There’s a town in the UK that has seen Gatsos – seen them, had them and had enough. I’m of course talking about the recent furore in Swindon. What’s the problem? Well apparently civic leaders don’t raise a single penny from the £400,000 cost of the cameras that are in and around the area in their jurisdiction.
There’s also talk that it is being seen (unfairly perhaps) as a ‘blatant tax’ on drivers. Naturally, with that sort of name, the local government is keen to put the money into other road schemes such as sleeping policemen (road humps) and vehicle activated speed signs (whoa scary!!).
Hmmm, not sure I agree with this one. Almost everyone seems to slow down in case they get a fine, however does everyone slow? I get the feeling that some out there (perhaps in their Subaru Imprezas or similar) think “look, I managed to get it up to 52 that time!” but it could just be me.
Swindon is a conservative-run council that operates 16 fixed speed cameras, three red light cameras, eight mobile vans and three speed-gun equipped bikes. Last year, 30,000 motorists were ticketed, generating revenue of £1.76 million pounds. That’s quite a lot of money, I’m sure you’ll agree. Let’s look at the math. 1.76 million divided by 30,000 is about £59 quid each.
However, the organisation that runs the cameras, the Wiltshire and Swindon Safety Camera Partnership, said that the amount of deaths that have occurred has been cut by two thirds. Putting that in perspective, it starts to make a lot more sense. Especially when serious injuries have also been significantly reduced.
Cllr Peter Greenhalgh is the civic leader behind the scheme to remove the speed cameras. Do I agree with him? Well, as a motorist I should take the stereotypical view that speed cameras are universally bad. However, in this case, I can’t – at least not in good conscience. Simply put, this does sound a little like the Cllr in question is annoyed because his ward pays the money out, yet sees nothing in return. However, I for one see a huge reduction in death and serious injury well worth paying for. Perhaps he would be less annoyed if some of that £1.76 million went the council’s way?
There’s no doubt that speed cameras are a great way in which to control people’s speed. There’s also no doubt that in a lot of cases they aren’t necessary. Is this one of them though? I’m not convinced, at least not until there’s more evidence as to why they should be removed. Sometimes, money isn’t the most important thing.
Leave a Reply