Today's most viewed
Camera opponent was banned for speeding
The leader of a council which is considering scrapping speed cameras was
once banned from driving for speeding, it was revealed today.
Swindon Borough Council is looking at proposals to get rid of cameras
and find other ways to spend the £400,000 annual contribution it
currently makes to the local safety camera partnership.
Roderick Bluh, the leader of the Conservative-controlled council, was
banned for three months after he collected 12 penalty points on his
licence for speeding.
Mr Bluh said the ban, which was imposed before he became Swindon council
leader in 2006, had changed his behaviour but said there were other ways
to improve people's driving.
"I was banned for three months. It has affected my behaviour," he told
Sky News.
"But all cameras do is catch you when you have speeded."
Swindon South MP Anne Snelgrove, who is parliamentary private secretary
to Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly, called on the council to reject the
plan.
"It will be an invitation to boy racers from all over the country to
come to Swindon and break the speed limit with no fear of a fine or
points on their licence," she warned.
"I'm urging the council to think again. They need to think about the
safety of the children of Swindon on our roads."
Mr Bluh said Conservative councillors moved a motion on the issue two
months ago and a decision will be made by September.
Mr Bluh said: "We are not going to compromise safety, but we are taking
the opportunity to review how we utilise the money.
"A huge amount of money is being raised by speed cameras and we are
seeking better ways of ensuring road safety without penalising
motorists."
It is believed to be the first time a council in the UK has challenged
the Government over the issue.
Chief Inspector Ian Copus, head of the Wiltshire Police roads policing
unit, said there was evidence that speed cameras had reduced accidents
and saved lives.
Collision statistics for Wiltshire and Swindon for the 12 months ending
in April showed a reduction of more than 30% in the number of people
killed or seriously injured compared with pre-speed camera levels.
"For children under 16 years the reduction is 47.7%," he said.
"At the core camera sites in isolation, the collision statistics
indicated a 69% reduction in the number of people killed or seriously
injured. For children under 16 years the reduction is 58.5%."
At core sites in Swindon, in the three years before cameras were
introduced in 2002, an average of 19 people were killed on the roads
every year.
"Since safety camera enforcement began at these sites the average number
of persons killed or seriously injured is 5.9 per year, a reduction of
69%," he said.
Swindon raised the idea of withdrawing from the Wiltshire and Swindon
Safety Camera Partnership after a shake-up of speed camera funding rules
which means the Treasury now keeps the proceeds of fines.
The Government then makes road-safety grants to councils.
Ministers argue this breaks the controversial link between cash and
camera, which critics said gave authorities a financial incentive to
fine more motorists.
Tory councillor Peter Greenhalgh, head of highways, transport and
strategic planning for Swindon, said the money should be spent on a
range of local safety measures.
"These are far more effective than speed cameras which, I feel, are a
blatant tax on the motorist," he said.
Mrs Snelgrove has launched a Hands off Our Speed Cameras campaign and
said the Government pays out more in road safety grants than it collects
in speed camera fines.
She quoted a letter to Mr Bluh from transport minister Jim Fitzpatrick,
who said £99.5 million was collected in speed camera fines in
2005/6 and £110 million was paid out in road safety grants during
the same year.
A spokesman for the Department of Transport said the funding decision
was a local matter for Swindon, but added: "Safety cameras are there to
save lives not to make money.
"The Government is clear that the best safety camera is the one that
takes no fines at all but succeeds in deterring drivers from speeding."
The Automobile Association (AA) said it did not agree with the wholesale
removal of speed cameras in Swindon.
"There is a role for cameras and they should be one weapon in the
armoury that's used to improve road safety," spokesman Edmund King said.
"The problem is they are often seen as the first and last resort rather
than looking at a junction improvement or traffic calming.
"The most pragmatic thing to do would be to look at where cameras are
effective and where they are not."
6:05pm Tuesday 15th July 2008
Print 
Email this
CommentPosted by: Dave, Down under the Plain on 7:44pm Tue 15 Jul 08
You've got to laugh at that one eh?
Having got to be leader why not abuse your postion to settle some old scores...
You've got to laugh at that one eh?
Having got to be leader why not abuse your postion to settle some old scores...
Posted by: The Beast, Swindon on 10:02pm Tue 15 Jul 08
So does Anne Snelgrove truly believe that people will come from all over the to speed in Swindon? The idea is frankly ludricous!
So does Anne Snelgrove truly believe that people will come from all over the to speed in Swindon? The idea is frankly ludricous!
Posted by: Joe, Wilts on 11:34pm Tue 15 Jul 08
Im sure being banned for driving having been caught by cameras in no way affects his opinion towards them!!!!
Being as it has changed his driving behaviour!!! its rather odd that he thinks they are a bad idea and should be removed!!!
Cameras dont penalise anyone who does not break the speed or is not paying enough attention to the road to see them in time to slow down!!! You have to be rather daft to get caught by 1!!!
Im sure being banned for driving having been caught by cameras in no way affects his opinion towards them!!!!
Being as it has changed his driving behaviour!!! its rather odd that he thinks they are a bad idea and should be removed!!!
Cameras dont penalise anyone who does not break the speed or is not paying enough attention to the road to see them in time to slow down!!! You have to be rather daft to get caught by 1!!!
Posted by: Public Spirit, Wiltshire on 12:25am Wed 16 Jul 08
As long as they get rid of the hated revenue cameras, what does it matter? It just shows that Mr Bluh is as human as the rest of us. You don't have to have been banned by one of the slimy nanny state 'motorist persecuting cameras' to hate them.
You might know this LibLab anti-Tory paper group would try to find some reason to blame a Conservative for anything. That's their usual political slip showing yet again.
As long as they get rid of the hated revenue cameras, what does it matter? It just shows that Mr Bluh is as human as the rest of us. You don't have to have been banned by one of the slimy nanny state 'motorist persecuting cameras' to hate them.
You might know this LibLab anti-Tory paper group would try to find some reason to blame a Conservative for anything. That's their usual political slip showing yet again.
Posted by: Phil_S, Chippenham on 3:20am Wed 16 Jul 08
The point is that cameras take a snap shot. Whilst I would not condone speeding the cameras are thgere purely as an excuse to raise money for the govn. Excess speed is not the only killer on our roads, when diod a spoeed camera last catch a drunk driver, or a banned driver. The money would be better spent on proper policing to catch dangerous drivers.
The point is that cameras take a snap shot. Whilst I would not condone speeding the cameras are thgere purely as an excuse to raise money for the govn. Excess speed is not the only killer on our roads, when diod a spoeed camera last catch a drunk driver, or a banned driver. The money would be better spent on proper policing to catch dangerous drivers.
Posted by: cindy, darkest Corsham on 7:09am Wed 16 Jul 08
This is a bit like Old George next door becoming Prime Minister and introducing free beer for pensioners!
This is a bit like Old George next door becoming Prime Minister and introducing free beer for pensioners!
Posted by: formerdriver, Swindon on 9:57am Wed 16 Jul 08
From the point of view of the people operating these cameras surely to have them in random locations in a van would be better then fixed cameras. Take the one of queens drive for example, when it was in use, vary rarely did anyone approach that camera and not have to slow down, hence the camera van being placed further along the same road. Clearly they safety camera partnership are aware that these fixed cameras are not working. In my own opinion they are only there for one reason, to make money. They know people speed and thats why they put them there. Maybe instead of fining people they should ban them for 2 weeks or something instead of the 60 fine. That would be a bigger deterant and with the points still totting up they could get a sufficiant ban when they reach the 12 point maximum. Most motorists depend on their cars on a daily basis, and £60 isnt a great deal of money these days, it wont even buy you half a tank of petrol. Its sad that some people have been killed by speeding motorists but the fact is that speed probably wasnt the only factor in the cause of these accidents. And as for the queens drive camera its a shame it wasnt working when a Police car went speeding along that road, then through a red light and collided with a bus! shouldnt the police know better?
From the point of view of the people operating these cameras surely to have them in random locations in a van would be better then fixed cameras. Take the one of queens drive for example, when it was in use, vary rarely did anyone approach that camera and not have to slow down, hence the camera van being placed further along the same road. Clearly they safety camera partnership are aware that these fixed cameras are not working. In my own opinion they are only there for one reason, to make money. They know people speed and thats why they put them there. Maybe instead of fining people they should ban them for 2 weeks or something instead of the 60 fine. That would be a bigger deterant and with the points still totting up they could get a sufficiant ban when they reach the 12 point maximum. Most motorists depend on their cars on a daily basis, and £60 isnt a great deal of money these days, it wont even buy you half a tank of petrol. Its sad that some people have been killed by speeding motorists but the fact is that speed probably wasnt the only factor in the cause of these accidents. And as for the queens drive camera its a shame it wasnt working when a Police car went speeding along that road, then through a red light and collided with a bus! shouldnt the police know better?
Posted by: ahudspith, Chippenham on 5:47pm Wed 16 Jul 08
"It will be an invitation to boy racers from all over the country to come to Swindon and break the speed limit with no fear of a fine or points on their licence,"
Of course it will ... I'll post up an advert now on www.barryboys.co.uk proclaiming a risk free "cruize" now shall I?
You, madame are a moran.
County Durham (where I lived for 24 years before becomming a Chippenham resident) does not have any SPEED (not safety!) camera's. The CC thinks they are a scam and it's more important to catch the bafoons on the roads that endanger us all by driving badly (which is not usually speed - but reckless overtaking, etc). He's put more traffic officers on the road.
Would the Wiltshire SCAM partnership care to do a comparisn of results of us against Durham? I'd love to see the results - and Im confident what the outcome would be!
"It will be an invitation to boy racers from all over the country to come to Swindon and break the speed limit with no fear of a fine or points on their licence,"
Of course it will ... I'll post up an advert now on www.barryboys.co.uk proclaiming a risk free "cruize" now shall I?
You, madame are a moran.
County Durham (where I lived for 24 years before becomming a Chippenham resident) does not have any SPEED (not safety!) camera's. The CC thinks they are a scam and it's more important to catch the bafoons on the roads that endanger us all by driving badly (which is not usually speed - but reckless overtaking, etc). He's put more traffic officers on the road.
Would the Wiltshire SCAM partnership care to do a comparisn of results of us against Durham? I'd love to see the results - and Im confident what the outcome would be!
Posted by: ahudspith, Chippenham on 6:12pm Wed 16 Jul 08
While Im on my high horse lets back up my argument with some evidence shall I?
Durham policy : http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/news/uknews/1
448704/%27Speed-came
ras-don%27t-save-liv
es%27.html
The LIES peddled by the SCAM partnerships and goverment : http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/motoring/main
.jhtml?xml=/motoring
/2007/11/10/mfspeed1
0.xml&page=1
If any of you would like to talk down to us poor motorists that SPEED KILLS - please read this before you swallow the govt. line without thinking.
And on another note - Im not trying to protect myself here. I have a Garmin Nuvi Sat Nav with camera alerts in my car. I wont get caught by camera's as it alerts me to where they are. Id like to see POLICE ON THE ROAD to catch the boy racers and other incompetant's ... I do not want to rely (and have them put my daughters safety) on static camera's that do not work!
While Im on my high horse lets back up my argument with some evidence shall I?
Durham policy : http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/news/uknews/1
448704/%27Speed-came
ras-don%27t-save-liv
es%27.html
The LIES peddled by the SCAM partnerships and goverment : http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/motoring/main
.jhtml?xml=/motoring
/2007/11/10/mfspeed1
0.xml&page=1
If any of you would like to talk down to us poor motorists that SPEED KILLS - please read this before you swallow the govt. line without thinking.
And on another note - Im not trying to protect myself here. I have a Garmin Nuvi Sat Nav with camera alerts in my car. I wont get caught by camera's as it alerts me to where they are. Id like to see POLICE ON THE ROAD to catch the boy racers and other incompetant's ... I do not want to rely (and have them put my daughters safety) on static camera's that do not work!
Posted by: who dat? on 7:59pm Wed 16 Jul 08
"So does Anne Snelgrove truly believe that people will come from all over the to speed in Swindon? The idea is frankly ludricous!"
[bold]Frankly, my dear, old B'Anne'd Wagon is LUDICROUS![/bold]
"So does Anne Snelgrove truly believe that people will come from all over the to speed in Swindon? The idea is frankly ludricous!"
Frankly, my dear, old B'Anne'd Wagon is LUDICROUS! Posted by: DingDonG, on my penny-farthing on 8:57pm Wed 16 Jul 08
[quote][bold]cindy[/bold] wrote:
This is a bit like Old George next door becoming Prime Minister and introducing free beer for pensioners![/quote] I'll vote for him.
I'll vote early and often (until the pus open)
If Old George went to school with Gladstone, he will do a better job than this lot!
cindy wrote:
This is a bit like Old George next door becoming Prime Minister and introducing free beer for pensioners!
I'll vote for him.
I'll vote early and often (until the pus open)
If Old George went to school with Gladstone, he will do a better job than this lot!
Posted by: walter, wilshur on 9:11pm Wed 16 Jul 08
If "tis the same old George who drinks with us down to "Jolly Farmer" of an evening, he were already old when Gladstone were born! Is "Bluh" a misspelling by the way, or is he a Martian?
If "tis the same old George who drinks with us down to "Jolly Farmer" of an evening, he were already old when Gladstone were born! Is "Bluh" a misspelling by the way, or is he a Martian?
Posted by: The Maxter, Chippenham on 4:24pm Sat 19 Jul 08
I travel daily along Thamesdown drive in Swindon. The locals - and that's what they are at 7.30 in a morning, know exactly where the police sit (occasionally) and where the cameras used to be. They slow down, then guess what? They speed up.
Cameras catch the unaware, nothing more.
One thing I would wager though, is that if the revenue was NOT being diverted to central government, the right honourable Gentleman for Speed Central wouldn't have suggested their removal!
I travel daily along Thamesdown drive in Swindon. The locals - and that's what they are at 7.30 in a morning, know exactly where the police sit (occasionally) and where the cameras used to be. They slow down, then guess what? They speed up.
Cameras catch the unaware, nothing more.
One thing I would wager though, is that if the revenue was NOT being diverted to central government, the right honourable Gentleman for Speed Central wouldn't have suggested their removal!
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!