We'll all be joining the criminal classes

2:41pm Friday 1st August 2008

Comments (2)   Have your say »

THE subject of speed cameras probably gets more people wound up than any other issue in south Bucks.

Opinion is savagely divided between those who believe the devices are a life-saving necessity and the cynics who claim they are just a pointless revenue raiser serving only to soak law-abiding motorists.

Even my own personal opinion is divided on this topic. Like most of you, I loathe the fact that so many drivers have been criminalised for very minor offences.

But, on the other hand, I applaud the fact cameras have lowered the speed of traffic in some very dangerous areas.

I have, in my time, campaigned vigorously to stop certain cameras - while I have also led campaigns to have them placed on roads such as the M40.

Am I a hypocrite? No, I don't think so, because this is a complex issue.

Take the news two weeks ago that three areas in this part of the county had landed in a list of the ten worst speeding hotspots in the UK. Princes Risborough, Chalfont St Giles, and Holmer Green & Hazlemere were named in this top ten by an insurance firm which surveyed 1,600 places across the land.

Residents in these Bucks areas received around double the national average of speeding convictions. What is more, Bucks was placed as second behind Dorset as the county with the highest percentage of speeders.

It makes for terrible reading and perhaps we should all hang our heads in shame. But then again, perhaps not because questions have to be asked.

Does Bucks have a higher proportion of functioning speed cameras than elsewhere? Or is this Big Brother technology placed in areas more likely to catch errant motorists?

Take for example the mobile one I successfully battled a couple of years ago on Marlow Hill, High Wycombe. It caught a staggering amount of drivers because it was placed on the upward part of the hill just before the speed limit changed from 30 to 40mph.

All arguments were eventually rendered meaningless when the county council decided to increase the entire upper limit to 40mph.

At the time, I received lots of support from the public. But I also came in for criticism from people who accused me of encouraging dangerous driving and law-breaking.

I have taken calls in my time from distressed members of the public, angry because they believe I support speeding.

I don't. I hate it and always aim to abide by the limits whether or not there are speed cameras around - to such an extent I get hassled by tail-gating vehicles trying to intimidate me into driving faster.

What worries me is the way the cameras have criminalised a huge mass of decent citizens who previously had unblemished records. These are not boy racers, or dangerous sports car fanatics. For the most part, they are careful, experienced motorists who have occasionally strayed over a confusing limit.

I simply cannot believe the amount and type of people who have been convicted. Supporters of zero tolerance camera enforcement will say this is a good thing, but what it does do is lower the estimation of the law in the minds of right-minded people.

When I was young, a thousand or so years ago, it was considered reprehensible to have a motoring blemish against your name. Now it means virtually nothing. I hear respectable people making light of it all the time.

And worryingly, because they think the system is weighted against them, many now have no moral hesitation in flouting the system wherever possible. There's no stigma any longer in being a motoring criminal because all your friends are one as well.

The solution, however, is not to ban the cameras. As technology improves, there will doubtless be no need for them soon. Instead, you will have an all-encompassing satellite system that means no one can ever drive over any limit.

What is needed, therefore, is a more sensible approach that incorporates high-tech with common-sense by making roads safer while not hammering every single minor deviation.

I suggest, first of all, taking a more lenient line on speeding misdemeanours that are just, say, five miles over the limit. Drivers could still be fined but, crucially, should not be given points on their licences.

Ah, I hear you say, the wealthy ones would abuse this because they wouldn't care a stuff about the money. So, in that case, anyone with a worrying pattern of fines should have their situation reviewed by a panel and should stand to be penalised with points or even a ban.

This would mean there is still a huge deterrent to speeding and to obeying the cameras - but not at the risk of losing your livelihood or your means of transport if you accidentally stray a few times.

The specifics at this stage aren't that important; I have no doubt the authorities could work out a sensible system if they put their minds to it.

For the record, I have not as yet been one of those convicted. But, unless the system changes radically, it's only a matter of time before I and the rest of you non-offenders' out there join the criminal classes.