Understanding Speed Cameras

Do speed cameras deserve to be criticised?
Image Creds: Stock.xchng

Speed cameras rarely garner much positive press. There have been ongoing debates into the effectiveness and the real motivations for their placement. Advocates cite lower accident figures, while anti-speed camera campaigners often highlight the level of revenue generated by fixed-camera sites.

Speed cameras featured heavily in the headlines last year when Oxfordshire council announced that cameras in the region would be switched off due to budgetary constraints. These measures led to one road safety group claiming that speeding had increased by 88% in their absence.

To help justify the ongoing placement of cameras, 75 English local authorities have published some or all of their information showing accident and casualty rates as well as speeds at camera sites before and after the introduction of speed cameras.

Increased Transparency 

This level of transparency should be welcomed, helping motorists understand the reasoning behind the placement of cameras. However, it should be noted that speed cameras should not be seen as the only solution to speeding. For fleet managers, effective training and awareness campaigns could be the most effective way of ensuring that their drivers remain safe and on the right side of the law.

Another welcome side effect of controlling speed is an effective reduction in costs – travelling at 80mph (10 mph above the legal motorway speed limit) uses around 10% more petrol than travelling at 70mph. Therefore, drivers can save money by obeying the law, both by avoiding costly speeding tickets and reducing overall fuel consumption.