Sponsored by
New speed camera policy unveiled
Countys roads to be targeted by cameras
The number of speed camera sites on roads across Lancashire is set to soar, the Evening Post can reveal today.
Despite several areas across the country cutting the controversial devices, the number of mobile camera sites across Lancashire will increase in the next 12 months.
And unlike existing sites, the new locations will not provide drivers with a warning sign telling them that the cameras are there. The Lancashire Roadwatch project will see huge stretches of road designated as mobile camera sites, instead of specific spots.
Warning signs, which are currently put in place when mobile cameras are being used, will be scrapped, to provide a “more flexible and prompt response to residents’ concerns about speeding”. However, vans will still be marked with camera partnership livery.
The expansion will not cost any more because existing cameras and resources will be used, paid for by the annual £1.3m budget for speed cameras, council chiefs say.
But the move was today branded “appalling” by driving campaigners.
Brian MacDowall, of the Association of British Drivers, said: “We are appalled by the response of Lancashire camera partnership. We can only summise that if they are going down this route it is only being done for the purposes of raising revenue now that there is no central Government funding for raising cameras.
“The warning signs are in the guidelines. They are not a legal requirement but surely fair warning should be given to all drivers.
“The Government has declared that the war on motorists will be ended. Clearly Lancashire County Council thinks otherwise.”
But County Coun Geoff Driver, leader of Lancashire County Council, said: “It is not a war on motorists, but it is a war on those motorists who break the speed limit.”
Mark Hendrick, MP for Preston, said: “This looks to me like an exercise in revenue raising.
“I’m against the cuts to police, I think the Government has gone too far, too fast, but rather than have officers sat in vehicles trying to catch out speeding motorists I would rather see more bobbies on the beat in inner-city areas like Preston, catching thieves and dealing with anti-social behaviour.
“It is escalating (the war on motorists).”
The scheme started in Lancaster and Wyre this month. It saw the introduction of 13 new mobile camera sites.
The scheme will be rolled out to South Ribble early next year, followed by east Lancashire and then all other areas throughout 2012.
If the same number of new sites was extended to all 12 county council areas, Lancashire could soon have another 78 speed camera sites.
Huge swathes of roads, as opposed to specific sites, are being included in the scheme. For example, in Lancaster the “entire length” of the A6 through Lancaster district is counted as one location.
There are currently more than 50 mobile camera locations and scores more ‘sites of community concern’ where cameras can be used. There are also 290 fixed camera sites.
Since 2001, well over half a million speeding tickets have been handed out to motorists the county.
Meanwhile the number of dedicated traffic police officers has fallen, from 220 in 2001/2 to around 180 now, although police have always stressed all officers can carry out traffic-related duties.
Controversy over the cameras was re-ignited earlier this year when Lancashire County Council and Lancashire Police released statistics about every fixed camera in the country. While accidents at many sites had fallen, some saw the number of crashes increase since they were installed.
Last October, the Coalition Government announced that it would not pay for the introduction of new cameras as it ended Labour’s “war on the motorist”.
A spokesman for Lancashire County Council said the new approach was more “focused”: “RoadWatch is considered necessary to continue the success that has already been achieved in Lancashire in reducing the numbers of people killed and seriously injured on our roads (from 1024 in 2005 to 681 in 2010).”
Lancashire Police’s Assistant Chief Constable Andy Rhodes said: “Priority will still be given to roads where injuries have occurred in the last five years but it will also enable enforcement on other roads where there is evidence that speeding is an issue, allowing us to be proactive in our approach and take action where speeding is a concern.”
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Preston
Wednesday 23 May 2012
Today
Cloudy
Temperature: 11 C to 15 C
Wind Speed: 15 mph
Wind direction: North west
Tomorrow
Sunny spells
Temperature: 14 C to 19 C
Wind Speed: 10 mph
Wind direction: North west
Comments
There are 70 comments to this article
Page 1 of 5
pcnich
Saturday, October 29, 2011 at 09:13 AMLonglivespeedlimits, you are the moron. Which survey are you quoting from. There is no suvey in the whole of the UK supporting that level of agreement for speed cameras. Check your facts numbnuts. Most people who have taken part in this post are decent members of the community. We are not all Aryton Senna wannabees. We just see cameras for what they are, a sneaky, revenue raising method of enforcement. Ask yourself this question. Do they catch the driver who is on drugs, no licence or insurance, texting or on the phone. They are and always will be a poor substitute for active policing. Next thing they will be introducing is the system that can read tyre depths as you drive over the device in the road.. True, this is on the way and being trialled by the Ministry of Transport as we speak. You are the cretin and an apologist for all that is wrong in society. We have kids being sent to their deaths in the middle east, we have corrupt polititians and institutions, extreme poverty in the UK, massive unemployment. These partnerships should be abolished as they are raping the tax payer of much needed money which we could spend on getting young kids off the street and back into work and more importantly putting proper police on the beat and proper traffic enforcement. You idiots cannot come up with a valid arguement, you just pluck up make believe figures and quote non-existant surveys. You don't live in the real world. Losers
AdoptedByPreston
Friday, October 28, 2011 at 11:20 PM#68 - If you really cared about the lives of people who are hit by cars then you'd campaign to have all cars banned. By the way speed cameras are regularly opposed by 60-70% in opinion polls. It's fun making up facts isn't it.
long live speed limits
Thursday, October 27, 2011 at 08:13 PMSpeed cameras regularly have 60-70% support in opinion poles - it's just the speed freak and their appeasers who hate them. None of these 'people' have every come up with a good 'reason' why deliberately breaking a basic road safety rule is perfectly acceptable; it's just the same 'persecustion' excuse. do you complain that police go undercover to catch other criminals? No Whya not? Surely they should be warning the peoplethey are trying to catch; after all, that would be fair, wouldn't it? You pro-speed morons make any decent person sick. If you are that desparate to try to kill yourself, becaone a racing card driver - at least those people accept the risk - normal people on the roads are not expected to put up with you cretins.
AdoptedByPreston
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 04:37 PMSlightly going over the speed limit is certainly not up in the top ranks of dangerous driving activities. Texting, drink driving, drug driving, talking on a mobile (even on handsfree), cutting people up, middle lane hoggers on motorways, dangerous overtaking and excessive speed such as 40 in a 30 are the things you should be stressing about. You can claim that this isn't a cash making scam but it certainly is a good way of bending stats to make your police force look as though they're doing a great job. Fines are not even a proportionate form of justice - a £60 fine will hurt a single mum of 3 in her old fiesta far more than it will hurt your yuppie types in their 2 tonne range rovers.
AdoptedByPreston
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 04:31 PMSpeed doesn't kill people, hitting people in a car kills people. As for children playing on estates - what on earth are they doing playing in the road? They should be terrified of the road - you can put all the 20mph signs up that you want, it only takes one joyrider or wreckless driver to kill a child. If the holier than thou "it's simple don't speed" brigade really cared then they'd be trying to ban cars in order to save every single life possible, why not through your weight behind a campaign to do that? Speed cameras are just lazy policing - it's far easier to catch someone doing 34 in a 30 than it is to patrol and find people using their mobiles or cutting people up.
Diesel10
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 11:24 AM@52 - 20mph on estates is essential as 30mph round these streets is reckless with so many obstacles and children playing but 20mph on the A6?!? Total nonsense, impractical and pointless. There are so many other ways to get people to lower their speed including, flashing signs, textured road marking, traffic islands but why would they take a full holistic approach to the problem when having some bloke jump out from behind a wall with a camera is so much more lucrative? I'm not a fast driver and despise those who drive too fast but don't believe cameras are the solution.
brookss4
Wednesday, October 26, 2011 at 12:12 AMI think this debate is similar to that smokers do to justify why they poison their bodies and those around them. Speeders will justify their actions latching on to statistics that support their argument and ignore all the rest, so they can sleep easier in their beds. It is only until they or their nearest and dearest are dying of cancer, they may consider their actions are wrong.
transitvanman
Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 11:05 PMwell said ken slater
cn123
Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 11:01 PMspeed cameras are inanimate objects and cannot save lives....driving properly and abiding by speed limits does, not my opinion, but fact #59
mrmungus
Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 10:59 PM#52 Yes I do live in an area that has the new 20MPH limits but the trouble is they have not put them just on estates, they have put them on the main roads. If you say you can drive a modern car at 20MPH without either constantly looking at your speedo or just staying in 1st gear all the time I'll call you a liar. It's not safe or practical to spend so much time head in for fear of being trapped. They have, against their own stated policy put them on main roads leading to the motorway near a very large factory. The limit is ignored by everyone, so what is the point. It's too low to set it on cruise control on our car so how is that aiding safety? Just walk along any road round the coast and see that the limit is ignored by police as well as drivers. Nor is it very green either, no vehicle except milk floats are designed to travel at that speed. And no, I have never been done for speeding before you ask. Have fun.
Ken Slater
Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 10:33 PMWill a camera be placed on a country road near Arkholme where a man was killed by a police car being driven at tremendous speed?
Removed by moderator
Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 09:58 PMdo speed cameras save lives then cn123? facts, figures only please not your opinion
cn123
Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 08:27 PMTo all the people on here who think speed cameras are there to make money....er wanna know the answer??? DON'T SPEED...not difficult is it??
cn123
Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 08:23 PMIt's about time they installed average speed cameras, these would stop the 'drivers' who exceed the speed limit , then slow down at cameras and then speed up once they have passed the cameras.
caretaker
Tuesday, October 25, 2011 at 07:48 PMTransitvan man, Which half?.
Page 1 of 5
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.