Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

CAMERAS SAVING 100 LIVES A YEAR

  • Comment
The number of people killed or seriously injured at sites where ...
The number of people killed or seriously injured at sites where

safety cameras are in use has fallen by 40%, transport secretary

Alistair Darling announced today. This equates to over 100 fewer

deaths a year.

The results come from an independent report evaluating the first

three years of the safety camera scheme and coincide with the

publication of details of every site where a camera may be used,

including data on the reasons for their approval and the impact they

have had on casualties.

The three year report covering 24 partnerships shows:

Effect on casualties at camera sites - beyond the long-term downward

trend

* There was a 40% reduction in the number of people killed or

seriously injured (KSI)

* There were 870 fewer KSIs per year, including over 100 fewer

deaths

* There was a 33% fall in injury accidents - 4,030 fewer per year

* There was a 35% reduction in pedestrians killed or seriously

injured

Effect on speed

* Average speeds at new sites fell by around 7% or 2.4mph

* Average speed at urban sites fell by around 8%

* The number of vehicles speeding at new camera sites dropped by 71%

Other findings

* 79% of people asked support the use of cameras to reduce

casualties;

* The benefit to society through casualties saved is about£221

million per year.

Mr Darling said:

'These figures prove that cameras save lives. The number of people

speeding has come down and there has been a significant reduction in

deaths and injuries at camera sites.

'Up to ten people are killed on our roads each day. We owe it to them

and their families to do everything we can to improve road safety

even further.

'Most camera sites have achieved good results. We will be asking the

partnerships where results were not as good as other sites to see

what more could be done to achieve the greatest casualty reductions.'

The release of the casualty data coincides with the publication of

detailed camera site data. This shows the location of every approved

camera site and gives the road safety justification.

Mr Darling added:

'We've published the location of every site where a camera may be

used. These show why the cameras were installed and the effect they

have had on casualties. The vast majority have delivered real

benefits in safety and prove that the cameras are justified and

they're effective.

'I have asked the partnerships who operate the cameras to take a look

at the details of the sites. It is for them to ensure that the

cameras which have had less impact on reducing casualties are needed

and are still the best road safety solution.'

The following tables show the casualty reduction at camera sites.

Table 1 shows the reduction in killed and seriously injured in the

partnerships who have been in the scheme for 18 months or more.

Estimates of the combined effect on KSIs of cameras operating under

cost recovery for more at least eighteen months, by partnership area

Overall effect on KSIs

Name %

Cambridgeshire -55%

Derbyshire -17%

Lancashire -58%

Lincolnshire -18%

Norfolk -56%

North Wales -68%

Northamptonshire -46%

Nottingham (City) -33%

Staffordshire -30%

Strathclyde -34%

Thames Valley -43%

Warwickshire -42%

**Although Cleveland and Essex had reductions in the frequency of

KSIs at camera sites, there was insufficient data for the model to

produce reliable estimates for these areas.

Estimates of the combined effect on Personal Injury Collisions (i.e.

all severities) of cameras operating under cost recovery, by

partnership area

Effect on Personal Injury Collisions (per annum)

Effect on Personal Injury Collisions

(per annum)

Name Effect on PICs

Avon, Somerset and Gloucestershire

- Avon and Somerset -13%

- Gloucestershire -23%

Bedfordshire -42%

Cambridgeshire -21%

Cleveland -50%

Derbyshire -23%

Essex -23%

Fife -15%

Lancashire -54%

Leicestershire -11%

Lincolnshire -24%

London -35%

Norfolk -41%

North Wales -41%

Northamptonshire -46%

Nottinghamshire

- Nottingham (City) -16%

- Nottinghamshire (excluding City) -12%

South and Mid Wales - South Wales -32%

- Dyfed-Powys -28%

- Gwent -39%

South Yorkshire -60%

Staffordshire -20%

Thames Valley -28%

Warwickshire -23%

West Yorkshire -72%

Wiltshire -64%

** Although Hampshire and Strathclyde had reductions in the frequency

of PICs at camera sites, there was insufficient data for the model to

produce reliable estimates for these areas.

Notes

1. The independent report was commissioned by the Road Safety

Division of the Department for Transport and produced by University

College London and PA Consulting Group.

2. The three year report and data on individual camera sites are

available at www.dft.gov.uk

3. For cameras installed before a partnership joined the programme

the data in column G shows the average annual KSI casualty before the

site was brought into the programme. This may reflect a period after

the site was established. As such the camera may have already reduced

casualties which the table would not show.

4. The pilot system began in April 2000 and lasted until March 2002.

The eight areas involved were: Cleveland, Essex, Lincolnshire,

Northamptonshire, Nottingham, South Wales, Strathclyde and Thames

Valley. National roll-out began with a first tranche in October 2001

and added safety camera partnerships for Cambridgeshire, Derbyshire,

Lancashire, Norfolk, North Wales, Staffordshire and Warwickshire. In

a second tranche Avon, Somerset and Gloucestershire, Bedfordshire,

Hampshire, Leicestershire, London, joined the scheme in April 2002.

5. Casualty reduction for those counties appears in this report.

Other counties have since joined the scheme but after the scope of

this report. They are: From July 2002: Dorset, Kent & Medway, London

(metropolitan and city). From October 2002: Devon & Cornwall,

Hertfordshire, Sussex, West Midlands, Grampian. Joined 2003:

Cheshire, Cumbria, Greater Manchester, Humberside, North Yorkshire,

Northumbria, Suffolk, West Mercia, Lothian & Borders, Dumfries &

Galloway, Tayside, Northern Ireland.

6. All casualty and accident reductions shown take account of the

long-term national trend.

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.