|London, 3 Sep 2002.
For immediate release.
|there are four times as many speed cameras on the country's safest roads as there are on the most dangerous roads|
|speed camera trials stopped after 1 year of a 2 year programme resulted in claims of 'success' for the first year, but the cameras made no difference to the long-term trend or made things worse - in one region, Essex, a reduction in fatalities of 20% was publicised, when the following year with even more cameras in place, fatalities rose by 40%|
|in 2001 compared to 2000, with the speed camera plague spreading plus more speed traps and more fines than ever before, 34 more people died on the roads and child fatalities rose by 14%|
|in police force areas where they have more speed cameras, more mobile speed traps and so issue more fines for speeding, the numbers killed or seriously injured dropped by 5%, but in areas with the fewest cameras, fewest speed traps and hence the least fines the figure fell by 22%, strongly suggesting that focusing on speed enforcement costs lives|
Speed camera expansion, which will see a trebling of cameras and fine 'targets' of hundreds of millions of pounds each year, is all about revenue not road safety.
A very small number of speed cameras at specific sites could be acceptable in safety terms, and carry public opinion. But it's time to take Canada's lead and scrap failing speed cameras and speed traps, replacing them with traffic officers on patrol, who can tackle all types of dangerous behaviour by all road users. In this way the UK's roads - the busiest but safest in the world already - will see the additional safety gains we all want, saving lives.