Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the n/a site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

The end of the road for mobile cameras?


We look at the arguments for and against speed enforcement

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

"We are keen to learn from experiences at other local authorities whose policies balance safety without being viewed as unfairly punishing motorists"
Bob Seery
Published Date: 02 December 2008
Mobile speed cameras could be scrapped as part of a review of road safety measures in Northamptonshire.
The cameras, operated by the Northamptonshire Casualty Reduction Partnership, could go because of concerns over their effectiveness.

Northamptonshire County Council's cabinet member for transport, Bob Seery, said any decision will be part of a major review of all council services but they had not even decided whether this was an area which would be examined.


Do you think abandoning mobile speed cameras would be a good idea? Let us know your views by signing-in and posting your comments at the bottom of the page.


He said: "It's important the council works with its partners to ensure our roads are safe and speeding will not be tolerated.

"We are keen to learn from experiences at other local authorities whose policies balance safety without being viewed as unfairly punishing motorists."

The news sparked a debate and Cllr Seery said he is keen to hear people's views. Any decision would have to be made in conjunction with the police, who are part of the casualty reduction partnership.

Reporters Monique Cleaver and David Jackson look at the arguments for and against mobile speed cameras.


The argument against

A safety campaigner and driving instructor have both said there are better alternatives than mobile speed cameras to ensure drivers stick to the speed limit.

Driving instructor Neville Read runs Abby School of Motoring in the north of the county.

He said: "I don't know if mobile speed cameras are the best way of enforcing the speed limit.

"Speed cameras are an important deterrent in making sure that people don't speed but I'm not sure mobile speed cameras are the best way to do it.

"The problem is that people can see where they are and they can cause the traffic to suddenly bunch up.

"People will slow down for them and this can cause accidents.

"I think the speed cameras that measure your average speed are better."

A43 safety campaigner Chrissie Osborne said that if the speed limit is going to be monitored it should be done using the variable speed cameras – similar to those used on the A43 near Weston Favell in Northampton.

She said: "The problem with mobile speed cameras, especially along the A43, is that they are always in the same place.

"People see them and just slow down for them.

"If everyone was travelling at the same speed there would be no overtaking and less risk of accidents.

"Safety should be the main thing to consider here and average speed cameras are able to monitor longer distances more effectively."


The argument for

Not everyone is in favour of scrapping the mobile speed cameras in Northamptonshire.

Among them is Shirley Reeves, whose husband Peter was killed in a road accident in Wellingborough last year.

The 55-year-old father and grandfather died after a van driver pulled out in front of him when he was riding his motorcycle.

Mrs Reeves, of Holcot Close in Wellingborough, said: "Mobile speed cameras are there to reduce speed so I don't think they should be got rid of.

"If people weren't going too fast they wouldn't have to brake suddenly anyway. It's all relative.

"I think mobile speed cameras are needed to remind motorists about the speed limit.

"All too often people don't realise how fast they're going.

"I completely agree that they should keep mobile speed cameras – they make people think twice about speeding.

"They make drivers aware that a speed camera could be just around the corner."

Weldon resident Des Wallington is also in favour of retaining mobile speed cameras.

Mr Wallington organised a community speedwatch programme in his village after his dog was run over.

He said: "Mobile speed cameras are better than the fixed ones. People know where the fixed ones are and just slow down in those areas."

"When we did our speedwatch, people were horrified when we caught them speeding because they were worried about points or even losing their jobs.

"That fear hanging over their heads can make people sit up and pay more attention."

The full article contains 691 words and appears in n/a newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 02 December 2008 8:59 AM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Kettering
 
Prev
1
Next
1

DT,

Kettering 02/12/2008 11:28:51
Flashing red speed signs do a good job of reminding people what speed they are going, and have been found to be effective.
And at least people can't hide in bushes or around corners to trap people - this only makes money - it doesn't make people slow down (and as far as I am aware, speed traps are meant to be clearly marked, not surreptitious affairs).
2

Mark Winspear,

Kettering 02/12/2008 11:38:12
I totally agree with the comments that the best solution is the use of "average speed" camera systems. However, given the cost of these, the police do need other ways of tackling speed.
Whilst the ridiculous reaction of many drivers in slowing down for both fixed and mobile cameras is a danger, they do help slow traffic in some circumstances - Geddington being a good example. (I do wonder if some drivers actually have a working speedo - as they will slow to a ludicrous extent, well below the speed limit, often causing bunching and potential danger). Maybe a bit more imagination and variety of the placing of mobile cameras would help - I'm sure there are safe locations which are not clearly visible could be found on many roads.
For all the negative aspects of speed cameras, let's remember that at least they do adhere to one important value: they only punish the innocent, unlike speed reduction humps, tables etc. So, more cameras please, not more spine jarring, car damaging, ill constructed and badly maintained humps.
Chrissie Osborne makes a valid point about the A43. Whilst not offering any excuse for dangerous speeding or overtaking, it is a fact that following a driver who dawdles along this route at 30-40mph is extremely frustrating. Whatever happened to MINIMUM speed signs - I learnt about them from the highway code, but have never seen them in use!
3

Mark Winspear,

Kettering 02/12/2008 11:42:47
DT: I disagree. Some of the flashing signs do perform a useful function, but some appear to just be a way of spending taxpayer-funded grants and fine receipts wastefully. They remind drivers who are basically law-abiding, but have no effect on the most dangerous habitual speeders.
I have NO problem with hidden cameras which "trap" people - the only people they can trap are those GUILTY of speeding!
4

Bill Whitehead,

02/12/2008 16:05:27
"Do you think abandoning mobile speed cameras would be a good idea? Let us know your views by signing-in and posting your comments at the bottom of the page."

Yes, if you're paying someone to sit in a van drinking tea and taking photo's all day, you might just as well pay a real police officer to do all of the job, including, breathalyzer, insurance, license MOT etc etc etc. North Yorkshire has shown that no fixed cameras and an emphasis on intelegence driven prosecution has a much higher effect on casualty reduction.

Diverting the funding wasted on camera partnerships back to front line police officers will go some way to restoring the missing 20% of traffic police who are now proven to be better at the job than a bunch of office bound do-gooders spinning stats to keep their jobs.
5

Bill Whitehead,

02/12/2008 16:15:58
As for the conversations about wether flashing signs are better than cameras, I think the whole concept is an invalid arguement. Neither make up for the absence of real traffic police, but given the choice, if we get our traffic police back in full force and stop wasting money on desk bound Partnerships PR, then flashing signs can be seen as beneficial, especially on those dark british winter nights.

GATSO style cameras? ...cut them down, put them in a crate and dump them in the north sea, it's been a total and utter waste of time and money.

Mobile cameras? ...just pay a real police officer to do all of the job properly.

However I can see the point in average cameras, but as already mentioned they're very expensive and simply do not prosecute as many drivers so aren't going to pay for themselves very quickly, but do work to slow drivers down over a distance. The question is, how flexible are they, as there's little point in putting them on motorways which are already the safest roads in Britain with just 2% of all casualtys on Motorways.

Real police, real patrol cars fitted with ANPR and a targeted approach to prosecution of dangerous driving is whats needed, not a continuation with this stupid obsession with speed which blinded authority to more important matters and has proven to be a fruitless pursuit of an untamed ornathoid (that's a wild goose chase) and only doing the job properly again will make the difference to road casualtys that cameras simply haven't achieved.
6

Mark Winspear,

Kettering 02/12/2008 17:27:51
What Bill says makes absolute sense. However, living in Northamptonshire it's probably too much to hope for!!!
7

John Amy,

N'Town 23/12/2008 01:15:15
I agree that mobile speed cameras should be scrapped across the country. However, I disagree with the bias in this article. I sympathise with Shirley Reeves for the loss of her husband, but using this for dramatic effect in a newspaper article is wrong. It clearly says that Mrs Reeves husband died after a van pulled out in front of him, but yet mentions nothing of a vehicle speeding as a cause of death. So why is this relevant in an article about mobile speed cameras? You are simply using this as a way to sway peoples ideas and attitudes of speeding and mobile speed cameras. And Mr Wallington, a road is no place for dogs.
Prev
1
Next

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.