Council leader’s vow over speed cameras
Saturday 14th August 2010, 11:30AM BST.
Telford & Wrekin Council’s leader today guaranteed the future of speed cameras installed at the site of fatal accidents across the borough.
Councillor Andrew Eade made the vow in response to a demand for assurances from Councillor Keith Austin, the borough’s Labour group chief on the council, after it was revealed borough finance chiefs were considering slashing funding for speed cameras.
Hard-hitting proposals to cope with the loss of more than £3 million in government funding were presented to members of the council’s ruling Tory cabinet at a meeting on Tuesday.
Presenting the report Councillor Sean Kelly said tough decisions had to be made and there was the possibility of a reduction in the number of speed cameras.
Councillor Austin today said the ruling Tory administration had to ensure fixed speed cameras remained switched on in those specific areas where there had previously been a fatality.
And he urged the council to recognise the plight of those families who have campaigned hard for fixed speed cameras as a result of a death of a loved one.
He said: “It is really important to remember the bottom line in the debate on whether to switch off speed cameras is the safety of the public.”
Council leader Councillor Eade today said: “Where there have been fatal accidents we supported the installation of speed cameras and will continue to do so.”
He added they would have to take a view on other speed cameras.
Most Commented
- Clampdown on Shrewsbury chuggers
- Bishop's gay marriage views do nothing to support bible teachings
- Letter: Alcohol price plans annoy me
- Planners ordered to stay on Newport visit bus
- Letter: Angered by close encounter of the furred kind
- Letter: No sense in overseas job adverts
- The Bleak Old Shop of Stuff doesn't raise a smile
Shropshire Star on Twitter
Keep updated with the latest breaking news and content on our Twitter feed.
Lifestyle
Interactive Dining Out map
Hundreds of reviews by the Shropshire Star and Express & Star's teams to help you decide where to eat.
Entertainment
All the film reviews
Before you plan a trip to the pictures, get our critics' verdicts on all the latest movie releases.
OUR NEW APP
Get the new Shropshire Star app
Download the Shropshire Star’s new app to your iPad or iPhone to get one week of access to our digital newspapers absolutely FREE.
shropshirestar.com
Popular sections
Useful links
good on him
Report abuse
Ooh it just makes me swell with pride when our glorious leaders make such commitments when not in possession of all the facts…
Perhaps Mr Eade should check the results of the withdrawal of speed cameras across the country before making promises to keep shoving OUR money down the drain…
Report abuse
what all this little people who sit in a van to take your picture – on a Sunday. Do they get double time for this intrusion?
Report abuse
As above. Nice to see the Politburo have their collective fingers on their respective pulses. My youngest brother is still reflecting on his heinous crime of driving at 35 mph on Bennetts Bank at 6.10 am one morning. How is it that burglars, thieves etc can get suspended sentences,bound over, conditional discharges etc whereas with inattentive drivers ie watching the road and driving accordingly it is straight for the wallet twice. Fine and increase in Insurance rates. Good old Andy
Report abuse
Great argument Paul. Thieving is far worse so we should bother with speeding drivers. Oh wait, murder is far worse than thieving, so perhaps if someone breaks into your house and takes all your stuff we should ignore that too?
Report abuse
Its a big yellow box that takes pictures of cars driving above the speed limit, if that hasn’t sunk in with your brother yet then how does he even manage three pedals..
Report abuse
Aimi May if thats your best comment shutup I bet you dont own a car just a pavement scooterIf you do own a car I hope you get some speeding fines or are you one of those stupid drivers that drive at 28 miles per hour in a 30 zone thus cauasing traffic jams behind you
Report abuse
You are calling people who obey the speed limits stupid. Unbelievable. I hope you are taken off the road soon, people like you make me sick!
Report abuse
The best way to reduce traffic jams is to up the points from three to six which would get idiots like yourself off the road a bit quicker.
can’t believe you call people stupid for abiding by the law..
Report abuse
good on him, atleast hes not the barking mad type of tory who is in whitehall!
Report abuse
The critical question to ask is “could a speed camera credibly have prevented the fatality?”.
I guarantee the answer will be “no”. Crashes are caused by misjudgements, drink/drugs, poor observation, mobile phone use, tiredness, etc. Cameras could not prevent or mitigate any such causes.
Speed cameras will never prevent a collision.
Report abuse
Right, so if you ask the police/fire brigade whether they have ever attended a crash caused by a driver who was speeding, you think they will say no!? Come on Eric you aren’t really that naive are you?
Report abuse
Julian
It is not a case of asking the emergency services a general question – it’s about asking whether a specific collision could credibly have been prevented by a speed camera.
The point being that where a collision was caused by a drunk/drugged driver, or a misjudged overtake, or a police chase, or the collision happened within the speed limit (true for about 95% of collisions), then cllearly a camera would not have had any effect.
I have asked dozens in the road safety world for an example of where a camera could have been beneficial – yet to get a positive answer.
I’ve had camera partnerships explaining why crashes at camera sites could noy have been CAUSED by the camera, but none elsewhere that could have been prevented. Without such an example, all claims for cameras preventing crashes or saving lives have no credibility.
Report abuse
The key words here are “fatal accidents”.
He can easily get rid of the cameras in situated in revenue friendly locations, which will be nearly all of them.
But shame on Councillor Austin, a supposed Labour man. As speed cameras raise revenue from the poor he should be supporting the withdrawal of all cameras that do not contribute to road safety.
Report abuse
well said cllr, the coalition talks rot on this for the tabloids, but we all know cameras work, they make you slow down and that saves lives (and fuel)
I hope the Drivers Alliance type folk will just learn to obey the law and drive normally and sensibly for my children use the roads too
Report abuse
These drivers who complain about cameras and speed limits have no regard whatsoever for other car drivers or the other road users.
Just because an accident is not fatal does not diminish the cost to society which can be greater with a non fatal RTA. Longterm medical care is extremely expensive.
The knock on effect of not using or removing cameras is reducing the quality of life for other road users like elderly pedestrians who become housebound and children who either have less freedom or are at greater risk.
The most amusing comments are those who think that speeding and good driving are synonymous.
The best and lowest insured drivers are those who drive as well as they did in their driving test which gave them the permission to be let loose on the highway in the first place.
If all drivers behaved as well as they performed in their driving test that they passed we would not need cameras.
Report abuse
You’re doing it again, eva.
I complain about scameras and idiotically applied speed limits (I’m thinking about – for example – the A518 between the Clock Tower island and Trench Lock: for many years a 60 limit, then six years ago reduced to 50 despite (and I have the evidence from council towers) there being no previous accidents where breaking the speed limit was a factor), and yet you claim I have no regard for other road users? You really think that my driving takes no account of others on or adjacent to the highway? If so, then the well-thumbed copies of RoadCraft and the IAM Manual sitting in my bookcase are clearly useless.
Your faith in the driving test is also spectacularly misguided. The driving test is the bare minimum standard expected of drivers and one only really starts learning to drive after the test. As a 17 year old I wasn’t aware of the differences between push-pull, fixed input, and rotational steering techniques, nor heel & toe downshifting, nor observational linking techniques, nor road positioning for improved forward visibility. These are all things I have learned over the years, digested, and apply whenever possible when driving.
Letting ones driving be dictated to by a robot at the roadside is as one dimensional as the robot itself. Government stats clearly show that we never needed speed cameras in the first place.
Report abuse
Drivers Alliance type folk? What is that supposed to mean?
I have no objection to the placing of such devices in known problem areas. I do however, have a real problem with those who believe that they are the answer to all our road safety issues.
If only 6 or 7% of fatalities or injuries are caused by speed (government’s own figures), then what about the other 93 to 94%? It seems to me that the camera supporters are quite happy to ignore the obvious fact that cameras will never ever help with these.
Are they really that stupid?
Report abuse
I can’t be that stupid as i’ve never been caught by one….have you??
Report abuse
No!
Report abuse
“The best and lowest insured drivers are those who drive as well as they did in their driving test which gave them the permission to be let loose on the highway in the first place.
If all drivers behaved as well as they performed in their driving test that they passed we would not need cameras.”
After 36 years of driving about a million miles, Eva,I would hope that my driving is a little better than when I past my test (and maybe your’s too!)
My insurance premium certainly reflects this, so how can you say that the best drivers still drive as they did on their driving,test? Comments like that just go to show how far out of touch with reality, people like you and the rest of the “speed kills” bandwagon, really are.
Report abuse
If the best drivers are the one’s who have just passed their tests, then please explain to me, Eva, how the highest death rates are amongst the youngest drivers, (those are the one’s who have just passed their test, I would guess).
Once again, we see examples of inexperienced drivers, setting and supporting ill thought out, road safety measures!!
Have you ever wondered why the police don’t support many speed limit cuts?
Report abuse
“Mark
Are they really that stupid?”
I’m afraid that they really are,Mark!
Report abuse
There’s a very important difference between speeding, i.e. exceeding the posted speed limit, and driving at a speed that’s too fast for the conditions.
Speed cameras can only detect the former. If I drove down my road at 28mph I would not be speeding in the legal sense, but I would be driving at a speed that I consider to be 50% faster than is appropriate for the conditions. Remember that speed limits are arbitrary numbers and not always appropriate – sometimes too low, sometimes too high.
I belong to the camp that generally disagrees with the widespread use of fixed and mobile speed cameras, but I do object when people assume that means I like to “speed” everywhere. That simply is not true.
In areas where a reduced speed would be appropriate, e.g. outside schools, etc., I would prefer to see traffic calming measures, rather than speed cameras. Speed cameras take eyes off the road and focus them on the speedometer, which is ridiculous and potentially quite dangerous. Traffic calming, on the other hand, slows traffic down and requires drivers to pay extra attention to the road, so a double win.
Report abuse
There is one thing that puzzles me about speed cameras in Telford. I drive 40 miles to work each day passing through eight speed cameras and everyone drives through them at either bang on the speed limit or 1 MPH below. Which is how it should be if the road conditions are OK. Incidently I have only ever seen one motorist get ‘flashed’ in nearly two years.
In Telford whenever I follow anyone through a speed camera they are doing at least 10 MPH below the limit. Is this because they have all been caught by a camera? or some other mysterious reason, anyone got any ideas?
Report abuse
#12
Mine too road runner especially as I am female too.
It’s strange however that older people with sooo much driving experience have higher premiums than even learner drivers. Do you think the insurance companies much like you apparently see the highways department, are a bit crazy?
I expect they base the premiums on their data and expert knowledge of drivers and driver behaviour based on age, gender, type of vehicle, driver history and points on licence.
Much like highway departments who use vast knowledge and experience when deciding when and where to put speed limits and then when necessary, methods (after consultation with the many other parties involved in highway law) to enforce them.
Meanwhile carry on resenting them if you must but a lot of other folk are grateful to know that the speed cars are approaching is consistent with what the law has applied and they can more easily judge whether they have time to cross whether on foot or in a car themselves.
Report abuse
“Mine too road runner especially as I am female too.
It’s strange however that older people with sooo much driving experience have higher premiums than even learner drivers. Do you think the insurance companies much like you apparently see the highways department, are a bit crazy?”
Eva, you really are out of touch with reality aren’t you?
My insurance premium Fully Comp, is about £300 for a group 17 car. If you can find me a learner driver with an insurance premium on a group 17 car less than that, I will happily pay their insurance and yours for a year.
Highway depts don’t consult or take notice of objectors (including the police) They often go against Dept for Transport(2006) guidelines when setting low speed limits and often the limits are proposed because of only one or two whinging residents, not the majority of road users, who they should take into consideration by taking data from road speed surveys and setting the limits at above the mean speeds of the road in question…are you still following me?
If you don’t believe the above then I can happily show you reports which prove the above.
Report abuse
[Eva, you really are out of touch with reality aren’t you?]
No, and I take the trouble to read posts properly.
Also meaningless personal comments like that do absolutely nothing to further your argument roadrunner.
I was naturally referring to older drivers with far more experience and years behind the wheel than you roadrunner and who by your calculations should not have any restrictions to what speed they can travel at all.
On the contrary older people are the other high accident rate group and they have to pay very large premiums.
[I expect they base the premiums on their data and expert knowledge of drivers and driver behaviour based on age, gender, type of vehicle, driver history and points on licence.]
Didn’t you read that bit?
As I pointed out to whinger, the road I used as an example was already a road that had a 30 mile an hour limit as many in residential areas. Until the speed camera was put there traffic speeds ditated by the Highway Code were exceeded constantly.
Report abuse
Eva, it is you that should read posts correctly, especially your own. In post 12 you said “The best and lowest insured drivers are those who drive as well as they did in their driving test which gave them the permission to be let loose on the highway in the first place.
If all drivers behaved as well as they performed in their driving test that they passed we would not need cameras.”
My answer to that was that the best and lowest insured drivers are those who have improved and gained experience after their test which is why the insurance premiums go DOWN as you get older (up to a certain age but we will come to that soon)and also the age range for crashes, show that you are most likely to have accidents and get killed in the 17 to 24 age range ..these just happen to be the people who are driving as well as they did in their test (the ones who you think are safest).
Obviously, when you get to 70, your reaction times are going to slow down, you are likely to have poor concentration and stand more chance of having a heart attack at the wheel, etc, etc, so you would expect insurance premiums to rise but this doesn’t help your “goalpost moving” argument that young drivers who have just passed their test and are driving, “just as when they passed their test” are better and safer than experienced drivers, who are probably in their thirties, forties and fifties with probably a quarter of a milliom miles driving experience..or do you still claim otherwise?
Report abuse
Well you seem to be agreeing with me now roadrunner!
When I made that comment I was referring to your age group just as you misinterpreted what I said when I later referred to older drivers when I assumed you were not in that catogory.
Obviously those who do not continue to drive as competantly and well mannered as they did in their driving test often get penalised and pay higher premiums.
Why do you continue to ignore:
[I expect they base the premiums on their data and expert knowledge of drivers and driver behaviour based on age, gender, type of vehicle, driver history and points on licence.]
Didn’t you read that bit?]
You said:
[Once again, we see examples of inexperienced drivers, setting and supporting ill thought out, road safety measures!!]
????? The reason younger drivers pay higher premiums almost equal in cost to elderly drivers is their propensity to speeding which whether combined with driver error and an accident or not is a very big problem for society. This is partly overcome by speed cameras which thankfully can get them off the road until they learn to obey the highway code.
Report abuse
“[Once again, we see examples of inexperienced drivers, setting and supporting ill thought out, road safety measures!!]”
I was refering to people like yourself , Eva, who probaly has limited driving experience and is easily sucked into the “speed kills and stick to the speed limit and all will be well”, attitude, which is not a recognised factor by more experienced drivers.
You seem to be twisting and turning about your statement that people who drive exactly as they did on their drivng test are the best and safest drivers…mmmm. It’s a shame that people don’t try and improve past that level but unfortunately, as I drive around all day long, I see that many don’t get past driving test standard and some don’t even achieve it but no doubt so long as they stick to the speed limit, they are perfectly capable and safe in your eyes and your like.
Report abuse
Oh dear, Eva, it does seem like you have been telling me porkies.
I did two quotes for car insurance on a citroen saxo. One for a 20Year old male provisional licenced driver and one for a 70year old man and guess what?
The seventy year old had a quote for £330 (no no claims discount either) and the 20 year old provisional licence holder, was a very close £2,921.
Is there anything in your statement …..
“It’s strange however that older people with sooo much driving experience have higher premiums than even learner drivers.”
that you would like to modify or are you going to stay with your statement and keep egg on your face?
Report abuse
Eva said:
to drive as competantly and well mannered as they did in their driving test
You know as well as I do that they aren’t competent as drivers in any way, shape, or form. All they’ve done is demonstrate they can operate the controls of the car and read simple road signs. How many new drivers do you know, eva, drive confidently and competently on the continent through a number of countries? I’ve done is numerous times, but I’ll tell you now there is no way I would have tackled it shortly after passing my test. One only starts learning to drive after passing the driving test. In fact, as a good driver you should never stop learning. I don’t. When I first read RoadCraft (the Police Drivers Training Manual) it was a goldmine of information that I still refer to.
Likewise, good manners are self-taught after passing the driving test not before or during. Don’t forget that good driving manners are reciprocal: both received and extended, and indeed variable. With confidence and experience behind the wheel comes the knowledge to recognise when good manners are required and / or tabled.
Anyhoo.
Back on topic.
According to the lead story above, Telford & Wrekin Council’s leader today guaranteed the future of speed cameras installed at the site of fatal accidents across the borough.
This is good news, as there are no speed traps in the borough sited at locations where a fatality was recorded. See here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8401344.stm
Other very interesting stuff on there also. Especially regarding new drivers, eva.
Report abuse
[I expect they base the premiums on their data and expert knowledge of drivers and driver behaviour based on age, gender, type of vehicle, driver history and points on licence.]
Didn’t you read that bit?]
It’s well known that as a result of bad habits many experienced drivers would fail a driving test taken again.
I don’t formulate my arguments on deciding what sort of driver a person is who posts on here, out of my imagination, but seeing as you and whinger do I’ll take the liberty and say that I can see that you both would clearly come into that catagory.
My son’s insurance at 21 is about the same as my fathers at 89, both in Shrewsbury of course. Location makes a big difference and is one to add to list above that insurers basr their premiums on and that I constantly keep repeating and you constantly keep avoiding reading, roadrunner.
I do not tell lies,I do not choose when good manners are required on the road!!! and my son is a learner BTW.
Report abuse
Eva, no disrespect to your father at 89, but I have had elderly relatives who are living/have lived into their early nineties but would not trust them out with a shopping trolley, to be frank, as they can hardly walk without a stick or walking frame at that age, which is why your father’s insurance is as high as your sons, which I would guess is over a thousand pounds compared to the seventy year olds at £330 (both of my quotes were obtained using the same address and car by the way).
So what bit about the fact, that learner drivers are NOT as low a risk as experienced drivers ( who are of a sensible age to drive and not over 80), are you stumbling over because frankly you haven’t shown me any proof to any other effect and you are starting to make yourself look silly, repeating the same old phrases with no evidence.
Report abuse
“It’s well known that as a result of bad habits many experienced drivers would fail a driving test taken again.”
I think that you are getting older and experienced mixed up, Eva.
Admittedly there are a lot of older drivers who would fail a test but they may not be very experienced. To me, an “experienced” driver is someone who has driven at least a quarter of a million miles, usually through work and probably averages at least 20-30,000 miles a year MINIMUM, over ALL sorts of roads, not just motorways.
I would guess though, if you were to have a choice of having and older (say 40ish) driver take you across Europe and back or your son, you would, (hopefully) feel safer in the hands of an older (even if not that experienced), driver.
It’s also a fact that more middle aged drivers get caught by speed cameras, than younger ones, Eva, but they don’t seem to have the same, or anywhere near the same, fatality rate as younger drivers, so how do you explain that one if speed is the big killer?
Report abuse
people who drive for work are 30% more likely to crash because they take more risks!
Report abuse
people who drive for work are 30% more likely to crash because they take more risks!
It could also be that they cover about 4-5 times the mileage of other drivers, so a 30% increase in risk of having an accident, is pretty low by comparison , don’t you think?
Report abuse