I NOTE your editorial (“Tough decisions must be taken on speed cameras”, The Herald, November 4) and am broadly in agreement with its sentiments. I am not, however, shocked at the recent revelation that many traffic enforcement camera sites are not a live threat to speeding drivers: that has never been the case.

Red signal enforcement started in Scotland in 1990, with speed cameras in 1993. For many years there was about one live camera for every four sites with dummy units at the others that provided a scare to errant motorists. Until 2000 the capital costs tended to be provided by local authorities as an investment in road safety, with police forces paying the running costs. Then, camera partnerships were formed and they received their costs from fine income. At no stage did any local authority or police force make a profit from motoring offences. The excess fine income always went to the Treasury, along with fines from weekend rammies after the dancing and so on. This scheme enabled investment in new equipment, but has come to an end. The original equipment is now obsolete in this digital age.

“Cameras cut crashes” was a publicity slogan that reflected the drop in casualties at fixed camera sites, with a reduction of 50 per cent in injuries being typical. All sites in Scotland were selected on the basis of having a significant injury history that would be best addressed by reducing speeds and thus the level of risk. Drivers have responded by reducing speeds and the number of fines dropped, but so did the crashes and the costs to health services and the lije, not to mention the personal suffering. Enforcement cameras are a very useful road safety measure when properly sited, after diligent analysis of the crash history.

It is time for governments to revisit the issue and to invest properly in all aspects of road safety: engineering, enforcement, education and encouragement. New equipment is needed and can be financially justified by the reduction in crashes and the attendant costs. That said, motorists should not be looking to what they can get away with, rather driving at appropriate speeds for the conditions that are fair to other road users. Speaking of fairness, some speed limits should be reviewed and adjusted, whether up or down.

We really should not need cameras, but unfortunately I don’t think that we are at that stage yet.

William Laird,

43 Bideford Crescent, Glasgow.