Anonymous submissions
Whistle blowers welcome!


We have invited folk to send in information anonymously using the form (here). We've started to get some interesting stuff. We'll collect and publish them on this page.

From Real Justice on 11th August 2003

In the name of justice and within precisely designed parameters there is a need for speed cameras.  Beyond that the situation becomes dangerous.

We are now in that danger zone where we must now spend too much time watching our speedometers rather than the road ahead. 

All of us law abiding citizens are in a "no win" situation and that accounts for the vast majority of drivers.  If you are exceeding the speed limit there are a variety of laws you are breaking.  Should you be watching your speedometer instead of the road ahead, you could be hit with maybe manslaughter, dangerous driving, undue care and attention, etc.

What are we supposed to do?

Safe Speed comments: Yes. We agree it's got dangerous. Please tell us what skills and experience you base your opinion on.

From FYI on 12th August 2003

Most areas have installed safety cameras over the past ten years, and as such these cameras were installed against different objectives and different criteria. The difficulty for partnerships is that cameras that have been in place for a significant length of time will often not have the speeding or casualty history to ensure acceptance in to the programme, and indeed will have achieved their objectives. 

Partnerships have 3 options for sites that do not meet current criteria:

  • Include some or all as part of the 15%  (see section xxxxx);
  • Leave camera in place but do not enforce (i.e. become a ‘dormant’ site).  Site should be monitored and data should still be included in the operational case and the monitoring tool.  Appropriate costs for maintenance and monitoring of the site can still be recovered;
  • Consider decommissioning the site where it serves no current traffic calming purpose (see section xxxxxx) for example where road conditions and layout of site has changed.
Cameras that meet current criteria can of course be included in the operational case.

Safe Speed comments: Very interesting. Do you work for a Scamera partnership? Does that info come from "The Handbook"? 

From Careful Commuter on 23rd October 2003

In Cardiff a new speed camera has been installed as you leave the Bute Town Tunnel heading towards the motorway. This dual carriageway was until recently considered safe at the national speed limit. Suddenly and cynically the speed limit is reduced to 50mph to co-incide with the installation of a stealth tax camera.

Locally a wide, clear and straight semi-rural road, with wide verges and a separate cycle path beyond the verges has a 40mph limit (Lavernock road between Cosmeston and Sully near Barry). If you turn off this road onto Beach road or Swanbridge road you will find yourself on single track roads with no pavement, obscured bends, high hedges and no pavements. Here the national speed limit applies. Something is back to front.

I have recently witnessed a crash caused by a speed camera. On the M4 westbound near Port Talbot, the speed limit has been reduced to 50mph and a speed camera installed. This has caused significant motorway congestion. The rubbernecking effect causes tailbacks and shunts. Recently a lorry driver joining the motorway from a slip road near the cameras saw a gap in the stacked up traffic just wide enough for him enter. As he manoevered, checking the traffic and his mirrors the car that he was slipping in behind noticed the camera. The car braked, the lorry driver was still looking over his shoulders and
caught the tail end of the car in front as he pulled out of the slip road. The car was turned sideways and pushed along the motorway sideways on for about 100 yards. Speed cameras are a menace and I do not believe the silly statistics that the vested interests trot out.

Calling for real road safety, based on truth

We have a strict editorial policy regarding factual content. If any fact anywhere on this web site can be shown to be incorrect we promise to remove it or correct it as soon as possible.
Copyright © SafeSpeed 2003
Created 12/08/2003. Last update 23/10/2003