Drivers split over cameras

13.58 | 11 August 2010 | | 2 comments

An IAM (Institute of Advanced Motorists) survey has found that while a majority of people agree with the government’s policy to reduce safety camera funding, a significant majority are supportive of cameras in principle.

The survey of nearly 1,000 respondents found that 44% supported government proposals to cut central funding of camera operations, with 30% unsure or expressing no opinion and 26% opposed.

However, safety cameras received a 70% approval rating overall.

Kevin Delaney, IAM head of road safety, said: “A lot of people like the idea of a camera on their street, slowing the traffic and making their area safer, but feel cheated when they confront one on a main road or in a different area.

“Rather than being purely hypocritical, it suggests drivers are seeing the lifesaving effects of cameras, but resent being caught out by them.”

The figures show a big difference between the sexes, with 55% of men supporting the switch-off, whereas only 33% of women agreed.

For more information contact the IAM Press Office on 020 8996 9777


Comment on this story

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Report a reader comment

Order by Latest first | Oldest first | Highest rated | Lowest rated

    If the cameras were so spectacular in reducing the accident rates throughout the country [something the government needed to do as part of the EU directives] then why o why are they now turning their backs on them as if they are not of any significant importance in keeping accidents down?

    Has the government decided on a value to human life and suffering and is no longer interested in protecting its population?

    Or is it no longer prepared to throw monies away on a farce.

    Bob Craven – Lancs
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    Do safety cameras really need to be centrally funded? It has been reported that the costs of installing and running cameras is more than covered by the revenue raised in fines or education referral fees.

    Let local authorities keep the income raised and pay the cost of running the cameras themselves. They could also use any surplus to fund other road safety projects. Then, if there’s any surplus left, it could go to central government. There you go – the big society – no need for goverment to get involved, all done and dusted at local level. The wheels of central government red tape could be rolled back. Hold on a minute! We’ve been here before haven’t we? Didn’t it used to work a bit like this? Good stuff this big society! Great if it helps cut costs, and facilitates the passing of the buck to somebody else when it goes wrong! Perhaps not so good when you lose control over a bit of income, or it leads to the unintended result of a first class safety measure remaining, that’s not entirely popular with the voters. Am I being cynical? Oh well, it’s just a thought!

    Mark – Wiltshire
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.