r32

Since HMG decided they wanted all the revenue from speeding fines they have been raking in an average of £10,000 every hour of the day. Whilst fatalities have reduced experts say thats down to vehicle improvements.

The Treasury is behind the lowering of speed limits across the country and are rubbing their hands in anticipation of even more dosh.

Milking the motorist: How speed cameras rake in £10,000 an HOUR from drivers | Mail Online

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

There are many, many reasons to hate speed cameras - and believe me, I do - but the whole revenue argument is the biggest load of b*llocks out there.

£10k an hour is peanuts. How much do you think comes from fuel tax?

How much more do you think would come from fuel tax if we all drove faster?

£10k/hr, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, comes to £87.6 million. Simon Cowell's own personal income tax covers that for three months FFS!

Hate them because they represent the dumbing down of everything that a driver needs to know about road safety, because they have no intelligence and can exercise no discretion, because they perpetuate the myth that slowness == safety, because they are a distraction and because they are a symbol of all that is wrong with traffic policing - but please, not the whole revenue thing again

bugeyeandy

I hate them because they don't do what they are set up to do.
If speed cameras actually prevented people speeding and therefore saved lives then surely the revenue would be a big fat zero. As it is, most people who are caught either don't know it until they get a letter several days later or really don't care 'cause they're using an unregistered/uninsured pile of junk.

boomer

Andy,

At the Moron/Dahling level it is indeed peanuts, but at the "Safely Camwa Partnership" level, which is typically run by private companies - it is a very good earner!!!

See Chickens are coming home to roost! for an ongoing "situation" in Lancashire that may well spill quite a few beans!

mb

Petem95

Government needs all the money it can get with all the MP's blagging £30k per year 'second home allowances' etc

Simon K

Simon Cowells personal tax bill, for 3 months is £87million ? That would mean his yearly profit is around £200 million a year. (rough estimate)

But according to The times, his personal wealth was recorded at around £110 million. ??!?!?!!? So, something not right here

I hate speed cameras, I can accept them outside schools etc etc, but on motorways, fast roads not near any built up areas, I see them as pointless. They seem to take away common sense from the driver, i.e. drive slower during the day when the roads are packed, but at 3am in the morning, roads are empty, whats the harm at doing 100 ?

How much of the fines are re-invested back into new roads, or hospitals, or other important things ?

SBK

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Other way round mate - SC's tax = 3 months' worth of camera fines. Puts it into perspective either way IMHO.

EddScott

So he's quite rich then?

There closet speed camera where I live is about 50 miles away

SunnySideUp

As has been said, £10,000 an Hour is nothing to a Government .....

Considering it is an OPTIONAL payment does make me wonder why people opt to pay it and then moan when the bill becomes due? Quite staggering really.

The cameras are pretty much illuminous these days anyway!

r32

I realise that £10,000 per hour is nothing compared to Government spending (or borrowing come to that) but it is a large figure for the issue in question.
Scowells tax bill isnt relative (even if the guess at it is wildly inacurate).

Cameras are not always 'illuminous' when Notts have a blue 'builders van' and Derbyshire have been using a horse box parked at the road side.

1.6 Million motorists were caught by static or mobile cameras in the last full year for which data is available.

The number of speeding related deaths is 6% of the total. By the Governments own information the cause of the majority of accidents and fatalities is bad driving practices and poor road design. But to fix those would cost money not bring revenue in.

Most of us enjoy driving and the pending introduction of lower speed limits across the board enforced by a huge number of a new breed of low cost average speed cameras will be an imposition on us all. Just take a day out and try to drive in built up areas at 20 and at 50 or 40 on open A and B roads. See if you think your any safer. Sadly it really is all about revenue.

The action on 'speed' is just not proportionate when 200,000 die of smoking or smoking related issues, 50,000 die of obesity and 12,000 die of flu (all Govt figures). Would the money be best spent elsewhere?

Leslie

Having been associated with radar and doppler equipment etc. in the past, I know that as has been shown on TV, the speedcams are just not reliably accurate enough to justify the conviction of motorists for speeding.

Les

SunnySideUp

You can enjoy driving without speeding .......... to do so you need access to the best 2 seater drivers car available - a MX5!

No great speed, but what pure driving pleasure!

Leslie

Yes I tend to agree with that too, even if I dont drive an MX5.

Just for a moment there Pete I thought ypu were going to explain the Doppler efect!

Les

SunnySideUp

I did explain the doppler effect to you a few years ago ..... you didn't understand it then, why do you think you would be any clearer now?

Leslie

Not quite right there, I understood it very well, but you tooks ages and a lot of prevarication to come out with relating the effects but not why it happens!

You rocket scientists are all the same, all puff and no go!

Les