Road speed limit enforcement in the United Kingdom
An LSE study in 2017 found that "adding another 1,000 cameras to British roads could save up to 190 lives annually, reduce up to 1,130 collisions and mitigate 330 serious injuries.
[3] Parliament noted that most deaths of pedestrian occurred in urban areas (where the speed limit ranges from 20 to 40 mph).[3][relevant?
[5] Groups most likely to speed excessively are those driving in a work related capacity, members of high income households and young males.
[6] There are many methods used by authorities, in places where the speed limits are not generally observed, to attempt to achieve greater compliance.
[7] Owners of vehicles photographed may be contacted with a 'Notice of Intended Prosecution' (NIP) requiring them to provide the name and address of the driver.
[9] Vehicle activated signs that illuminate to indicate to a driver that they are exceeding the speed limit – these do not result in the issuance of a penalty, merely serve as a warning.
to install equipment on some of their traffic light systems so that they will turn to red early if a car is detected travelling above a preset speed on the approach.
Drivers can install free software in their TomTom GPS sat-nav units to provide a warning if they are exceeding the speed limit.
In addition a 'voluntary ISA' system which uses technology installed in the vehicle which makes it difficult to accidentally accelerate beyond the speed limit is being developed.
[19] In February 2005 the British Medical Journal again reported that speed cameras were an effective intervention in reducing road traffic collisions and related casualties, noting however that most studies to date did not have satisfactory control groups.
[22] The Times reported that this research showed that the department had been previous exaggerating the safety benefits of speed cameras but that the results were still 'impressive'.
[23] A report published by the RAC Foundation in 2010 estimated that an additional 800 more people a year could be killed or seriously injured on the UK's roads if all speed cameras were scrapped.
Within four years of Swindon abandoning the use of fixed speed cameras, arguing that the cost did not represent an effective way to reduce road accidents,[28] the town was the safest town to drive in the UK, based on accident rates per 1,000 registered vehicles: a result linked by the Local Authority Member for Council Transformation, Transport and Strategic Planning to the removal of speed cameras and resultant additional funding for road safety, alongside close working with the police.
[31] In 2006 Transport Minister Stephen Ladyman issued a retraction accepting that VAS were indeed ten times more cost effective than cameras.
[38] In 1906 Earl Russell, an early motoring enthusiast, compared 'speed traps' to 'highway robbery' in Parliament: "Policemen are not stationed in the villages where there are people about who might be in danger, but are hidden in hedges or ditches by the side of the most open roads in the country... they are used in many counties merely as a means of extracting money from the passing traveller in a way which reminds one of the highwaymen of the Middle Ages".
[50] The charity Brake was formed in 1995 to support traffic victims and campaign for effective enforcement of speed limits.
[45] Research published in February 1999 showed that cameras reduce drivers' speeds markedly and were perceived to be reasonably effective.
[n 4] In March 2000 the government launched a new road-safety strategy that would focus specifically on speed aiming to reduce road fatalities and serious injuries by 40%, and by 60% for children by 2010 (compared to the average of 1994–1998).
[45] In April 2000 two motorists caught speeding and challenged the Road Traffic Act 1988 which required the registered keeper of a vehicle to identify the driver at a particular time[58] as being in contradiction to the Human Rights Act 1998 on the grounds that it amounted to a 'compulsory confession', also that since the camera partnerships included the police, local authorities, Magistrates Courts Service (MCS) and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) which had a financial interest in the fine revenue that they would not get a fair trial.
In 2007 the European Court of Human Rights found there was no breach of article 6 in requiring the keepers of cars caught speeding on camera to provide the name of the driver.
'[61] The Transport Research Laboratory published a report on traffic management at major motorway road works in January 2004.
[62] In March 2005 a BBC program Inside Out demonstrated how the LTI 20.20 LIDAR speed gun, of which 3,500 were in use in the UK, could create exaggerated reading.
[63] In July 2005 the Department for Transport blocked the installation of nearly 500 new speed cameras over concerns that partnerships have failed to consider alternatives.
[67] The 2006 AA road map controversially included the location for thousands of speed cameras – the first time such information was available in that form.
[69] As of April 2006 there were thirty eight Safety Camera Partnerships in England and Wales covering forty-one police force areas out of a total of forty-three.
[citation needed] Swindon in Wiltshire switched off their 5 fixed cameras in July 2009, with the intention of replacing them with vehicle activated speed warning signs.
[74] In the nine months following the switch-off there was a small reduction in casualty rates between similar periods before and after the switch off (Before: 1 fatal, 1 serious and 13 slight accidents.
[89] In July 2010, some opposition politicians and some road safety campaigners claimed that lives were being put at risk by the removal of speed cameras.
[93] In December 2010, Portsmouth City Council decided to end its membership of the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Road Safety Partnership, and to remove all its speed cameras.
The report found that City of London, Metropolitan Police/TfL, Lancashire, Nottinghamshire, Suffolk and Northern Ireland police forces said that all of their cameras are active.
