There's a controversial thread on Pistonheads about the effectiveness of speed cameras at motorway roadworks, are they just cashing in or do they reduce accidents?

Thought some peeps here might be interested so I've pasted it below:

 

 

Author

Discussion

 

safespeed

 

03:17

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Following a recent Freedom of Information request, and a careful review of the materials supplied, Safe Speed issued the following PR at 02:52 this morning:

 

PR228: TRL says speed cameras useless at motorway roadworks

 

News: for immediate release

 

Safe Speed issued a Freedom of Information request to the DfT on July 5th

regarding motorway roadworks safety. The results have just been published.

One document makes it crystal clear that speed cameras have no influence on

the rate of injury.

 

In a study carried out for the Highways Agency by TRL Limited and published in

2004 it is revealed that roads works are no more dangerous than open motorways

and that speed cameras have no effect on accident rates.

 

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign

(http://www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "When this sort of information is available, why

are camera partnerships allowed to continue to fleece motorists with no safety

benefit?"

 

"It is outrageous that partnerships continue to operate speed cameras in

motorway roadworks claiming that they are required to 'protect the workforce',

when science clearly tells us that motorway road works are not specially

dangerous and speed cameras don't help at all."

 

"The greedy camera partnerships frequently lie to us about the 'benefits' of

speed cameras. False information in road safety costs lives because it causes

life saving resources are misallocated. The partnerships must be disbanded

because they are working against the long term interests of road safety. They

are 21st century snake oil salesmen."

 

"Why on earth does it take the Freedom of Information act to uncover important

information like this?"

 

TRL Report says: "The study showed that there was no significant difference in

the rate of PIAs (Personal Injury Accidents) when road works were present on

the motorway."

 

TRL Report says: "No significant difference was observed in the PIA rate for

sites with and without speed cameras."

 

 

 

Notes for editors:

==================

 

DfT Page regarding Safe Speed's Freedom of Information Request:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_foi/documents/divisionhomepage/039530.hcsp

 

TRL Report summary containing quotes above:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_foi/documents/page/dft_foi_039535.pdf

 

 

puggit 08:41

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is a bombshell!

 

I think most of us would agree that speed limits are valid in roadworks, and that the cameras are there to enforce safety. Normally short thrift is given to those coming on this forum and bleating about being caught in the roadworks...

 

However, the recent move to 40mph limits rigourously enforced, compared to the historic 50mph limits with erratic enforcement, has always smelt fishy.

 

 

Don 08:54

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The salient point of the report is that accident rates are no worse in motorway roadworks than they are on the rest of the motorway now...and that there is a only tiny difference in Fatal and Serious Injury accidents at roadworks equipped with cameras (1%). This would appear to me not to be statistically significant.

 

But could this be because most drivers now drive through roadworks slowly and carefully anyway because they know that in such locations it is likely that there will be workers at risk?

 

Or even, for those who don't give a shit about workers, that it is likely that there will be cameras?

 

Whilst I drive with the same amount of care at all times I do drive purposely within the speed limit in areas I consider "risky" (with respect to detection) and purposely much higher than the speed limit in areas I consider "safe" (both in absolute terms and in terms of detection).

 

This means I drive through roadworks at the speed limit checking carefully for both workers and cameras happy in the knowledge I will not be contributing to the scamerati's Christmas party fund...

 

 

safespeed

 

09:10

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Don said:The salient point of the report is that accident rates are no worse in motorway roadworks than they are on the rest of the motorway now...and that there is a only tiny difference in Fatal and Serious Injury accidents at roadworks equipped with cameras (1%). This would appear to me not to be statistically significant.

 

 

 

Damn right it isn't significant, and very oddly, that's a comparison with open motorway. Why didn't they compare it with roadworks with no camera I wonder? Could it be that crashes are slighty up compared to roadworks with no cameras?

 

It'll cost us £40 to buy the full report and find out.

 

Meanwhile tens of thousands of us are being fleeced at roadworks around the motorway network.

 

 

timtonal 09:34

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think crashes will be up due to the clumps of speedo-watching motorists across the 3 lanes. Especially alarming yesterday was the HGV edging along my inside whilst I was doing an indicated 42mph. M6 Thelwall had a similar scheme (not been up that way for some time so don't know if its still going on). I kept hearing of lots of accidents happening - not a good advert for SPECS.

 

Also why has the M1 J21-20 roadworks 40 limit been extended by a couple of miles southbound due to the hard shoulder being coned off but nobody working on it? There are gantries for SPECS but no cameras, yet. I appreciate that this stretch is next to be resurfaced, but surely limit it when the works start, not several weeks in advance.

 

Bad management through and through.

 

 

safespeed

 

12:18

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further PR issued at 11:33 this morning:

 

PR229: Motorway road works speed cameras: legalised extortion

 

News: for immediate release

 

Following Safe Speed's revelations earlier today that motorway road works

speed cameras do nothing to improve safety, motorists will be absolutely livid

to learn that they have been fined for no safety benefit.

 

The TRL report stating with absolute clarity that speed cameras do NOTHING to

improve road works safety on motorways was completed over 18 months ago. The

Highways agency did not make it public and continued to slap up speed cameras

at motorway roadworks sites.

 

Any member of the public wishing to read the report would have had to pay £40

to do so. Not even a summary has been previously published as far as we can

tell. It took a request under the Freedom of Information Act to dig it up.

 

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign

(http://www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "Hundreds of thousands of motorists who have been

fined for exceeding the speed limit in roadworks in the last 18 months are

going to be livid. The Highways Agency knew that cameras did nothing for

safety - all they have been doing is spreading misery and raising revenue.

These cameras are legalised extortion - no more and no less."

 

"This has to stop and it has to stop now. Speed cameras do nothing for safety.

The official claims are bunk. But far worse than that, those claims cause

live-saving resources to be misallocated and cause extra deaths indirectly."

 

"How dare they keep this information hidden for 18 months. Since the Freedom

of Information Act came into force the wheels are coming off the speed camera

bandwagon. The abuses of information are outrageous and heads must roll."

 

 

 

Notes for editors:

==================

 

Safe Speed PR issued earlier today:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SafeSpeedPR/message/76

 

Includes reference to TRL report which includes:

 

"The study showed that there was no significant difference in the rate of PIAs

(Personal Injury Accidents) when road works were present on the motorway."

 

"No significant difference was observed in the PIA rate for sites with and

without speed cameras."

 

========================================

 

I've had little pickup on either PR so far (which isn't really surprising on a Sunday).

 

But if anyone has any press or broadcasting contacts AT ALL please send them these two links:

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SafeSpeedPR/message/76

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SafeSpeedPR/message/77

 

 

turbobloke 14:20

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hmmmm. About the same time this report became available to the authorities, there was a noticeable increase in interactive driver signals in some motorway roadworks sections - one stretch on the M5 that used to have four or five gatsos changed to one gatso and two or three IDS. Regrettably there are still sections with specs cameras (M1, M40), these purely revenue raising instruments of driver oppression should be removed immediately. So it has been shown that m-way roadwork cameras have no safety benefit - which just brings us back to Canada's decision to throw out all forms of automated speed enforcement (photo radar) in two provinces because

 

- it had no safety benefit

- it was propped up only by a well funded spin machine

- it was arbitrary and heavy handed

- it was a symptom of intrusive big government

- it harmed police-public relations

- recruitment and witness cooperation were hit

- better and more cost-effective approaches are available (our TRL has already shown that IDS have greater safety benefits than speedcams)

 

Same old over here

OK, my twopence worth. When I drive anywhere at all with motorway roadworks, it's often down to Dorset, and to avoid the traffic I tend to go late at night, or very early in the morning (although I'm not so good at the latter). Consequently I end up hitting the M25 roadworks between the M4 and M3 junctions, complete with about 6 speed cameras.

 

Now this doesn't bother me too much during the day when there's plenty of traffic, and in the narrower lanes it's probably a good idea because it deters all the morons in A4s and BMW 3 series from driving twice as fast as everyone else which would be kind of dangerous. However, at midnight when all I want to do is get where I'm going and go to bed, it seriously gets on my nerves. In fact, at that time of night the 70 limit is taking the mick as far as I'm concerned. The road's empty, and frankly I'd much rather people drove faster and got to their destination earlier, rather than falling asleep at the wheel because they stuck to the speed limit and thereby lengthened their journey by 30 minutes or whatever.

 

When I'm driving at that time of night now I always make sure I get plenty of rest beforehand because I've had one particularly nasty experience where I realised I'd drifted across a lane without realising. Not nice. IMO anything that lengthens a night time journey unnecessarily is a bad thing, and that includes speed traps at roadworks.

Not much interest here then!

 

m0n1, good point, as you probably know nodding off at the wheel does cause quite alot of motorway accidents, especially speed restricted trucks. Must be a nitemare trying to stay alert from London to Scotland all night at 56mph!

Must be a nitemare trying to stay alert from London to Scotland all night at 56mph!

 

Yeah, I wouldn't want to have to do it. Respect is due.