Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

jennings ford direct
Sponsored by
 
 
Tuesday, 2nd December 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the n/a site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Calls for speed camera review



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
21 May 2008
Demands have been made for a review of how speed cameras are used in Lancashire after more than 500 drivers had unsafe speeding convictions overturned.
The debacle, which has seen three Lancashire police workers facing disciplinary action for misconduct, will mean police could "struggle" to rebuild motorists' faith.

A probe focused on allegations that a speed camera had been wrongly set up and that paperwork had been wrongly processed by staff at the central process unit in Blackburn.

The joint investigation between the police and Independent Police Complaints Commission resulted in 545 speeding convictions being quashed, £35,000 in fines refunded and a further 2,115 tickets cancelled.

Motoring experts said police would find it difficult to rebuild motorists' faith in road policing following the scandal.

Elizabeth Dainton, research manager at the RAC Foundation, warned against over-reliance on speed cameras for keeping roads safe.

Ms Dainton said: "We do support the use of speed cameras where correct and appropriate but there needs to be traffic police on the roads to pick up offences such as drink and drug driving.

"Police will have a struggle on their hands to restore public confidence. Lessons need to be learnt and appropriate training needs to be in place."

The Evening Post revealed this month that there are now 184 officers patrolling Lancashire roads – a fall of 13 on the year before and the lowest since 2002.

Fylde MP Michael Jack questioned whether setting up cameras should be done by civilian staff instead of police.

The speed camera operator accused of wrongly calibrating a mobile camera in Penwortham and Blackpool was not a police officer.

Mr Jack said: "The Chief Constable has got to do everything he can to put in place policies which reassure motorists that the use of cameras is justified and done by the book in future.

"If it is not dealt with right, it will undermine the generally good relations police have with the public."

Ribble Valley MP Nigel Evans will write to Chief Constable Steve Finnigan to voice concerns about how cameras are used.

The Conservative MP added: "The fact three (police staff) have been found against is very serious.

"People will start to lose faith in the police.

"It's bad enough now – people already think they are nothing more than a cash cow for the Government.

"They raise millions but they are supposed to reduce accidents at black spots, not to raise money for the Government."

Figures show the number of fixed and mobile speed camera sites in Lancashire has increased from 63 fives years ago to 345 last year.

The number of people killed or seriously injured on Lancashire roads has dropped from 886 in 2003 to 863 last year but the number of those with more minor injuries following road accidents has risen from 5,238 to 5,471.

Andrew Howard, head of policy at motoring organisation the AA, said national research showed speed cameras could help to cut casualties by up to 100 a year at some sites.

A Lancashire Police spokesman said: "We will not be making any comment until after the disciplinary hearing."

The IPCC probe covered tickets processed between September 2006 to August 2007.

>> Vote in our latest web poll

>> Have your say on our special traffic and travel rantline

Traffic & travel

The full article contains 553 words and appears in n/a newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 21 May 2008 9:48 AM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Preston
 
Prev
1
2
1

time for action,

21/05/2008 11:19:30

So a "SAFETY Camera" generated 545 UNSAFE speeding convictions and more than 2,000 tickets had to be cancelled.

It will indeed be difficult to restore faith in "safety cameras" - if faith ever existed in the first place.

Most drivers still think the cameras are there to raise more money for the Government to squander.
2

jonh,

21/05/2008 12:30:00
"Most drivers still think the cameras are there to raise more money for the Government to squander."

Of course they are. Yet when residents in Leyland WANTED a camera on a road used by boy racers, the Partnership for Road "Safety" showed no interest. Reason? No one had died there. (Yet)
3

barnfarm,

21/05/2008 12:54:53
Most of the money goes on installing and operating more cameras. Still, they've probably saved a few 1,000 lives by now so let's be thankful for that eh?
4

WorkerBee,

Preston 21/05/2008 15:59:51
"police could 'struggle' to rebuild motorists' faith"

How's that for understatement? The way motorists have been persecuted and fleeced left, right and centre while traffic cops have been pulled off the roads - you are more likely to restore turkeys' faith in Christmas as a time of peace and goodwill.
5

Eric Cartman,

Preston 21/05/2008 16:14:50
Speed cameras are good, just a shame they are positioned in spots that are most likely to generate the most money, as opposed to preventing the most accidents.
6

barnfarm,

21/05/2008 16:35:54
Agreed, but the fact remains that these annoying devices have taken away the licences of enough habitual, unthinking speeders - ie the sort of divvies who carve you up, blast off from traffic lights, boy-race in general and are the most likely to end other people's lives - to justify their troublesome existence. Everybody suffers a bit, but the greater good is ultimately served.
7

yimitier,

21/05/2008 17:21:27
"Everybody suffers a bit, but the greater good is ultimately served."
The end justifies the means!!! Shades of fascism!
This is inly the tip of the iceberg!!!
For the last three months another investigation has been taking place into financial "irregularities" in the accounts of The Road Safety Partnership, Lancashire Constabulary, & Lancashire County Council into milking speed camera revenue! This is over a period 2001 to 2006 and is in the hundreds of thousands of pounds!
The IPCC investigation is only covering 1 year!!! How long have these "misconductees" been performing their mischief? Why does the IPCC have to be tied to the wishes of the Chief Constable who has an interest in damage limitation? Why aren't they named? What positions do they hold? How did the CTO Manager let this happen? Is he one of the three? There are too many unanswered, and UNREPORTED, questions. The media has been aware of what has been happening in Blackburn CTO for a long time but they still churn out the same old FALSE figures served up to them on a plate from the PR reps of the Constabulary & the Partnership,as facts, whilst taking part in the charade of the benefits of speed awareness courses,(reporters actually taking part!)and all the rest of the blurb without actually questioning how the money is spent, what's the profit, how much do the police make etc....
Where is the investigating journalist on these newspapers???
Yimitier
8

time for action,

21/05/2008 17:50:23

#7: A colleague got a speeding ticket the other day after an encounter with a "safety" camera.

It was no longer signed by the Blackburn CTO manager Adrian Emberton, so maybe he's been "promoted" for oustanding service milking the cash cow.

On the other hand, maybe he was required to walk the plank before the investigation started. Either way, we'll probably never find out.

9

barnfarm,

22/05/2008 11:29:38
Everybody suffers a bit (we all get clobbered from time to time) the greater good is ultimately served (several hundred people, many children, get to stay alive and X thousand persistent n0bheads lose their licence).
Buy an OED. Look up fascism.
The comment, incidentally, is directed at those people who seem to think that speed cameras per se are a bad thing because the government - as ever - has made its usual botch of outsourcing various operations. The idea is sound. The execution is the problem.
10

Long live speed limits,

Fylde 22/05/2008 17:05:11
the only people who are against safety cameras are thos idiots who seem to think the law does not apply to motorists - WAKE UP, USE YOUR COLLECTIVE BRAIN CELL and REALIZE that these cameras are for SAFETY.
Using your 'logic' 'all cameras are evil and should be scrapped because of 3 police officers', when are you going to campaign to get all cars banned because thousands (millions?) of motorists deliberately break the law every day and some of those has killed people? No? thought not. Just shows the lack of intelligence in the road lobby
Prev
1
2

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.