| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
RobBrady
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Jul 21, 2004
Posts: 2718
Location: Chelmsford, UK
|
 Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 12:14 pm Post subject: The Promised Curb on Fixed Speed Cameras Confirmed |
 |
|
 The new coalition Transport Secretary, Philip Hammond has confirmed the Tories' manifesto pledge to slow the rise of fixed speed cameras.
The cabinet minister plans to stop public funding for new cameras, but Council run road safety partnerships would be allowed to fund future schemes with their own money - if they could justify their use. Hammond said that the partnerships would not be allowed to keep revenue from speeding fines and that any money raised would end up in central government's coffers.
On paper this all sounds good to those who oppose speed cameras, but the reality is that it's far likelier that we'll all have to put up with a lot more cameras under the new government.
Average speed cameras are set to become the new standard, mobiles aren't going anywhere soon and the satellite tracking 'Speed Spike' system which is currently on trial is set to boost the treasury's future fortunes.
_________________
Robert Brady |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
DennisN
Tired Old Man
Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 14902
Location: Keynsham
|
| Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 9:23 pm Post subject: Re: The Promised Curb on Fixed Speed Cameras Confirmed |
|
|
| News Team wrote: | | Council run road safety partnerships would be allowed to fund future schemes with their own money - if they could justify their use. Hammond said that the partnerships would not be allowed to keep revenue from speeding fines and that any money raised would end up in central government's coffers. |
Now there's a great idea for goverment funding - don't pay for cameras to be installed, but take all the money they earn! 
_________________
Dennis
If it tastes good - it's fattening.
Two of them are obesiting!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT
The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006
Posts: 10118
Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
| Posted: Sun May 16, 2010 10:27 pm Post subject: Re: The Promised Curb on Fixed Speed Cameras Confirmed |
|
|
| DennisN wrote: | | News Team wrote: | | Council run road safety partnerships would be allowed to fund future schemes with their own money - if they could justify their use. Hammond said that the partnerships would not be allowed to keep revenue from speeding fines and that any money raised would end up in central government's coffers. |
Now there's a great idea for goverment funding - don't pay for cameras to be installed, but take all the money they earn! |
Much better idea than the last lot's  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT
The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006
Posts: 10118
Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
| Posted: Mon May 17, 2010 9:18 am Post subject: Re: The Promised Curb on Fixed Speed Cameras Confirmed |
|
|
| News Team wrote: | | The cabinet minister plans to stop public funding for new cameras, but Council run road safety partnerships would be allowed to fund future schemes with their own money - if they could justify their use. Hammond said that the partnerships would not be allowed to keep revenue from speeding fines and that any money raised would end up in central government's coffers. |
I've had a think about this. How does this differ from the previous regime. Sounds just the same to me. Presumably the money will come from the central government grant for road safety, as it does at the moment.
Or is this the new lot using the same spin techniques as the last lot  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rowan29a
Regular Visitor
Joined: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 95
Location: North Yorkshire, England
|
| Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 11:22 am Post subject: Governement Statements |
|
|
Politicians - never believe a word they say especially those manifesto statements. Just look at the Capital Gains betrayal.
_________________
Mike -
TomTom 750 Live
iPhone 5 16GB, Kavaj "Dallas" case |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT
The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006
Posts: 10118
Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
| Posted: Tue May 18, 2010 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| But surely a little change of mind to compromise is a lot better than getting a Gvt. that nearly everyone in England voted against, and only got as many seats as the did because they changed the boundaries in their favour and include MPs from Scotland who seem to want an incompetent Gvt. and who want independence as long as UK central Gvt. keeps giving them handouts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
snailracer
Occasional Visitor
Joined: May 21, 2010
Posts: 1
|
| Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| M8TJT wrote: | | But surely a little change of mind to compromise is a lot better than getting a Gvt. that nearly everyone in England voted against, and only got as many seats as the did because they changed the boundaries in their favour and include MPs from Scotland who seem to want an incompetent Gvt. and who want independence as long as UK central Gvt. keeps giving them handouts. |
Keeping the Scots in the UK is a sensible policy, if they went independent they'd take a lot of North Sea oil reserves, refining facilities and pipelines with them. The cost of the "handouts" you mention needs to be offset against the direct revenues from North Sea oil, which presently DON'T go to the Scottish executive, but directly to UK government coffers. The status quo exists because everyone wins. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chuffer4
Occasional Visitor
Joined: Nov 14, 2008
Posts: 10
|
| Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 11:20 am Post subject: speed cameras |
|
|
Have I missed something here ?
If the government will not pay to install the cameras but take all the money they earn it is likely that the councils will not install more because it will be of no financial benefit to them.
Why would they pay to install and operate them and not make any money.
Unless of course they really wanted to make to roads safer ! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CDK
Regular Visitor
Joined: Apr 20, 2006
Posts: 122
Location: Ashford. Kent. UK.
|
| Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, that's a start I suppose - some councils were using the cameras as a easy source of funds under the guise of traffic safety.
Lets hope they also look at the tacticks of the bully boys of the private parking companies who are coining it.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andy_P
Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Posts: 19991
Location: West and Southwest London
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2010 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| M8TJT wrote: | | But surely a little change of mind to compromise is a lot better than getting a Gvt. that nearly everyone in England voted against |
Err, which lot are you talking about?
According to the BBC, 10,706,647 voted Tory, 8,604,358 voted Labour and 6,827,938 voted LibDem. Hardly a landslide for or against ANY party.
And didn't all those LibDem voters vote that way to keep the Tories (and Labour) out? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT
The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006
Posts: 10118
Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2010 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Andy_P wrote: | | M8TJT wrote: | | But surely a little change of mind to compromise is a lot better than getting a Gvt. that nearly everyone in England voted against |
Err, which lot are you talking about?
According to the BBC, 10,706,647 voted Tory, 8,604,358 voted Labour and 6,827,938 voted LibDem. Hardly a landslide for or against ANY party.
And didn't all those LibDem voters vote that way to keep the Tories (and Labour) out? |
I agree, but I was talking about ENGLAND not the UK. The vote in England was about a ratio of 2.6:1 against Labour. With about 25M votes total with about 7M for Labour. That's about 18M out of 25m that did not want a Lab govt, a damn good majority even if it's not 'nearly everyone'. This would have given 'Call me Dave' (without Scotland and Wales) an overall majority of 62. No, not a landslide but he would not have had to compromise with the LibDems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DennisN
Tired Old Man
Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 14902
Location: Keynsham
|
| Posted: Sat May 22, 2010 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aw fer God's sake!!
_________________
Dennis
If it tastes good - it's fattening.
Two of them are obesiting!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
![]() Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising |
|
|
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!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
