Article: Private speed cameras to 'shock' drivers

Seth Brundle

from http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=IRELAND-qqqm=news-qqqid=18296-qqqx=1.asp

22 October 2006 By Nicola Cooke
The public are in for a shock when private speed camera operators begin to monitor many of the country’s roads, according to the road safety chief.

Motorists can expect to see gardaý and the private camera operators on motorways and secondary roads working around the clock by March. Danger areas - named ‘‘red zones’’ - that have a high record of fatalities in the early hours of the morning, will soon receive special attention. Red zone areas in every county were published by the media last week.

The tender for the speed camera contracts is expected to be finalised this week, gardaý confirmed to The Sunday Business Post, with up to one third of the mobile or fixed cameras to be located in covert positions.

Noel Brett, chief executive of the Road Safety Authority (RSA), said the aim of private speed monitors was not to stop accidents, but to change driver behaviour over a period of time.
‘‘The policy is not one of interception or engaging in a high-speed chase after a vehicle, but rather making people realise that, if they speed, they will be caught sooner or later,” he said.

‘‘The aim is not pursuit or revenue intake, but one of getting motorists to comply with speed limits.

‘‘Considering the annual target is for 11 million camera images of cars - and there are 2.5 million cars in the country - most cars will be recorded an average of four times,” he said.

‘‘The Irish public are in for a shock, as they will never before have been subject to such a level of surveillance on the roads.”

The introduction of random breath testing last July resulted in a 51 per cent increase in drink driving detections in August, and a 71 per cent increase in September. In the first week of October, there were 411 arrests for drink driving alone. Superintendent John Farrelly, who heads the Garda Traffic Corps, said deaths on the roads were already down 15 on this time last year.

‘‘No matter what, the end objective is always to save lives. But to do that we have to change habits, and through all this new legislation - including the ban on mobile phones, random breath testing and private speed cameras - we believe we can significantly reduce the number of people killed on the roads,” he said.

The Traffic Corps head said it would take hundreds of employees to operate mobile and fixed speed cameras.

‘‘They will work round the clock with the aim of reducing red zones to amber (less dangerous), and amber to green (safest).

‘‘We have collated our information and know where and when the most treacherous roads are.”

peasant

I'd never thought I'd hear myself say this ...but for once I think they may just have got it right ...well semi-right anyway.

Read in the local rag this week where the red spots around our area will be, and yes ...they actually seem to have identified the most dangerous stretches of road and in all honesty I can find no reason why these spots shouldn't be controlled with speed cameras. Some of the red zones cover the favourite playgrounds of the local speed merchants and some cover just plain dangerous stretches of "ordinary" road.

Slowing down traffic in these spots has to be a good idea.


Why semi right then?
Well, call me cynical, but somehow I don't see anything being done engineeringwise to improve these red zones. Things like de-sharpening a few bends, improving road surfaces, putting down proper road markings etc ...instead the speed cameras will stay there forever or at least until they've financed themselves and made a bit of profit.

neacy69

i take it these private operators will only be able to issue fines surely a private body can't issue penalty points can they?

dahamsta

I have no problem with the cameras as long as they're in black spots, but the appointment of a private operator is a disgrace. Scumbag PDs at work again no doubt.

adam

cjt156

Can't win can you; if a Garda is spending his day holding a hairdryer in a ditch its "Why aren't you out catching the real criminals" - so privatise it!
What's wrong with privatising it? GO PDs! They're on a fixed contract; they don't earn per ticket.

I heard you can look up the zones online, do we know where?

TomMc

I have seen what only can be described as temporary surveillance cameras, been put up around Navan this morning, on some of the busy roads.

Gurgle

dahamsta wrote:

I have no problem with the cameras as long as they're in black spots, but the appointment of a private operator is a disgrace.

If the government did it directly through a contracter it would cost €12.6 million per camera and they wouldn't be able to see red cars.

dahamsta

cjt156 wrote:

What's wrong with privatising it?

What's wrong with keeping it under state control. It's a state issue. More importantly, you and everyone else will be complaining about implementation in a year or two. Can you say NCT?

GO PDs!

Yeah, because lowering the income tax rate by 2% on the highest tax bracket it so good for society.

They're on a fixed contract; they don't earn per ticket.

You know contracts expire and get renegotiated, right?

adam

mike65

Once was enough. Seems like a philosophical step fowards from the current non-sense. In NI the PSNI say "we want to STOP you speeding, not CATCH you speeding".

Mike.

cjt156

Oh, here we go.

Ok; if you earn more than 30k in this country you're on the top rate of tax. If you think that's rich I'm very sorry for you.
In actual fact its repeatedly been proven that lowering tax stimulates the economy and benefits all. Are we economically better off now after years of low-tax policy than we were in the '80s after decades of high-tax socialist mentality?

State control rarely returns a viable economic solution to this kind of issue. Aer Lingus, CIE, Telecom Eireann, the past state of road building versus the current policy of fixed contracts...how many need I list. Private industry will do it cheaper and more efficiently.

Yep, contracts expire, and when they do other private companies compete to get the job - see private clampers in Dublin for example. They want the business; they compete on price, and they free up the Gardai for the job they should be doing.

socialism is dead my friend ;VOTE PD! (go on Michael McD!!!)

dahamsta

Sorry Mike, Boards went slow on me; you could have just deleted it.

Many of the examples you give actually prove the point cjt156: TE built and ran one of the most advanced telecommunications networks in the world, for example - the Irish Goverment screwed it up when they privatised it - and I don't see how the current road contracts can be listed as a success. Tolls are a success? I call them a step backwards.

I've said my piece on the PD's, I won't take the thread any further off-topic.

adam

Savman

is this the Motors or Politics forum?

pity they couldn't outsource drink driving checks and kill the problem once and for all.

cjt156

I remember the 70's when my parents ordered their phone from the Dept of P&T and then settled in for the 3 month wait...this is in a Dublin suburb with the telephone exchange across the street!
D'ya reckon you phone bill is higher or lower now than before privatisation? And how much costly, inefficient staff did the government shed before it was floated?

It was announced yesterday that the new N6 section will come in 1 yr ahead of schedule and under budget; do you remeber that happening before the current fix-contract system?

Sorry to go off point repeatedly but if we are talking about enforcement then privateers are the way to go. They have a fixed contract to monitor a set number of vehicles - not catch them, just monitor them. If they are true to their word and the red zones are monitored properly I don't see how this can be a bad thing. Leaves the Gardai free to get on with other business.

maidhc

dahamsta wrote:

What's wrong with keeping it under state control.

Because the health service/bord gais/esb/county councils are somehow examples that should be followed?

I'm all for private speed cameras provided the whole thing is sensible. e.g. in Dangerous places..when it is wet.. at night.. and giving a reasonable margin of appreciation for the speed limits.

dahamsta

maidhc wrote:

Because the health service/bord gais/esb/county councils are somehow examples that should be followed?

The same could be said of that horrendous example of monopoly creation, Eircom. Or how about the dumb privatisation to end all dumb privatisations, Railtrack? And county councils? WTF? Are you trying to tell us that county councils should be privatised now? I'll reserve comment on that for fear of being banned for personal abuse...

I'm all for private speed cameras provided the whole thing is sensible

That's the problem, it won't be. It'll be done to maximise revenue; if not in this contract then in the renegotiated or next one. Corporate directors, as we are so often told, have a duty to their shareholders, not the public or the government. And the larger they get, the further away they get from a dictionary with the word "morals" in it.

adam

mike65

dahamsta wrote:

Sorry Mike, Boards went slow on me; you could have just deleted it.

adam

I quit about 6 weeks back. Could'nt hack it. Was going stir-crazy reading everything several times a day.

Mike

dahamsta

mike65 wrote:

I quit about 6 weeks back. Could'nt hack it. Was going stir-crazy reading everything several times a day.

Oops, sorry again, didn't notice. Know the feeling, believe me.

adam

maidhc

dahamsta wrote:

The same could be said of that horrendous example of monopoly creation, Eircom. Or how about the dumb privatisation to end all dumb privatisations, Railtrack? And county councils? WTF? Are you trying to tell us that county councils should be privatised now? I'll reserve comment on that for fear of being banned for personal abuse...

Most county council work is now contracted out. I know a guy actually who lays kerbs on contract for Cork CoCo. Before he can start work the council guys must be present, and guess what they do all day: S.F.A.

Yeah, selling the copper with Eircom was silly, I'll give you that one.

dahamsta wrote:

Corporate directors, as we are so often told, have a duty to their shareholders, not the public or the government. And the larger they get, the further away they get from a dictionary with the word "morals" in it.
adam

You cannot blame a company for making money. If private speed cameras end up a farce, it wont be the private sector to blame, it will be the government for making a mess of the contract.

One thing that does worry me is if payment is on the number of cars clocked irrespective of fines issued. It would seem the best way to monitor the maximum number of vehicles is not on a extremely dangerous road (e.g. Mallow - Fermoy if anyone is familiar), but on a motorway.

Stephen

Where can we get a list of the "red zones"? My local paper has nothing about them.

Sam Vimes

cjt156 wrote:

socialism is dead my friend ;VOTE PD! (go on Michael McD!!!)

eh no, for so many many reasons

Dr. Loon

Stephen wrote:

Where can we get a list of the "red zones"? My local paper has nothing about them.

Why do you need to know where red zones may be? Surely you drive within the speed limit?

maidhc

Dr. Loon wrote:

Why do you need to know where red zones may be? Surely you drive within the speed limit?

Wouldn't it be beneficial for everyone to know where they are. Even if it meant people slowed down and didn't get caught?

dahamsta

Commander Vimes wrote:

eh no, for so many many reasons

You're wasting your time Vimes. This is a person that tried to suggest that when you hit 30k you pay 42% on all of it, which is either incredibly obtuse or downright dishonest. Given the comment you replied to, I'd favour the former. You know what they say about cheerleaders...

adam

cjt156

Quote;
Ok; if you earn more than 30k in this country you're on the top rate of tax.
Unquote.

Where do I state you pay that rate on all of your earnings?

Stephen

Dr. Loon wrote:

Why do you need to know where red zones may be? Surely you drive within the speed limit?

I'd rather not get killed in them, thanks.

jhegarty

Great idea.. as long as they use the money collected to fix dangerous roads (fix current ones , not build new ones)....

maidhc

dahamsta wrote:

You're wasting your time Vimes. This is a person that tried to suggest that when you hit 30k you pay 42% on all of it,

No he didn't!

dahamsta

The implication was there, intentionally; typical PD fanboi politicking.

Anyone earning than that should be able to afford to pay the top rate of tax on the amount over the threshold, which is of course where the top rate kicks in. They'll pay the usual rate on amounts below that.

If an adjustment needs to be made, it should be the threshold level, not the percentage. If anything the percentage should go up, although of course we'd have to get the top earners to actually pay their taxes first.

Wealthy are still getting away tax-free (from the indo, no less)

adam

maidhc

dahamsta wrote:

The implication was there, intentionally; typical PD fanboi politicking.

No. It wasn't. His point was there is still room for tax cuts. Perhaps there is, perhaps there isn't. I suspect there is.

dahamsta wrote:

Anyone earning than that should be able to afford to pay the top rate of tax on the amount over the threshold, which is of course where the top rate kicks in. They'll pay the usual rate on amounts below that.

30k is small money to be hitting the top band tbh.

dahamsta wrote:

If an adjustment needs to be made, it should be the threshold level, not the percentage. If anything the percentage should go up, although of course we'd have to get the top earners to actually pay their taxes first.

adam

Yep. I don't think anyone is arguing with that.

I appreciate you dislike the PDs, but it would be more constructive to go canvassing for Joe Higgins or the SWP if you are so opposed to private enterprise and low taxation. I don't think they would bring in private speed cameras... the trabant can't go that fast.

dahamsta

Actually I'm a self-employed businessman so I sit well to the right of the aforementioned (although admittedly to the left of middle). But thanks for the patronising comment, your suggestion that someone that dislikes the PDs has to be a socialist demonstrates your level better than I ever could.

adam