Speed camera revenue shortfall “suggests they have worked” | Smart Highways Magazine: Industry News

Speed camera revenue shortfall “suggests they have worked”

Share this story...Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookShare on Google+Email this to someonePrint this pageBuffer this pagePin on PinterestShare on StumbleUponShare on Tumblr

Speed camera vans in North Yorkshire have been described as “the single greatest underachievement of income” for the county’s police force.

The Press website in Yorkshire says accounts for 2017/18 have revealed that road safety cameras brought in millions of pounds LESS than the force and the Police and Crime Commissioner expected.

Although the force does not receive revenue from fines, it does from speed awareness courses but in 2015/16, the force received just over £1.8 million from the courses, and based later budgets on a similar or higher amount, even increasing the number of speed camera vans on the region’s roads.

But the Chief Constable’s draft statement of accounts said, “The recharges made for speed awareness courses were responsible for the greatest single underachievement of income. The recharges generated £2.1 million less income than was forecast.

“This was in part as a result of a delay in the procurement of new vans which resulted in fewer than 12 safety camera vans being deployed until the middle of December. In addition to this the safety camera vans generated course referrals at a slower rate than was forecast and the rate of offences detected per hour has also decreased.”

The Press quotes North Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner Julia Mulligan as saying the “underachievement of income” simply showed the road safety camera vans had worked. “The camera safety vans are on our roads to help make them safer. They have been very effective in doing so, with clear evidence that drivers are slowing down and as a result, fewer people have been on driver awareness courses than was estimated, resulting in less money coming in.

“The success in slowing people down does mean shortfalls in estimated budgets, which were based on figures from previous years, but contrary to popular belief, this has never been about making money. The work that the safety camera vans do is very important, and as they pretty much ‘break even’, it suggests the current numbers are about right. However, this is under constant review, as are the financial impacts.”

 
Comments

This assessment is a load of nonsense, for these reasons:

a/ The primary objective of the cameras is to reduce collision rates – but they are not mentioned at all!
b/ My detailed analysis of 3,848 cameras shows conclusively that they cause severe ADVERSE changes in collision trends. I will publish it shortly and copy it to you.
c/ There are many reasons for fewer drivers being caught speeding than expected:
i/ Official estimates were badly wrong in the first place
ii/ More drivers bought speed camera warning systems and sat-navs including warnings.
iii/ Drivers changed their routes to avoid cameras and had their collisions nearby but outside the official site boundaries (as my analysis confirms)

Before Ms. Mulligan decided to introduce camera vans I sent her detailed evidence that they cause more collisions than they prevent, but although she replied she decided to ignore it – incidentally, I understand that not even Chief Constables are ever taught how to understand statistics.

An the accident rate has dropped by????????????????
How about the ‘cost ‘ and stress to family life through increased insurance premiums, loss of licence and maybe job?
When for 99% of the time these people were driving perfectly safely and fell foul of speed limits, which are mostly imposed on the whims and fancies of local councillors!

William Laird

The cost and stress of increased premiums and loss of licence through disregard of the law (and it takes several speeding offences to achieve 12 points -can’t you heed a warning) is lot less than the pain and suffering of being injured in a crash or the grief of a bereavement. Sorry, but your comment is trite and offensive.
I do accept, though, that some speed limits are set because of political interference. if people feel that they are wrong, they have the chance to object before they become law. If you feel they are inappropriate, complain to police and local authority.