torys. someone with brain in this case.”