Department for Transport have published new rules for the use of speed cameras today (Wednesday 31st January 2007).
The new rules can be found here:http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/cameras/pdfdftcirc0107
We present here a 'critical guide'to the new rules:
3 This amounts to the winding up of the 'National Safety Camera Programme'.
4 This appears to move much of the responsibility away from Department for Transport, where the speed camera issue has become 'too hot to handle'. However Safe Speed asserts that DfT remain fully liable.
5 Cameras must remain visible.
8 This so called 'evidence' remains very poor indeed, neglecting side effects completely. Safe Speed has a list of 30 negative side effects.
10 The 42% claim is largely or entirely 'Regression to the mean' effect. See Appendix H of the report in question.
11 Very weasel words. If they won't put a number to the 'substantial benefit'- and they won't - how do they know if there's any benefit at all?
12 Safe Speed termed the new speed limit guidance as 'flawed and deadly'. We think it's founded on 'bad science'.
19 'Better meshing' = Weasel words for spend less on cameras and more on other things. (And don't blame DfT for the results.)
21 Repeating the idea that 'engineering is the first choice solution'.
24 VAS are known to be more effective than speed cameras, and many times more cost effective. It remains to be seen how much of the grant cash will be spent on VAS instead of cameras.
25 SID = cheaper VAS
4.25 'recommended' = no longer 'required'. Of course if a camera is placed where there have been no crashes, then crashes can only go UP. No wonder they no longer wish to collect data on a national basis. (9.68)
27 We're extremely worried about the load on the courts.
28 DfT denies their responsibility.
31 They don't seem to have read their own research in TRL595 which shows that cameras in such locations are associated with an increase in crashes.
34 20mph zones need to be self-enforcing because it takes too much driver attention to attempt to maintain 20mph by using the speedo.
39 Full visibility must be maintained. "The Department expects" but no suggestion of any possible sanction for non-compliance.
59 About time too! But we don't expect the local partnerships to comply. They never have before.
60 We don't want national data because we know it can hurt us.
