William Green Transport Correspondent
NEARLY 30 more speed cameras are set to appear on Yorkshire roads in the New Year, it emerged yesterday.

Officials in West Yorkshire yesterday announced plans to expand the existing network to cut the number of deaths and serious injuries on the roads.
The West Yorkshire Casualty Reduction Partnership, which includes the police and councils, has identified 14 accident blackspots? where fixed cameras should be installed and 21 other stretches where mobile cameras should be used – including some in Bradford, Leeds and Halifax.
Plans have been submitted to the Government for approval and installation could begin next April.
The move was welcomed by pressure group Transport 2000 last night but the RAC Foundation – the lobbying arm of the breakdown recovery group – gave a more guarded reaction.
Transport 2000 spokesman Steve Hounsham said: "Government figures show that speed cameras are effective in both cutting speed and reducing crash casualties."
He added: "The expansion of speed cameras is in everyone's interests who wants to see safer streets."
Edmund King, director of the RAC Foundation, said he supported the installation of cameras on roads proven to be dangerous but Mr King expressed concern that cameras were being seen as a replacement for traffic police, the number of which he claimed had fallen by 11 per cent nationwide.

"Whereas the camera can catch someone two miles above the limit it can't catch someone two bottles of wine above the drink-drive limit. Therefore the speed camera can only address one problem," he said.

But Steve Thornton, chairman of the West Yorkshire partnership, said the existing network of cameras had helped to cut road deaths in West Yorkshire from 144 in 2001 to 115 last year.
He said the downward trend was also continuing this year with 93 killed on the roads up to mid-November.
Mr Thornton also vigorously defended the use of speed cameras.
"They are fantastically important – they are the only way we can have 24-hour policing of speed limits. They do save lives," he said.
He added:
"As far as I am concerned, the opposition to speed cameras is from a low number of people in relation to the very large number of people who want to be safe on the roads they live in."
Mr Thornton also revealed a new advanced type of camera will be tested to catch out even more speeding drivers.
White stripes on the road used to calculate speeds will also be painted on both sides of the highway as some motorists are driving at high speed on the wrong side of the road in the mistaken belief they will avoid detection.

http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticleMore2.aspx?SectionID=55&ArticleID=708858&Page=1&ReturnUrl=NewsFrontMore.aspx

But 144 was a massive upward blip.

And 115 is the average of the previous four years.

And 93 gives 108 pa (higher than 1998).

Assuming the same number of people get killed every month.

But the last one and a half months are dark, icy ones.

In other words, the final figure will be about average again.

Compared to recent years.

 

But before the proliferation of speed cameras fatalities used to fall around 7% pa!

 

I know that!

You know that!

We 'ALL' know that!

Do THEY know that?
NO!!
========================================

>"Whereas the camera can catch someone two miles above the limit it can't catch someone two bottles of wine above the drink-drive limit. Therefore the speed camera can only address one 'Problem'" he said.


Problem?-Problem? they're making us 'Millions',

NO PROBLEM!!!.

Hi Prof H! etc

Speaking on behalf of both teams! (Also posted on "other channel"!!***)

So who exactly is getting a bonus in the New Year - us or them??!!*

West Yorks Cops? Did they not get a bad press some time ago for giving a 3 point penalty to some bloke for not having washer in the screen wash reservoir? (The guy was watching "Corrie" at the time and the recent MOT pass was parked up outside his house.! Course when challenged - they backed down and commuted this to a warning) It was a bit OTT given that the car was not actually being driven, and being nice guys and gals we like to think that the chap would have applied P>O>W>E>R before setting off anyway! After all - he had replaced all tyres, had all legal documents etc, and was experienced clean living driver for 30 years!

Deaths cut by 25% as result of scams? Despite the above case --- Given the recent (and have to admit generally reasonable) campaign to remove dangerous vehicles from their roads - would that action NOT account for this apparent decrease around there?

and if scams really reduce speeds on our roads - then how come there is a sharp increase in revenue raised?
And how come they are so certain of reaching their targets and income from fines - just like any other BUSINESS FOR PROFIT!?

How many of the deaths on those roads are due to drinking "under the influence"? Joy riding? Tired drivers? Careless pedestrians and cyclists?

Where are the figures? Have they been unduly massaged?
Transport 2000 et al just give a blanket statement - harping that one driving issue is the sole blame for all deaths, they will not acknowledge any other factor in an RTA!

Who do they think they are fooling?

As for the strips on both sides of the road - Lancashire, Merseyside, North and South Wales, and the Home Counties already have these sort of scams in place! We've all driven past them!

And NO we do NOT and NEVER will condone BAD, INCONSIDERATE and RECKLESS driving.

Like everyone else who posts here and elsewhere - we simply want a fair policing policy - which does not involve hiding behind telephone booths, under blankets in white vans, disguising talivans as RAC vans, or placing scams where they can earn most money.

Safety camera signs should warn of impending hazard, and encourage the motorist to adopt a safe driving speed. If the driver chooses not to heed the warning - then s/he deserves all s/he gets!

and there should at least be some re-training for first and "just more than// just over etc" offences.

NOT REALLY ASKING THAT MUCH ARE WE?