Are speed cameras revenue raisers?
Here in Australia we have had speed cameras on our roads for around 10 years. Some are static cameras, others are mobile vans. A great deal of effort is put into catching people speeding. We are told by the authorities that the speed camera programs are designed to save lives and cut down on accidents and injuries. “Speed kills” is a prominent and common government message.
Personally, I agree that excessive speed inappropriate for the circumstances should be curbed. I have never been photographed by a speed camera and in 31 years of driving (first obtained a licence at 14) have been booked twice for speeding – once in 1979 when I was a young hothead and once in 2001 when I was caught by a laser gun doing under 15 kmh over the limit. My comments therefore do not stem from any personal “axe to grind”.
I object to official denials that speed cameras and similar are revenue raisers. This is because a simple understanding of economic principles and basic human nature indicates otherwise.
Let us consider the claims by officialdom that they think saving lives is important and that speed cameras and such like are a key tool for doing this. I agree that speed monitoring devices are a useful tool, however I don’t believe that officialdom is really interested in saving lives – I suspect that their motivation is to use speeding as a way of raising revenue.
A human life is extremely valuable and the loss of a life is a very serious issue – it has huge and long-term effects and implications. I’m sure that most readers will agree with me on the value of a life. It is clear that excessive speed is a key contributory factor to deaths and injuries on our roads – officialdom acknowledges this, which is quite clear from their “speed kills” message.
Why then, do we have a road traffic offence penalty system with such a paltry level of fines for people exceeding the speed limit? Bearing in mind the severe consequences of excessive speed – loss of life, maiming and so on one would think that the penalty would reflect the seriousness of the offence. It doesn’t however, and so the speeding problem continues. We don’t need experts to tell us that speeding is still very serious problem; we can see it every time we travel and it is clear that the current speed enforcement methodology is not working.
A basic understanding of human nature tells us that people are deeply affected by money and the loss thereof. I think that many will agree that if we had a speeding penalty system with very large fines for anyone exceeding the speed limit by more than 20 km per hour then we would see a big reduction in speeding. It is simply a matter of setting the fines at such a high level that people change their behaviour. What is the value of a human life after all? Why should people who will not willingly curb their excessive speed be immune from severe financial losses, with perhaps the possibility of jail for those who won’t or can’t pay? How serious is the loss of human life? What dollar value shall we put on it?
I don’t think we really need an understanding of (economic) supply and demand curves to know that should speeding fines be increased to extremely high levels, that the revenue from such fines would drop off severely. It seems clear that officialdom, despite saying that they are concerned that speed kills, have no real interest in reducing the road toll from excessive speed. I’m sure that many people conclude, myself included, that officialdom is really motivated by revenue raising.
Online news articles added after blog post was written:
The £1m-a-year motorway speed camera that is causing accidents
Related Posts:
Category: Society and Community
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Alex Webley. Alex Webley said: Are speed cameras revenue raisers? http://su.pr/2PYg1A [...]