Feeds

Speed-cam fines topped out in 2005

Strangely, UK.gov eased off in 2006

Security for virtualized datacentres

New falling motor-crime figures for 2005 published by the UK Ministry of Justice (MoJ? MinJ?) could be interpreted in a number of ways.

The Times and the RAC Foundation are pretty sure what they think.

"Public outrage leads to first fall in number of speed camera fines" runs the Thunderer headline.

“This shows the outcry by millions of drivers has finally paid off," the RAC's Edmund King told the tabloidsheet.

"There is no doubt that enforcement was getting out of hand, particularly with the use of speed cameras.

“The authorities have finally realised that showing a small degree of flexibility can be more effective than huge numbers of fines, even though they are making less money.”

The main number behind this is a 2 per cent drop in speed-cam fines during 2005, from 1.91 million to 1.87 million.

"The number is likely to have continued falling in 2006 because the policy that allowed police to keep a proportion of the fines to pay for more cameras ended in April of that year," says the Times.

So, just to be clear. Public outrage led the government to restrict cameras-begetting-cameras in 2006 - but the total number of fines actually fell in 2005, while the cams were still merrily breeding away.

We don't yet know what effect - if any - the outrage-driven policy change may have had. We do know that even with free camera growth, fines topped out anyway.

It's much the same story with parking fines, which saw a 3.5 per cent drop in 2005, a year before local ticketing targets were abolished by central government.

Is all this a case of public outrage rolling back over-aggressive enforcement, or a savage automated crackdown cowing the population into submission? Or even - as the government would no doubt contend - a case of drivers finally beginning to obey the democratically-enacted laws of the land after effective enforcement came in (paid for mostly by dangerous criminals rather than law-abiding citizens)?

Or is the law just an ass, sometimes? Perhaps 30mph in built-up areas is fair enough, though there are those who say it should be slower still; but is a 70mph cap really required on motorways? The Germans certainly don't think so.

You decide; the Times bit is here. And don't forget the less-visible privacy and surveillance issues attendant on the still-rapidly-growing nationwide ANPR numberplate-cam networks. ®

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

More from The Register

next story
Found inside ISIS terror chap's laptop: CELINE DION tunes
REPORT: Stash of terrorist material found in Syria Dell box
Show us your Five-Eyes SECRETS says Privacy International
Refusal to disclose GCHQ canteen menus and prices triggers Euro Human Rights Court action
Radio hams can encrypt, in emergencies, says Ofcom
Consultation promises new spectrum and hints at relaxed licence conditions
Heavy VPN users are probably pirates, says BBC
And ISPs should nab 'em on our behalf
Former Bitcoin Foundation chair pleads guilty to money-laundering charge
Charlie Shrem plea deal could still get him five YEARS in chokey
NORKS ban Wi-Fi and satellite internet at embassies
Crackdown on tardy diplomatic sysadmins providing accidental unfiltered internet access
prev story

Whitepapers

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk
A single remote control platform for user support is be key to providing an efficient helpdesk. Retain full control over the way in which screen and keystroke data is transmitted.
Top 5 reasons to deploy VMware with Tegile
Data demand and the rise of virtualization is challenging IT teams to deliver storage performance, scalability and capacity that can keep up, while maximizing efficiency.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.
Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops
Balancing user privacy and privileged access, in accordance with compliance frameworks and legislation. Evaluating any potential remote control choice.