Funding for old Midlands speed cameras to be axed
Saturday 22nd January 2011, 7:00PM GMT.
The future of old-style speed cameras in the West Midlands has been thrown into question after transport chiefs from councils across the region voted to stop funding them.
Scheduled payments worth £950,000 from local authorities to pay for the speed cameras are to be scrapped for 2011/12 after reductions in Government grants left a shortfall. Councillors on the West Midlands transport sub-committee say the wet film technology used in older cameras is outdated, and claim West Midlands Police are not co-operating in discussing their future.
The force was today unavailable to comment on the claims. At a meeting yesterday the committee set aside alternate funding of around £500,000 for police to spend on new speed deterrent technology, including flashing warning signs.
The committee has agreed to continue funding the West Midlands Road Safety Partnership, which includes councils, the fire service and police, and oversees all road safety schemes. The councillors also backed plans from the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) to increase the fee charged for speed awareness courses from £60 to £80.
Acpo also wants more drivers caught speeding to be offered the course without getting automatic points, raising up to £420,000 a year — up from £142,500 under the current system. It would unlock extra funding for cameras.
But a final decision must be reached by the police, who want to reduce the expense of running 304 speed cameras in the West Midlands, 86 of which are already “dummies”.
Only three cameras in Wolverhampton and 34 regionally are frequently used, with operating times limited to 15 days a month. That is now likely to be reduced to 10 days a month.
Committee vice-chairman and Stourbridge councillor Les Jones said: “The partnership has been successful and we want it to continue, but we’re no longer in a position to simply commit to funding in this way.”
Chairman, Aldridge councillor Tom Ansell, added: “We’re waiting for the police to come back to us but they have been reluctant.” Birmingham councillor Jerry Evans told the meeting that wet film was “obsolete”.
By Alex Campbell
Most Commented
Business Awards
Book a Business Awards table
Join our celebrations of the region's best in business on Thursday March 22 - book your table now
Lifestyle
Interactive Dining Out map
Hundreds of reviews by the Express & Star and Shropshire Star's teams to help you decide where to eat.
entertainment
All the film reviews
Before you plan a trip to the pictures, get our critics' verdicts on all the latest movie releases
OUR NEW APP
Get the new E&S app
Download the Express & Star’s new app to your iPad or iPhone to get one week of access to our digital newspapers absolutely FREE.
expressandstar.com
Popular sections
Useful links
Just get rid of them, they are a cause for accidents and robbing motorist. How does a speed camera stop a stolen car? or a drunken driver?
Report abuse
I don’t condone dangerous driving and agree for speed deterrence outside schools for example but GATSO cameras have always been positioned to make the maximum amount of money-NOT for safety purposes.
Report abuse
well said, ive seen a lot of drivers do sudden braking throu these things causing all sorts of havoc.
Report abuse
I absolutely agree. The offence should almost NEVER be simply “speeding”. Careless or dangerous driving should have to be proved in order to target, well, the careless and the dangerous. That takes REAL people to do it, not stupid cameras.
Report abuse
they are not a cause for accidents !!!! speed, drink, and bad driving are the causes of most accidents. If people did not exceed the speed limit, then they would not be photographed, and fined legitimately. Speeding is the drivers fault, no one elses !!!!!! As far as i am aware, no one has ever said that speed cameras can stop a stolen car, or a drunken driver.
Report abuse
Sorry just don’t agree at all.
They do not cause accidents or rob motorists. People driving too fast and slamming their brakes on causes accidents and passing them in excess of the speed limit sets them off.
Take responsibility instead of blaming a static bright orange box you can see a mile off.
Report abuse
Dick Turpin in another guise.’Safety Cameras’ money makers more like it.
Report abuse
They do not rob the motorist. If you stay within the speed limit, you won’t have to pay a fine. There should be more real camera, not less, and with higher penalties, including crushing of cars for a second offence. No namby-pamby courses, hit the speeder in the hip pocket.
Report abuse
One would think with the revenue generated from these cameras that they would be self-sufficient in terms of maintenance or upgrades. To have a shortfall of nearly one million pounds or the compromised settlement of 500,000 is a lot of money for devices that bring in a lot of money to begin with. It makes me wonder if the funds generated from these cameras were diverted to other projects with the hope that the general public would pick up the tab. It takes a lot of moxie to mishandle revenue and expect the tax payers to pony up for these speed cameras that they never wanted in the first place. Perhaps we should put cameras on the people created this mess.
Report abuse
It is disgraceful that councillors have been naive enough to support the increase in the cost of a speed awareness course. If these courses are really about road safety they should be charged at cost. The £20 increase is just blatant profiteering by ACPO, a private company. Once again it has become all about money.
Report abuse
ACPO is not a private company. It stands for the Association of Chief Police Officers. I’ve no idea where the money goes but I very much doubt that Chief Constables could get ‘blatant profiteering’ past the auditors.
Report abuse
It’s not so much the cameras that annoy me, it’s the lowered speed limits that come with them. We now find ourselves forced to crawl around at 30mph on roads that were designed for (and are perfectly safe for)50mph.
Report abuse
isnt that goin back to a “netting off” system of self funding where they put cameras in areas known for high speed rates….having said that if everyone keeps to the speed limit then that wouldnt be an issue…would it?
Report abuse
Stop wasting any of our money on these things, they are causing more accidents than they prevent.
Reading the report shows why cameras have been used – money is the reason. Too many people rely on the cash from them and then the safety figures are ‘fiddled’ to get even more money.
Speed cameras are a scam and all public spending on them should stop immediately.
Report abuse
When are people going to get a brain and wake up the fact that speed cameras only make money when drivers speed. Everytime this subject comes up there are still the simpletons on here who blame the speed cameras, and not the idiot speeders!!
And what has speed cameras got to do with catching stolen cars or drunk drivers..Exactly the kind of moronic response these subjects generate!!
Report abuse
peter harris – provide me with facts how they cause more accidents than they prevent ?
If money is the reason then why the shortfall in funds ? The truth of the matter is they dont even cover the running costs and never have.
They are a deterent and catch the habitual speeder, to deter and stop them killing innocent people with speed. How would you like to tell a parent their child has been killed by a speeding motorist.
Keep the cameras !!!
Report abuse
Its about time. Swindon removed their cameras last year and accident rates have not gone up. Speed is merely a factor that affects the outcome of an accident and not the primary cause. The safety camera partnerships were supposed to be self financing but clearly the figures in the article indicate that we the taxpayer were actually paying for them as you would probably have expected being under a pathetic labour government for too long. Get rid of all cameras now and focus on poor driving and drink and drug related offences and leave honest motorists alone.
Report abuse
You probably find that because motorists are getting better at avoiding the speed camera, the powers that be need to find alternative ways of getting at our cash, by getting rid of the current camera type they save money, The rub for the motorist is what they will replace them with to get the money back, raising the speed aware courses is just the start,
A point to note is when finally nobody Speeds or breaks any laws the powers that be will make the noose tighter and what is now deemed as lawful will become sanctioned,
Report abuse
Reckless driving, driving without due care and attention will never be caught on a static image. Video recording is the only way to record these occurences. Police, stop Camera!!
Report abuse