[Article] Govt plans to recoup lost stamp duty revenue from speed cameras

orbital83

I know there's already a speed cam thread but I think this warrants its own thread.
Particularly interested in Sandwich's viewpoint on this article.

Edit - should point out this article is from Oct 2006 but the fact we still have the same administration and indeed the references to stamp duty cuts make it highly relevant.

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=410449&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=NEWS&ct=5

Tele-Traffic's business is not limited to the UK. Ireland has bought more than 400 laser cameras from their company - and over there, the government is quite open about using cameras to raise revenue.

Mr Ricketts said the Irish government had made an election promise to reduce stamp duty and had made it clear they would make up the lost revenue from speeding fines.

'We have produced for them a new system to make up that revenue,' Mr Ricketts said. 'So they are going the opposite way to the UK Government. They are actually openly promoting speed enforcement as their revenue raiser.'

Sandwich

Not ducking your question but Ill keep my contributions following this post to the other thread as its too similar. As Ive posted there, the money raising aspect is a side show to the safety one. If (and Ill grant its still an 'if') speeding is a major source of road accidents, and cameras is a way of preventing it, then whether the govt raises a fortune as a by product of changing driving behaviour then so what. Drivers could have the last laugh - all obey the speed limit and the revenue to the govt and the private operator will be zero.

pburns

I'd rather have higher VRT than fish-in-a-barrel speeding clampdown!

jimmycrackcorm

The article is company marketing bluff.

milltown

pburns wrote: »

I'd rather have higher VRT than fish-in-a-barrel speeding clampdown!

That would be unfair on everybody. "Safety" cameras only penalise offenders.

D_murph

:mad:

well those of us with a brain always knew its about the money or the fines of 80 euro would be abolished and just the points given on your license instead :rolleyes:

of course there will always be people that actually believe its about the safety alone.

oh well.................sigh :rolleyes:

Wishbone Ash

John J wrote: »

this article is from Oct 2006 but the fact we still have the same administration

Not really. At that time there was only a FF/PD coalition.

Wishbone Ash

D_murph wrote: »

well those of us with a brain always knew its about the money

If it was just 'about the money' surely they would increase the fines to something like €1,000 per offence. It wouldn't effect non-offenders.

D_murph

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

If it was just 'about the money' surely they would increase the fines to something like €1,000 per offence. It wouldn't effect non-offenders.

im surprised that they dont really TBH.

im sure you always watch your speedometer so carefully that you never do even 51kmh in a 50kmh zone and the same for the other limits all over "just in case".

even on the roads with ridiculously low artificial speed limits that are put in place for money collecting. these same roads the guards regularly haunt most fiercely because after all they must be the most dangerous to drive on :rolleyes:

let he who is without sin.................:p

Wishbone Ash

D_murph wrote: »

im sure you always watch your speedometer so carefully that you never do even 51kmh in a 50kmh zone and the same for the other limits all over "just in case"

That's what Cruise Control is for.

I wouldn't rely too much on the speedo anyway as most tend to overmeasure speed, i.e. if your speedo indicates 80kph, you are probably doing about 73/74/75.

Re 51 kph: The vast majority of speeding offender are caught doing more that 50% over the posted limit. I've never heard of anyone being done for being just over the limit. It's a myth and anyway they factor in a fairly generous margin of error.

D_murph

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

That's what Cruise Control is for.

I wouldn't rely too much on the speedo anyway as most tend to overmeasure speed, i.e. if your speedo indicates 80kph, you are probably doing about 73/74/75.

Re 51 kph: The vast majority of speeding offender are caught doing more that 50% over the posted limit. I've never heard of anyone being done for being just over the limit. It's a myth and anyway they factor in a fairly generous margin of error.

i dont have cruise control unfortunately

ive seen from sat navs that the speedo in a car is accurate enough until you go over 100kmh (motorway of course ) so when you are doing 120kmh on the speedo you are actually doing 116-117 and it gets progressively slower than you think youre doing as you go faster than that.

i know that no guard will pull you for 51 in a 50 but i was making the point that we all "technically" speed at times but how much tolerance will these speed scameras have? not much id bet :rolleyes:

Steve

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

That's what Cruise Control is for.

I wouldn't rely too much on the speedo anyway as most tend to overmeasure speed, i.e. if your speedo indicates 80kph, you are probably doing about 73/74/75.

Re 51 kph: The vast majority of speeding offender are caught doing more that 50% over the posted limit. I've never heard of anyone being done for being just over the limit. It's a myth and anyway they factor in a fairly generous margin of error.

I don't think anyone can complain about being 50% over the limit - they deserve to be caught.

The guards generally would not 'do' people for a few kmh over the limit, or for going over the speed limit during an overtaking manoever.
This is an application of common sense to the situation, its far safer to do 100kph in an 80kph zone for a few seconds in order to minimise time on the wrong side of the road than spend the 5 times longer in danger doing 79.999kph as you pass.

I don't think the cameras will have this common sense feature.

The safety message this sends is to watch your speedo all the time, not the road.

Re cruise control: had it on my previous car, not really workable if there's any traffic around, was great for late night motorway driving though.

Wishbone Ash

stevec wrote: »

Re cruise control: had it on my previous car, not really workable if there's any traffic around, was great for late night motorway driving though.

I would certainly miss it if I didn't have it. As well as preventing me from going over the limit it also helps me to make progress on nearly empty motorways. I'm inclined to be a bit lazy at times and would be doing 90 or 100 when I could have been doing 120.

The worst thing about cruise control are those muppets who pass and then slow down again forcing me to pass them again and so on in a viscious circle. They probably think I'm speeding up and slowing down again!