UK Speed Cameras: Safety or Votes?

[RobBrady]

Many of you would have heard by now that Conservative transport spokeswoman Theresa Villiers, has signalled that the Tory party will not fund new fixed speed cameras if they get into office.

Additionally, they will only allow councils to roll out new cameras in areas where they can demonstrate that they can cut accidents. The councils would have to raise the money to fund new cameras themselves.

Despite surveys that suggest that the majority are in favour of speed cameras in the UK, Villiers questioned their usefulness and said that motorists regard them as a stealth tax.

Do you think that the Tories are banking on those that support speed cameras shrugging their shoulders, but also hoping that those who vehemently oppose them, of which there are many, are further persuaded to vote Conservative in the next election?


_________________
Robert Brady

[sduffield]

This is fine IF (and this is a big IF), they carry out what they pledge. We have seen too many broken promises over the last 12 years. Remember the Nu Labour pledge just before the last general election of giving the people of the UK a referendum and then backtrack once they took government!

I would welcome a sensible approach to road safety, which the Tories are obviously trying to embrace.

Only time will tell.

[ChristopherW]

This is just mutton dressed as lamb... No more fixed cams, but PLENTY more SPECS no doubt. Ugh. They're all as bad as each other.

[DarrenR21373]

I was going to vote Conseravtive anyway - I always have, and am old enough to remember the halcyon days when Maggie's government rewarded us hard workers and not the shirkers that Labour give most of our hard-earned, over-taxed money to, while penalising those of us who choose to work for our living...

Definite vote winner for me, but not because I drive particularly fast. I do drive a lot of miles a year for work, and am fed up with the constant imposition of ridiculously low speed limits on roads that were designed for, and are safe at, much higher speeds, enforced by money-making speed cameras.

It's time that all speed limits were reviewed (mostly upwards) to reflect the abilities of modern cars, except the 30MPH urban limit, which is still the best compromise between efficiency, safety, economy and emissions. 20 is too low and has in fact been proven to create more pollution than driving at 30.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and surely SPECS are fixed cameras by their very nature - they can't move as they average your speed between 2 (or more) fixed points? Which makes me wonder how the Welsh are going to use mobile SPECS - I hope the plod operating them is given a tape measure to ensure they are exactly the right distance apart, otherwise can you say "inaccurate results" and "false prosecutions"?

However, it may mean more police patrols, which might actually catch the dangerous/drunk/drug/mobile phone using drivers - is this a bad thing?
_________________
Drive carefully; the Government needs all the Taxpayers it can get.

[GeoffCee]

Things are pretty bad when a government can't trust its people and the evidence is that this one can't. Twelve years of New Labour and cameras are EVERYWHERE. We are the most watched nation on the planet, including North Korea which we happily despise for the lock-down that country has on its people. We do this whilst ignoring the assault that has taken place on our own freedoms. We should be saying enough is enough and my vote will go to whichever party promises to reduce the level of surveillance in the UK, including the cameras which monitor where I go and how quickly I get there.

We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?.
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!