Speed camera research 'axed'
#1
Speed camera research 'axed'
Speed camera research 'axed' - News - AOL Motoring
The Government cancelled research into the effect speed cameras were having on accident rates and driver behaviour, a request under the Freedom of Information Act has revealed. The move by the Department for Transport (DfT) was described as "astonishing and grossly irresponsible" by anti-speed camera group Safe Speed.
The DfT said in its reply under the Act that its original research was replaced by research looking at the wider effects of cameras.
But Safe Speed, which believes cameras are having no effect on casualty rates, said the original research was dropped because the DfT was "scared about the likely results".
It was a Safe Speed member who organised the anti-road charging petition which attracted 1.8 million signatures on a Downing Street website recently.
Safe Speed has published its own report on the "side effects" of speed cameras, pointing out that neither road deaths nor the number of people taken to hospital after crashes had fallen as expected since the introduction of speed cameras.
Safe Speed founder Paul Smith said: "Our analysis is clear and confident and takes proper account of all known science, statistics and systematic analysis. Our confident conclusion is that speed cameras are making road safety much worse and must be scrapped immediately.
"It is astonishing and grossly irresponsible that the DfT has cancelled their important 'side effects' research. I can only imagine that they were scared about the likely results and would rather save face than save lives.
"I would love to see a DfT point-by-point response to our new report but of course they cannot properly respond because they have cancelled their research."
The Government cancelled research into the effect speed cameras were having on accident rates and driver behaviour, a request under the Freedom of Information Act has revealed. The move by the Department for Transport (DfT) was described as "astonishing and grossly irresponsible" by anti-speed camera group Safe Speed.
The DfT said in its reply under the Act that its original research was replaced by research looking at the wider effects of cameras.
But Safe Speed, which believes cameras are having no effect on casualty rates, said the original research was dropped because the DfT was "scared about the likely results".
It was a Safe Speed member who organised the anti-road charging petition which attracted 1.8 million signatures on a Downing Street website recently.
Safe Speed has published its own report on the "side effects" of speed cameras, pointing out that neither road deaths nor the number of people taken to hospital after crashes had fallen as expected since the introduction of speed cameras.
Safe Speed founder Paul Smith said: "Our analysis is clear and confident and takes proper account of all known science, statistics and systematic analysis. Our confident conclusion is that speed cameras are making road safety much worse and must be scrapped immediately.
"It is astonishing and grossly irresponsible that the DfT has cancelled their important 'side effects' research. I can only imagine that they were scared about the likely results and would rather save face than save lives.
"I would love to see a DfT point-by-point response to our new report but of course they cannot properly respond because they have cancelled their research."
#2
Yes but they need a new way to raise money now that they are stopping people smoking and losing revenue from that.
If they went ahead they would just be spending money on something they were going to sweep under the carpet and ignor anyway.
If they went ahead they would just be spending money on something they were going to sweep under the carpet and ignor anyway.
#3
Must say I'm shocked at the lack of concern here - are we all lying with our bellies facing the sun? Have we all given up & rolled over? Pass the soap
Does no one find this collapse of a search for a corobaration of the good they do us an outrageous turn and vindicative of the contempt some feel for the road 'safety' priorities and spin we are fed? These that 'know better' have now seemingly fed their coffers & pensions and now decline to pursue the drive for any open results for all to see...
I feel even angrier when sat behind a poster on the back end of a bus [no doubt with a picture of a pram on it] warning us of the sheer chaos that doing 80 mph on a quiet motorway could mean This all whilst being told eating a sandwich/being on a phone/picking your nose/changing a CD makes you a massive 4 times more likely to have a smash... So, I have just fed Safe Speed some cash instead rather than just rant here - at least they genuinely care about road safety and making it better out there.
Sign this if you agree We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to scrap speed cameras.
If you REALLY agree then read this site and give the logical, reasoned campaigner a couple of quid Welcome to Safe Speed
Take a leaf out of David & Goliath's book as the BS walls of Jericho are tumbling
D
Does no one find this collapse of a search for a corobaration of the good they do us an outrageous turn and vindicative of the contempt some feel for the road 'safety' priorities and spin we are fed? These that 'know better' have now seemingly fed their coffers & pensions and now decline to pursue the drive for any open results for all to see...
I feel even angrier when sat behind a poster on the back end of a bus [no doubt with a picture of a pram on it] warning us of the sheer chaos that doing 80 mph on a quiet motorway could mean This all whilst being told eating a sandwich/being on a phone/picking your nose/changing a CD makes you a massive 4 times more likely to have a smash... So, I have just fed Safe Speed some cash instead rather than just rant here - at least they genuinely care about road safety and making it better out there.
Sign this if you agree We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to scrap speed cameras.
If you REALLY agree then read this site and give the logical, reasoned campaigner a couple of quid Welcome to Safe Speed
Take a leaf out of David & Goliath's book as the BS walls of Jericho are tumbling
D
#6
Did you ever think that NL would allow such research if it threatened their success in milking the cash cow which is the motorist?
Its easy, just change the law or the regulations or the actions to suit themselves, sod the rest of us!
Les
Its easy, just change the law or the regulations or the actions to suit themselves, sod the rest of us!
Les
#7
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Muppetising life
Posts: 15,449
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I head about this from Piston Heads. It really sucks, but its no surprise that they bury information that they don't want to hear.
We know the current anti-motorist policies suck, but what we really need is a political part that has the ***** to stand up and say they are going to scrap them. Politicians are just too scared to stand up against the green lobby at the moment.
We know the current anti-motorist policies suck, but what we really need is a political part that has the ***** to stand up and say they are going to scrap them. Politicians are just too scared to stand up against the green lobby at the moment.
Trending Topics
#9
BANNED
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Ministry of Truth. War is Peace: Freedom is Slavery: Ignorance is Strength
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The effective repealing of the Freedom of Information Act? I was right: ignorance really is strength!
#11
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Sub-Subaru
General Technical
1
28 September 2015 12:47 PM