Redirecting... our OLD website!

We're still in the process of converting the site to the new format.

Apologies for the inconvenience and thank you for your understanding.

-Matt, Admin


Ok - go now to OLD site

No thanks - stay on NEW site

General Chat/Anything Goes

Cameras Axed After Performance Review (Lancs)

Cameras Axed After Performance Review (Lancs) - Forums [Biker Match] Cameras Axed After Performance Review (Lancs) - Forums [Biker Match]
Home / Search Forums / General Chat/Anything Goes /

Cameras Axed After Performance Review (Lancs)

 Posts: 9       Pages: 1/1

Post Reply
Around 30 speed cameras are set to be axed in Lancashire after officials revealed they would switch off units in areas that didn't show a significant drop in road traffic accidents.In a full review of the county's 290 cameras, between 30-40 units were revealed as the cameras which were ‘not performing’.Counties around the country have taken similar measures to reduce spending following the government’s decision to cut funding for road safety partnerships.Councillor Tim Ashton said: "We are looking at the data to see where they have worked in terms of reducing serious injuries and some less serious injuries.“We have to analyse that a little bit further, but where a speed camera doesn’t work I believe it is an unfair tax on the motorist.“I’d rather use that money on more effective methods of reducing accidents - which we are committed to doing in Lancashire."<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p>

   Update Reply
Sandi @ 22/10/2010 08:07  

With the exception of average speed check systems, most speed cameras only monitor 50-100 metres of tarmac.

We've all seen the motorist that hits the brakes on the approach, then accelerates afterwards. And with more 'alerting' devices on the market, they are getting it down to a fine art!

Education is a good way forward. Teach the youngsters using shock details of the results of speeding accidents. It needs to stay in their brains in later life!

   Update Reply
sifimedia @ 22/10/2010 10:33  

Strange that cameras are now being judged on their ability to reduce accidents. Nothing to do with revenue now going to central govt and not the local councils ??

   Update Reply
Rob1050 @ 22/10/2010 11:33  

Not performing=not taking money

   Update Reply
Deleted Member @ 22/10/2010 12:39  


   Update Reply
Rob1050 @ 22/10/2010 12:53  

Yes ans easy equasion No cameras no money

   Update Reply
Deleted Member @ 22/10/2010 16:31  

why dont they turn off all cameras for 6 months and see if accidents increase ? 4% of accidents are caused by breaking the speed limit yet cameras generate 150 mil a year in fines so people are plenty speeding anyway lol

   Update Reply
dunans @ 22/10/2010 20:12  

Would you trust them if they said they had turned the cameras off?

   Update Reply
sifimedia @ 23/10/2010 01:57  

well yeah. if they published that they where off for 6 months for a trial the publication would be evidence to avoid fines

   Update Reply
dunans @ 23/10/2010 12:39  

 Posts: 9       Pages: 1/1

Back to top
Facebook Twitter Google Pinterest Text Email