Cost Recovery System for Speed Camera Enforcement - How it Works to Reduce Casualties

  • Published: Department for Transport, 2003
  • Authors: A. Waddams
  • Date Added: 18 Mar 2013
  • Last Update: 28 Oct 2016
  • Format: pdf

Objectives:

The paper explains how the safety camera partnership funding systems was piloted then rolled out across Great Britain.

Methodology:

The paper is a summary document of the process by which safety camera partnerships operate.

Key Findings:

  • In the past local authorities and the police often had insufficient funds to make fullest use of cameras to deal with the problem of speeding.

  • Enforcement had to compete with other priorities from their limited budget allocations and some areas could not afford any automatic enforcement.

  • In 1998 the Government decided to resolve this by changing HM Treasury rules to allow penalties from speeding and traffic signal offences to be “netted-off” to pay for the costs of purchase, operation and administration of safety camera enforcement.

  • Initially eight pilot schemes were undertaken in rural and urban locations across the UK.

  • The pilot project was designed to test the funding system and to show that cameras continued to be an effective road safety intervention under the different operational arrangement.

  • At fixed camera sites 85th percentile speeds are down by 8 mph and at mobile sites by 3 mph.

  • Overall the pilot areas have outperformed the rest of GB by about two to one in casualty reduction. We expect the national rollout to cover all areas of GB next year and that will contribute to achieving our casualty targets by 2010.

  • These results suggest that the safety camera partnership funding mechanism was successful. Since this paper was written many local authorities have now taken over the management of safety cameras in various regions.

Themes:

Safety camera funding, Safety camera effectiveness

Comments:

Includes the funding aspect of camera installation and use.

Free