The proof that speed cameras don't save lives
.and the police needn't try to deny it, the evidence is in their own statistics

By Peter Zimonjic -The Mail on Sunday January 18, 2004

The explosion in the number of speed cameras in Britain has failed to stop the rising tide of road deaths, according to new figures obtained by The Mail on Sunday.

New evidence from police forces across the country proves that far from declining, road deaths have actually increased since 2001- the year speed cameras began spreading across our roads.

In fact, two forces found that although they doubled the number of cameras in their area since 2001, the number of people killed on their roads leapt by a third.

Mark McArthur-Christie, head of road safety for the British Association of Drivers, said: 'We are being told that speed cameras save lives but if this was so we should be seeing massive reductions in deaths on our roads. Clearly this is not happening.'

The figures directly contradict repeated claims by supporters of speed cameras that their introduction is a safety measure, which saves lives. Many motorists still believe that the cameras are simply a cash cow for police forces - and that they could in fact be encouraging dangerous driving practices.

Recent reports have suggested that many drivers brake sharply in front of the cameras but others drive on the wrong side of the road in a bid to avoid detection.

The Mail on Sunday contacted more than 30 of Britain's 43 police forces to obtain road death figure for the past 3 years.

Of these 11 were able to provide the data and in these areas the number of road deaths rose from 856 in 2001 to 882 in 2003.

In Derbyshire, the number f speed cameras being used rose from 56 in 2001 to 101 in 2003 yet over the same period road deaths increased from 45 to 63.

In Lanarkshire, road deaths jumped from 74 in 2001 to 88 last year. The number of cameras increased from 2006 to 297.

In Hampshire, the number of cameras increased from 23 in 2001 to 51 in 2003. The number of people killed in fatal car crashes also increased from 69 to 104 a spokesman for Hampshire Police camera partnership, which in our survey saw the greatest increase in road deaths, defended the claim that speed cameras save lives.

He said: 'Where we have put the cameras we have had a reduction in casualties. Deaths might have gone up on other parts of the road. I don't know what happens away from our cameras.'

Other examples of the programmes failure include Dorset where the deaths jumped from 42 in 2001 to 50 in 2003 while speed cameras went from 38 to 51

In Ken the number of speed cameras increased by more than 50% - From 81 in 2001 to 126 in 203 - but the number of people killed stayed almost the same with 107 deaths in 2001 and 103 in 2003.

The Mail on Sunday was unable to obtain the official number of speed cameras for Staffordshire but the death toll on this counties roads fell only slightly from 98 in 2001 to 90 in 2003.

When speed cameras started to appear motorists were assured that they would be placed at accident hot-spots but critics say they are put in places where they are most likely to make money.

In 2001 the government changed the law to allow police forces to keep some of the revenue from the cameras and since there thousands have been put up.

The 6,300 fixed and mobile cameras collected £73millin in 2002, the most recent year for which figures are available.

After paying to the up-keep of the cameras and the staff to run them the government pocketed the remaining £40million.

The safety partnerships which run the camera schemes have always denied they are a money-making business and insist road safety is the only motivation.

But last month the Mail on Sunday obtained papers that exposed targets set by three police forces which proved the devices were being used to make money rather than save lives.

The document showed that Avon and Summerset, Dorset and Kent all had targets for the number of £60 fixed penalties to be issued each year. All other forces denied setting targets or claimed their account could not be seen as they were being audited.

Suzan Beck, a spokeswoman for the 43 safety camera partnerships, said: 'we have not been targeted to reduce deaths, we have been targeted to reduce the number of people killed and seriously injured. We are saving lives from misery and from being in a permanent vegetative state.'

Although Department of Transport figures suggest that the numbers of people killed or seriously injured on the roads is falling, critics of the speed cameras say advances in seatbelt and airbag technology are responsible for the reduction in serious injuries.

N/A: Figures not available