In response to the Transport Committee Press Notice inviting the submission of written memoranda on the effectiveness of traffic policing, ITS United Kingdom, is pleased to provide comment into the effectiveness of traffic policing, and in particular to examine through a series of questions and associated issues the appropriate balance between Traffic Policing and technological deployment.

  The Intelligent Transport Society for the United Kingdom, known as ITS United Kingdom, is a not for profit organisation dedicated to promoting the use of ITS technology in the UK and promoting UK technical expertise and systems overseas. Our membership consists of around 150 organisations working in the transport field to promote the use of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS), which employs modern developments of mobile Information Technology and communications technology to assist all modes of surface transport. We are fortunate in having membership from both public and private sectors and from academia. We are funded entirely from the subscriptions of our members and therefore can independently represent the interests of the whole membership spectrum in this rapidly developing field. A complete list of our Members is attached to this Response.

  In particular we would like to respond to the specific issues raised by the Transport Committee as follows:

Are traffic officers adequately resourced, trained and supported?

  All indications suggest that the infrastructures to support Roads Policing are well placed with appropriately trained Roads Policing officers allocated correctly fitted and equipped vehicles that are "fit for purpose". A common complaint however is that Roads Policing priorities are subsumed to Force priorities thereby frustrating efforts to focus on Roads Policing issues.

  There is a recognised reduction in the number of Roads Policing officers however there have been efforts to redress this since 2003. Increases in Roads Policing resources may well have been negated through additional policing demands, primarily counter-terrorism. Such demands will have had an effect as high-speed resources such as Roads Policing units may be readily redeployed as conventional police resources. The primary dilemma is focused around existing Roads Policing resources being required to fulfil an increased police commitment. All too often immediate and urgent police priorities require a reallocation of resources and Roads Policing resources are often the first option that is available with reliance upon the capabilities of alternative agencies to fulfil a similar function, albeit with reduced legislative powers and capabilities.

  An examination of Police Forces and their Annual Policing Plans needs to take into account individual forces' local policing priorities, the urban/rural split, the nature and extent of the road network infrastructure and the Roads Policing fleet capabilities and distribution. In addition Police Forces are increasingly concentrating on a "like or like" comparison with Basic Command Unit and "family" groups—the current principal policing focus being directed towards crime reduction as opposed to casualty reduction issues.

  Proposals to merge Police Forces will undoubtedly have a significant impact in the future on the allocation and availability of Roads Policing resources as the reduction of the current 43 Police Forces in England and Wales to a lesser number will require a reconsideration of the Roads Policing response to reflect the new Police Force structures and the Roads Policing Strategy. Chief Constables current autonomy will need to be realigned to correlate to the new enlarged Police Force structures, core policing issues and the commitment to Roads Policing issues will need to be considered within current and future National Policing Plans and individual Police Force Annual Policing Plans.

What impact has the joint Roads Policing Strategy had on the work of traffic officers? How has it influenced the priority given to roads policing, and the resources invested?

  The Roads Policing Strategy has been incorporated into individual Police Force Annual Policing Plans however implementation varies from force to force dependent upon the prioritisation and the allocation of resources investment. Currently there is a National Roads Policing Strategy however there is no mandate for a national implementation programme and its adoption is based upon the local police force priorities; all too often experience suggests that Roads Policing issues are relegated to lesser prominence.

  The increase deployment of "non-sworn" law enforcement personnel has provided advantages and disadvantages as many of the responsibilities historic to "sworn" police officers require policing powers; conversely many functions undertaken by police officers were wholly inappropriate to highly trained and expensive Road Policing resources and did not require those police powers. A realignment of such responsibilities requires careful consideration and can be best described as a "sensitive balancing act" that necessitates regular review to ensure it appropriateness; a good example is the transfer of certain responsibilities from the Police Service to the Highways Agency's Traffic Officers where the interface between responsibilities is enhanced through joint control room operation at the Regional Traffic Control Centres. This is a developing relationship that will be fostered through close cooperation.

  Increased traffic flow should be reflected with a commensurate increase in Roads Policing resources; this is markedly important when the Police Service is required to be involved in the investigation of fatal and serious road collisions. The Roads Death Investigation Manual demands a criminal investigation process where a Senior Investigating Officer is appointed to ensure the due process of law is upheld; however this may be in conflict with the Highways Agency's remit to maintain traffic flow on primary routes.

Have police forces across the UK got the balance right between technology-led enforcement and officers carrying out Road Policing duties? What evidence is there that the changing balance between traffic officers and technology has influenced casualty reduction rates?

  Roads Policing resources primarily use technology-led enforcement as an alternative to conventional Roads Policing operational activities and not necessarily as a supplement. Significant attention should be given to the implications of the deployment of "speed"/"red light" cameras in areas of known fatal and serious collision locations, and despite the proven evidence that the siting of these cameras in such locations has reduced injury rates their installation has attracted vociferous media attention to the extent that it has adversely affected the police "brand" and generally alienated "middle-Britain" motoring public towards the Police Service.

  The uptake of Automatic Number Plate Recognition camera systems (ANPR) has provided varying results across all Police Forces. ANPR is a significant "crime reduction tool" and its employment through Projects Spectrum and Laser, reinforced by National Performance Indicators, has shown how effective this particular technology has become. The focus for the use of this technology is concentrated on counter-terrorism and crime reduction to reinforce the policy of "denying criminality the use of the roads" potentially to the disadvantage of road safety initiatives.

  "Intelligence-led" Roads Policing operations (involving GAIN, multi-agency partnerships, VOSA and DVLA interaction) are becoming increasingly sophisticated and are targeted to the most appropriate locations using technological support where multi-agency enforcement activity can effect maximum casualty reductions.

  Anecdotally Police Force Roads Policing resources remain the most effective means of moderating driver behaviour. Speed reduction is recognised to be the prime influence for casualty reduction statistics however determining the effectiveness and efficiency of this statement is a different matter; individual Traffic collision reports may assist this process but conventional Policing Performance Indicators are generally not subtle enough to identify the effect.

  In general terms, other than ANPR, there have been no major technological developments in recent years to have revolutionised operational Roads Policing; consequently existing Home Office Type Approved technology predominates.

  How effective and how efficient is roads policing in reducing the number of road casualties? Are police forces concentrating traffic enforcement on the right areas and activities to achieve maximum casualty reduction? To what extent do approaches to traffic enforcement and casualty reduction differ between forces across the country?

  As mentioned beforehand policing priorities are generally focused towards crime reduction, counter terrorism and public order issues, and as a result there is a reduced directive towards road casualty reduction. Whilst there is coterminosity between the Home Office and DfT aims and objectives it is the general perception that Department for Transport is the principal agency responsible for casualty reduction rather than the Home Office.

  To reinforce this perception many of the "softer" enforcement issues such as congestion charging, safer environment and parking /bus lane enforcement are not regarded as prime policing issues and therefore remain very low on policing priorities. Furthermore decriminalised offences are no longer seen to be a policing responsibility and are considered more applicable as an "extended law-enforcement family" responsibility. The potential for intrusion into traditional areas of policing should remain under continual review to ensure that important policing priorities are not subsumed incorrectly to an alternative agency.

  Widely varying dispositions of Roads Policing resourcing are evident throughout all Police Forces in England and Wales; this is based upon the individual Police Force priorities, crime statistics, geographical location, population, ethnic distribution, topography, road network and other influences. It is common for adjacent Police Forces to have dissimilar structures dependent upon the local requirements; consequently the approaches to traffic enforcement and casualty reduction are equally dissimilar.

How have technological developments affected both the detection and enforcement of drivers impaired through alcohol, drugs and fatigue? Is the best use being made of these technologies? What legislative, strategic and operational changes would improve the effectiveness of these technologies?

  There are many new technological challenges in the future as drugs, drink and/or fatigue impairment detectors and "alcolocks" are developed. These technologies remain in the early stages of development and operational availability and deployment is still a distant reality; nevertheless consideration should be given to enactment of appropriate legislation and the preparation of a training regime in anticipation of their introduction. Operational Roads Policing practices need to be considered and incorporated into enacting legislation to ensure compliance and to prevent abuse or avoidance tactics of the relevant technologies.

  Consideration may be given to a reduction of the current limits when a driver may drink and then drive a motor vehicle to further minimise legislative loopholes. There is evidence to suggest that that drinking/driving is on the increase; this may be attributed to a previous lack of Roads Policing resources, a lack of education and/or advertising campaigns. A recent disturbing phenomenon is the increased incidence of driving whilst under a drugs or drink/drugs "cocktail" combinations impairment; it is far harder to determine the actual cause of impairment and consequently less likely to result in prosecution. Whilst suitable impairment detection devices are currently being developed their operational implementation is still some way off and in the interim close operational liaison is required between Roads Policing and the Forensic Science Service to ensure prosecution is pursued wherever possible.

  Driver fatigue is even more difficult to detect and inappropriate action will prompt an adverse affect, particularly when there is a perception of discrimination between driver status and age groups; "Age Concern" have already lobbied government when the proposals to introduce such technology was first mooted.

  It is probable that the maximum benefits may not be gained from impairment technologies owing to the inability of the Roads Policing strategy to impose a national technology-led enforcement campaign across all Police Forces. This is an understandable situation as all new enforcement technologies require Home Office Type Approval; this process involves inherent time delays followed thereafter by a procurement process. There is an understandable reluctance for the Police Service to readily embrace new technologies as each one provokes hitherto unknown legal challenges; therefore the maxim "better the devil you know" is often preferable to prosecuting agencies. Limited budgets necessitate reasoned business cases and procurement processes that are in competition with other issues that may have higher priorities determined by the National Policing Plan and individual Police Force Annual Policing Plans.

How will the new funding arrangement announced by the Secretary of State affect the work of the road safety camera partnerships? What lessons can be learned from the experience of speed limit enforcement using camera technology?

  The new funding arrangements for road safety camera partnerships will need to be monitored closely to avoid them being considered as an additional funding option for Local Authorities. Whilst the criteria for camera deployment has been varied and increased the justification to do so will need to have strong supporting evidence and the reasons for their siting will have to be very evident and purpose-specific to satisfy the motoring public that the correct rationale has been considered on all occasions.

  Lessons need to be learnt from the considerable disquiet expressed throughout the motoring public regarding the extent of "speed camera" distribution and the prosecution process of Safety Camera Partnerships. The Police Service is regarded as implementing speeding prosecutions merely to supplement police budgets; this is an incorrect perception however one that is predominant and unlikely to change. The "hearts and minds" campaign to achieve a favourable attitude from the public towards road safety cameras is subject to considerable suspicion and the consequential disadvantage is that the long-term impact for the reputation of Roads Policing resources is they receive considerably less sympathy, tolerance, acceptance or support for policing activities. The vociferous antagonism towards road safety cameras has reached a stage whereby criminal action is directed at cameras on a regular basis.

How effective are multi-agency approaches to safety issues? What steps are required to improve partnership work between the police, Department for Transport, local authorities and other agencies?

  More formalised multi-agency structures with reporting framework are being increasingly considered across England and Wales. Common road safety issues are coterminous to organisations and are being replicated across England and Wales. The Central Policing Motorway Group in the Midlands has demonstrated "best practice" in the "Midlands Motorway Box" of the M6, M5, and M42 motorways that surround Birmingham. Several police forces have combined their Roads Policing resources, together with associated "extended police family" agencies; this successful policing model is being closely assessed for its impact, effectiveness and efficiency.

  Police Control Offices are being integrated into Highways Agency Joint Traffic Control Centres and this will undoubtedly bring significant benefits to both parties through the ready interchange of real-time data and information. The future challenge will be the continued integration of police resources into Traffic Control Centres particularly when more than one Police Force Control Room is relocated. Each Police Force has unique and highly individualised procedures, protocols and IT systems that will require gradual integration; this will be achieved through time and the mutual cooperation by all partners involved.

SUMMARY

  The current dilemma for Roads Policing is that it having been neglected somewhat across the UK Police Forces for a number of years efforts to redress that imbalance will be difficult to achieve and are often compromised through a proportionate lack of resources needed to compensate for additional policing demands, additional traffic flow and additional legislative requirements.

  The greatest threats to the Police Service's Roads Policing capacity remain the conflicting and often immediate policing priorities, rapidly shifting operational demands to respond to emerging issues and incidents that adversely affect all strategies, including the Roads Policing Strategy and the encroachment of competing "non-sworn" law enforcement agencies that are keen to extend their influence and capabilities. In recent years the Police Service has readily devolved its responsibilities to alternate organisations to better concentrate its efforts on current imperatives. To neglect, for very understandable reasons, one of its prime functions is a dangerous situation particularly when efforts are expended to retrieve "lost ground".

CONCLUSION

  In conclusion, the Intelligent Transport Society for the United Kingdom through its interest groups, members and industry links is ideally placed to provide independent expert advice into the effectiveness of traffic policing and welcomes further opportunities to assist the Transport Committee in this process.

14 February 2006