This Morning 1532were saying : And an update... ------------ Before 'phoning 999, van driver behind van driver and Saab driver and I get woman out of nova and...
Uno Hoo! Thus finally dropping all pretence that the cameras are not about raising revenue. Well............you will note the above from the OP: "Researchers from University College London and PA Consulting visited 4,000 camera sites across the UK over a four-year period. They found there was a 42% reduction in the number of people end or seriously injured at camera sites and 22% fewer personal injury collisions." Now if that is correct - and fines were being spent on more cameras, then I cannot see how you can argue about 'pretence'.
When the money *was* only being spent on cameras, then the claim that some cameras were deliberately placed in inappropriate positions simply to raise revenue could be partly refuted with the fact that no one was making any money out of it. If in future the money raised is to be used to fund that which should be funded by the highways agency or the council in the first place, then the fines are not really fines, but taxes (albeit voluntary).
This Morning 1531Adrian says... Completely illogical and I think his colleague thought so too. His argument was that because I didn't have a numberplate on the trailer...
That would also mean the expected revenue will be budgeted for, with the hope and expectation that it will be forthcoming, otherwise there will be an unwelcome cash shortage. Therefore there will be less of a desire to see a change in driver behaviour than the desire for a steady income stream. So the 'there's no profit in it' claim is bogus.
-- Rob
