End of the road for speed cameras?

Should more councils get rid of speed cameras? Join the discussion at Auto Trader Pulse

The Conservative-run council is considering withdrawing from the Wiltshire and Swindon Safety Camera Partnership after a shake-up of speed camera funding rules which mean the Treasury now keeps the proceeds of fines.

The Government then makes road-safety grants to councils.

Ministers argue this breaks the controversial link between cash and camera, which critics had argued gave the authorities a financial incentive to fine more motorists.

Tory councillor Peter Greenhalgh, head of highways, transport and strategic planning for Swindon, reportedly said the money should be spent on a range of local safety measures.

"These are far more effective that speed cameras which, I feel, are a blatant tax on the motorist," he said.

"They are being used as a cash cow. I do take exception to the positioning of some mobile speed cameras. They are designed to raise revenue.

"I think enough is enough. There are much more important things we as a council should do instead of acting as a law enforcement arm of this Government."

But Labour MP Anne Snelgrove, parliamentary private secretary to Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly, has accused council leaders of playing "politics with lives" and is calling on the council to drop the plans.

The MP for South Swindon said the removal of the cameras could see road accidents and deaths rise and has launched a Hands off Our Speed Cameras campaign.

A spokesman for the Department of Transport said the funding decision was a local matter for Swindon, but added: "Safety cameras are there to save lives not to make money.

"There are 1,475 fewer deaths and serious injuries at camera sites each year.

"The Government is clear that the best safety camera is the one that takes no fines at all but succeeds in deterring drivers from speeding."

"It will be an invitation to boy racers from all over the country to come to Swindon and break the speed limit with no fear of a fine or points on their licence," the Labour MP warned.

"I'm urging the council to think again. They need to think about the safety of the children of Swindon on our roads."

She quoted a letter to Mr Bluh from transport minister Jim Fitzpatrick, who said £99.5 million was collected in speed camera fines in 2005/6 and £110 million was paid out in road safety grants during the same year.

A spokesman for the Department of Transport said the funding decision was a local matter for Swindon, but added: "Safety cameras are there to save lives not to make money.

"There are 1,745 fewer deaths and serious injuries at camera sites each year.

"The Government is clear that the best safety camera is the one that takes no fines at all but succeeds in deterring drivers from speeding."

Mr Bluh served a three-month driving ban after he collected 12 points on his licence for speeding.

He admitted the ban - which was imposed before he became Swindon council leader in 2006 - had changed his behaviour but said there were other ways to improve people's driving.

Should more councils get rid of speed cameras? Join the discussion at Auto Trader Pulse

"I was banned for three months. It has affected my behaviour," he told Sky News.

"But all cameras do is catch you when you have speeded."

The Automobile Association (AA) said it did not agree with the wholesale removal of speed cameras in Swindon.

"There is a role for cameras and they should be one weapon in the armoury that's used to improve road safety," spokesman Edmund King said.

"The problem is they are often seen as the first and last resort rather than looking at a junction improvement or traffic calming.

"The most pragmatic thing to do would be to look at where cameras are effective and where they are not."

He added: "We do believe cameras have changed attitudes towards speed since they were first introduced in 1992.

"You see less people speeding in urban and residential areas."

A spokeswoman for the RAC Foundation said: "Once one council starts thinking about this, it would not be surprising if others followed.

"Some engineering schemes are massively more cost-effective and have bigger road safety returns than speed cameras."

Chief Inspector Ian Copus, head of the Wiltshire Police roads policing unit, said: "Over the 12 months to the end of April, 2008, the collision statistics for roads across the Wiltshire and Swindon area, including camera sites indicated a 30.25% reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured when compared with the baseline data required by the Department for Transport before safety camera enforcement began.

"For children under 16 years the reduction is 47.7 per cent.

"At the core camera sites in isolation, the collision statistics indicated a 69 per cent reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured. For children under 16 years the reduction is 58.5 per cent."

Focusing only on Swindon's core sites, in the three years before camera enforcement was introduced in 2002, the average number of people killed or seriously injured was 19 per year, he said.

"Since safety camera enforcement began at these sites the average number of persons killed or seriously injured is 5.9 per year, a reduction of 69 per cent," he said.

Mr Copus said that since new funding arrangements were introduced in April last year, local authorities have received additional government grants which are fixed until 2010.

He added: "Wiltshire County Council has confirmed that it will provide funding in support of safety cameras until the end of 2010. Swindon Borough Council has agreed to provide funding until April 2009 and indicated that it will review the position each year."

Should more councils get rid of speed cameras? Join the discussion at Auto Trader Pulse