Damning may be too harsh a word to describe the overall findings of the ACT Auditor-General's performance report - released this week - on the effectiveness of speed and red light cameras, but it nonetheless makes for troubling reading. Maxine Cooper considered three fundamental questions in her audit: are the four types of speed cameras employed here effective at reducing speed, are they reliable, and is their number and placement beyond reproach? On all three questions, she has found fairly conclusively in the negative. That assessment will add weight to the views of many motorists that the main reason cameras were introduced here was for revenue raising, not safety enhancement.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The territory government has reaped $106 million in fines from the network since 1999; about $7 million on average. Last year, the cameras netted close to $11.5 million, helped in part by regular additions to the network, including the installation of point-to-point cameras on Athllon Drive in Tuggeranong and on Hindmarsh Drive in Woden. That revenue growth, always welcome in an economy as narrowly based as the ACT's, could be at risk, however, if the government accepts the third of Dr Cooper's 16 recommendations: that the purpose and siting of the existing 13 mid-block cameras be reviewed ''to determine if they need to be removed, relocated, or expanded''.
The NSW government ordered 38 fixed speed cameras to be switched off after its auditor-general raised doubts about their effectiveness, and Attorney-General Simon Corbell may find himself under pressure to do the same here. But a response is unlikely before the public release of a second review authorised by Mr Corbell and being conducted by an independent road safety specialist to determine the overall effectiveness of the program.
Speed and red light cameras are employed the world over as a means of enforcing speed limits - travel speed being directly related to both the likelihood of a crash occurring and the severity of crash outcomes. The fixed cameras are generally located at specified road lengths or intersections where there is a demonstrated crash history or where speed is considered to be a problem. However, the effectiveness of clearly marked ''mid-block'' cameras remains a matter of some conjecture since motorists are free to speed before and after encountering the devices.
As Dr Cooper's audit points out, however, the lack of documentary evidence on the extent of the ACT's speeding problem makes it all but impossible to determine if indeed these particular speed cameras are effective in reducing speed. The audit also noted that the reliability of fixed cameras in accurately determining the identity of offending vehicles is adding to the uncertainty.
A number of Australian and international studies have demonstrated that mobile speed cameras are much more effective at reducing mean travel speed, crashes and casualties than fixed or average-speed cameras. However, the ACT audit found that the coverage of the territory's five mobile camera vans was ''limited and overt'', meaning the government's sign-posted ''any time, any where'' warnings were unlikely to make all drivers in all locations comply with posted speed limits.
In putting together a more ''strategic basis'' for the ACT's cameras systems, as the Auditor-General advocates, the government faces potentially difficult decisions. Does it bow to evidence and switch off or move some of the mid-block cameras, wearing the expense of relocation or the drop in income from fewer infringement notices? Or does it render them far less visible to approaching motorists, and add to their numbers (as authorities in Victoria have done) thereby potentially increasing their effectiveness? The government may also consider adding to its fleet of mobile speed cameras and to have them adopt a lower profile on the road. That would be certain to incur the wrath of motorists, but it is the one measure that road safety experts agree makes for an effective speeding deterrent.
Set against all of these possible scenarios is the fact that the number of deaths in the ACT from road traffic accidents per 100,000 people is the lowest in Australia and that Canberra drivers are generally responsible and law-abiding. Mr Corbell has said it is precisely because the ACT's roads are so good that greater efforts have to be made to curb the tendency of motorists to speed. If the government is to make that case convincingly, however, it must have the strongest possible statistical evidence to back up its strategy.
