Safe Speed Forums

SPEED CAMERA SELL OFF FURY

THE threat of private companies handing out speeding fines is hanging over hard-pressed drivers.

Only months after Government funding cuts meant relief for drivers running the gauntlet of traffic cameras and heavy fixed-penalty fines, come fears of a radical new system.

Mick Giannasi, head of roads policing at the Association of Chief Police Officers, proposes that the issuing of tickets and collection of fines should be “outsourced”.

The scheme, which could mark the end of local police, councils and courts administering penalties, comes as councils begin to pull the plug on partnerships in response to cuts in Government road safety grants.

However, rank-and-file police officers fear it could be the thin end of a wedge that triggers an American-style privatisation of the UK’s cameras. Last year, motorists were fined £87million for speeding, more than £65million of it imposed after they fell foul of the country’s 6,000 static traffic cameras.

Under current law, fines can only be issued on the authority of the local chief constable and collected by officials engaged by magistrates’ courts.

The thought of road fines falling into private hands worries some policemen.

Alan Jones, lead roads policing officer at the Police Federation, which represents officers up to the rank of chief inspector, said: “I understand the fear and costly consequences of a shift towards privatisation.

“I also have concerns over data management and information sharing. We cannot afford the consequences of the private sector managing camera enforcement.”

Mr Giannasi, who is also Chief Constable of Gwent, has written to road safety minister Mike Penning expressing his alarm at the unintended results of cuts in Department for Transport funding.

He has proposed that the camera network should be retained at a reduced cost by outsourcing “back office” functions.

“If you are going to have safety cameras, you’ll need an administrative system to underpin it,” he said. “One option is to have fewer locations where data processing and the administration of justice takes place.”

Dan Campsall, of Thames Valley Safer Roads Partnership, which last month axed speed cameras in Oxfordshire when the county council withdrew funding, said: “We already have civilian staff operating under the authority of the chief constable. It doesn’t need a police officer to do it.”

A DfT spokeswoman added: “It is up to local partnerships to decide what measures are best.

“If private companies are brought in, it must be within the rules of camera law enforcement.”

After all, most clamping staff are ex-police or forces.

Private Operators set to cash in under plans drawn up by UK's most senior traffic policeman

The threat of private companies handing out speeding fines is hanging over hard-pressed drivers.

Only months after government funding cuts meant relief for drivers running the gaunlet of traffic cameras and heavy fixed penalty fines, comes fears of a radical new system.

Mick Giannasi, head of roads policing at the Association of Chief Police Officers, proposes that the issuing of tickets and collection of fines should be "outsourced". The scheme, which could mark the end of local police, councils and courts administering penalties, comes as councils begin to pull the plug on partnerships in response to cuts in government road safety grants.

However, rank-and-file police officers fear it could be the thin end of the wedge that triggers an American-style privatisation of the UK's cameras.

Last year, motorists were fined £87 million for speeding, more than £65 million of it imposed after they fell foul of the country's 6,000 static cameras.

Under current law, fines can only be issued on the authority of the local chief police constable and collected by officials engaged by magistrates' courts.

The thought of road fines falling into private hands worries some policemen. Alan Jones, lead roads policing officers at the Police Federation, which represents officers up to the rank of chief inspector, said: "I understand the fear and costly consequences of a shift towards privatisation. I also have concerns over data management and information sharing. We cannot afford the consequences of the private sector managing camera enforcement."

Mr Giannasi, who is also Chief Constable of Gwent, has written to road safety minister Mike Penning expressing his alarm at the unintended results of cuts in Department of Transport funding. He has proposed that the camera network should be retained at a reduced cost by outsourcing "back office" functions. "If you are going to have safety cameras, you'll need an administration system to underpin it," he said. "One option is to have is to have fewer locations where data processing and the administrating of justice takes place."

Dan Campsall of Thames Valley Safer Roads Partnership, which last month axed sped cameras in Oxfordshire when the county council withdrew funding said: "We already have civillian staff operating under the authority of the chief constable. It doesn't need a police officer to do it."

A DfT spokesman added: "It is up to local partnerships to decide what measures are best. If private companies are brought in, it mmust be within the rules of camera law enforcement."