A freedom of information request confirms today that Department for Transport have cancelled their planned speed camera side effect research project. Safe Speed called the cancellation of this most important research "astonishing" and "grossly irresponsible".
We welcomed the research project when is was announced in 2005,[1] although even then it was really over a decade late.
Now that DfT's research has been cancelled, we present our analysis in a MAJOR NEW REPORT.[2] Our report lists 40 different side effects arising from speed cameras and the policies that support them. Some of the side effects are immediately recognisable to any driver. Others are more subtle, but no less dangerous for that.
Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "Our analysis is clear and confident and takes proper account of all known science, statistics and systematic analysis. Our confident conclusion is that speed cameras are making road safety much worse and must be scrapped immediately."
"It is astonishing and grossly irresponsible that Department for Transport has cancelled their important 'side effects' research. I can only imagine that they were scared about the likely results and would rather save face than save lives."
"I would love to see a Department for Transport point by point response to our new report but of course they cannot properly respond because they have cancelled their research."
"I recommend that anyone who cares about road safety should sign our highly ranked 10 Downing Street petition to scrap speed cameras:http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/scrapcam - at the very least it will help to force out the facts that Department for Transport would rather ignore."
Idris Francis, originator of the freedom of information request said: "It is alarming to realise that the DfT and those responsible for the Camera Partnership scheme even now remain unable to understand that draconian enforcement of speed limits can have adverse as well as beneficial effects."
"That they failed even to consider these entirely predictable effects before authorising cameras in 1992 or the Camera Partnerships in 2000 is bad enough, but cancellation of the long overdue investigation even before it started raises further serious questions about the competence of the DfT."
The CONCLUSIONS of the new Safe Speed report are as follows:
1. The best estimate of the life saving benefit of speed cameras stands at about 25 lives per year. If more than 25 lives per year are being lost due to side effects, then speed cameras are increasing the death toll on British roads.
2. None of the side effects have been officially studied. This is almost unbelievable because we have had speed cameras on British roads since 1992 and it is perfectly clear that there is a wide range of side effects.
3. Drivers gain experience particularly over the first decade after passing a driving test. During this time their average crash risk falls by at least a factor of ten as they gain experience. This subtle process of skills development is potentially extremely vulnerable to false beliefs and distorted safety priorities.
4. The 'smoking gun' evidence that the side effects have damaged road safety is that neither road deaths nor road crash hospitalisations have fallen as expected. In fact, if policy had done nothing and earlier trends had continued we'd have about 1,200 fewer road deaths each year by now.
5. Several recent studies propose that the only possible explanation for the failure of road deaths to reduce as expected can only be 'because drivers are getting worse'. The question of why drivers are getting worse has not been officially addressed. We are certain that 'bad policy' is responsible for making drivers worse through side effects.
6. It is known that single vehicle crashes are on the increase, including typical 'failed to negotiate bend' crashes. These are very much the sorts of crashes that we would expect to increase if driver quality was falling.
7. Department for Transport claims that road safety is meeting their targets, but this assessment depends entirely on the recorded beneficial trend in recorded serious injuries. Hospitalisation records do not show this trend at all. Road deaths do not show this trend.
8. Speed cameras are blunt instruments (at best) which have changed many things. They have changed the things that drivers pay attention to and the things that they regard as important. They have changed the way that our roads are policed and damaged the relationship between police and public. They have brought the law itself into a degree of disrepute.
9. Speed camera policy has failed. The overall road safety results show very disappointing trends with neither deaths nor hospitalisations falling significantly.
10. The only 'control group' study available of speed cameras on British roads shows an increase in crash risk associated with speed cameras at speed camera sites. (TRL595)
