I am neither professionally nor politically involved in transport and highways matters. I have been very concerned for many years of the apparent license given to vehicle drivers to flout the law with the resulting damage to others. As a driver of many years standing I can also view it from behind the steering wheel.

  I have been involved for some years in a wide variety of consultations over highways matters in Derbyshire and the East Midlands, with most levels of professionals involved, and with other members of the public. My response comes from this experience.

SUMMARY

  Over reliance in the "magic" of technology has not replaced the reduction in policing of our roads.

  Locally, policing of roads is not seen as a high priority and the police appear to be free to make their own choices over this.

  Relying on cameras to police road speeds means that all other lengths of roads where the majority of collisions occur are neglected.

  Rules set out in Whitehall often do not allow concerned local professionals to deal effectively with their particular problems.

  Multi-agency approach is ineffective in ensuring road speeds are curbed.

  1.  In answer to your third question on balance between technology and officers in person, my answer is that it is not right. That in relation to casualty reduction cannot be answered in general terms and has to be looked at in individual areas.

  In Derbyshire the police have apparently used the excuse of cameras to dramatically reduce the checking of road vehicle speeds by individual officers, and the casualty rate reduction is struggling to meet targets, yet alone improve on them.

  2.  In answer to your fourth question on efficiency of roads policing, I can only answer that this appears to be very low. Some authorities such as Northamtonshire have made positive steps to reduce speeding that includes publicity on casualty rates on certain stretches of road, and the offer to speeding drivers of an intensive course in the reasons they should not speed. They report this as being successful in reducing speeding by these drivers. In Derbyshire their appears to be a lack of willingness to enforce speed limits and an unwillingness to publicise the casualties on the roads where they occur.

  3.  Road Safety Partnerships appear hamstrung by the DfT guidelines on where these cameras may be placed. The necessity for a high record of KSI before cameras are installed should be removed. The moral issue raised of asking for sacrificial victims before we make our roads safer should be completely unacceptable in a civilised society.

  This KSI requirement means that cameras are only used in places where collisions occur regularly. Statistics show that the majority of collisions occur quite randomly across the road network and so will never be caught on camera.

  The effectiveness of fixed cameras is reduced by:

—  the necessity for them to be made very obvious to drivers

—  allowing drivers to use camera detection devices

—  drivers reducing their speeds for the short distance over which most cameras operate

—  the majority of camera sites not containing a camera.

  The effectiveness of mobile cameras is also reduced for the first above reason.

  4.  My answer to the question on the effectiveness of multi-agency approach in Derbyshire is that it appears to have set back progress rather than improved it.

—  The police say it is the job of the Safety Camera Partnership to control speeding.

—  The Safety Camera Partnership say they can only put in cameras where they comply with DfT guidelines.

—  The Derbyshire County Council say they have no influence on how the police allocate their resources.

—  The police say the highways authority have to introduce `traffic calming' features on the roads if they want speed limits reduced.

—  The Highways Authority say they do not have the money to introduce such schemes except in a way limited in both number and effectiveness.

—  The introduction of Community Forums in Chesterfield lead to two full days of public debate by local people on "Major Causes of Concern". The number of references relating to dangers of and on the roads exceeded the number of references to crime. Yet road safety was not mentioned anywhere in the resulting Community Safety Strategy. The excuse being that as the Borough was not the Highways authority it had no power in the matter. This in spite of being "In Partnership" with all the above bodies.

Avoiding responsibility by "passing the buck" has been the result.

  I am unable to see how reducing traffic speeds and enforcing speed limits can be improved through the existing partnership arrangements. The incredible amounts of time and paperwork work involved in and between these organisations blocks the job of getting things done.

CONCLUSION

  A.  Whilst human casualties resulting from collisions should be a main reason for reducing traffic speeds, there are many other reasons for doing so:

—  An estimated 20,000 people a year dying before their time from vehicle pollution.

—  Reduction in noise.

—  Reduction in danger and community severance caused by traffic.

—  Reduction in road congestion.

—  Increase in road capacity.

—  Not least—reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, and thus global warming.

  B.  A single organisation is required to enforce road speeds, which suggests a transport police force. This will no doubt be strongly opposed by existing police forces. This argument should only be accepted if our present police change their attitude of "not wanting to upset law abiding citizens" by catching them for speeding. Why speeding is not breaking the law is unexplained.

  C.  One way of overcoming the problem of B) might be to make exceeding the speed limit a criminal offence.

  D.  Barbara Castle when Minister of Transport changed the belief that drinking and driving was perfectly acceptable to the present position where it is regarded as socially unacceptable and is widely avoided.

  What about a similar campaign to convert speeding from a "normal" way of driving to being socially unacceptable?

  E.  The technological method of controlling maximum vehicle speeds and setting these controllers from roadside beacons is now available. What is required is the political will to introduce them, along with reduced speed limits in many places.

14 February 2006