Reduction in casualties

Image of a crashed vehicle

Casualty reduction is the sole purpose of safety cameras. They are no more a revenue generator for the Government than any other means of fines being paid for offences dealt with by the courts. Furthermore, contrary to public belief, there is no financial incentive for the police or any other Partnership member, to detect motorists using cameras. Not one penny collected from the cameras goes to the Nottinghamshire Safety Camera Partnership.

We don't want to catch motorists, we just want them to slow down!

Why? Well, nationally, these have been the effects on casualties at camera sites:

Both casualties and deaths were down - after allowing for the long-term trend, but without allowing for selection effects (such as regression-to-mean) there was a 22% reduction in personal injury collisions (PICs) at sites after cameras were introduced. Overall 42% fewer people were killed or seriously injured. At camera sites, there was also a reduction of over 100 fatalities per annum (32% fewer). There were 1,745 fewer people killed or seriously injured and 4,230 fewer personal injury collisions per annum in 2004. There was an association between reductions in speed and reductions in PICs.

Vehicle speeds were down - surveys showed that vehicle speeds at speed camera sites had dropped by around 6% following the introduction of cameras. At new sites, there was a 31% reduction in vehicles breaking the speed limit. At fixed sites, there was a 70% reduction and at mobile sites there was a 18% reduction. Overall, the proportion of vehicles speeding excessively (i.e. 15mph more than the speed limit) fell by 91% at fixed camera sites, and 36% at mobile camera sites.

There was a positive cost-benefit of around 2.7:1. In the fourth year, the benefits to society from the avoided injuries were in excess of 258million compared to enforcement costs of around 96million.

The public supported the use of safety cameras for targeted enforcement. This was evidenced by public attitude surveys, both locally and at a national level.

(Source:The National Safety Camera Programme Four-year evaluation Report - December 2005)

Click here to see this report in detail...>>