The one piece of common sense and correctness I’ve seen in 7 or 8 years of
looking at Dorset Road Safe is in the lateast SEES report: “The low numbers
involved create difficulties in identifying any particular trend.” Correct.
Chief Constable of Dorset
Police, Mike Glanville, chairman of the Dorset Strategic Road Safety
Partnership, said the successful No
will be expanded.”
All I’ve seen from Dorset Road Safe is delight at the numbers of fines they’ve
managed to raise (many going on massively lucrative courses) and a few of the
silly things people say. I’ve seen no evidence of any “success” whatsoever, of
improving driving or respect for traffic law. Please tell us Mr Glanville, how
you have come to this conclusion about success. Is it anything to do with the
amount of money you’ve made? Why do you target only trivial, harmless offences,
not serious dangerous ones? Why does Dorset police refuse to tell us what the
£813,000 cost of courses is spent on?
“But the casing will remain as a deterrent and cameras could be re-installed if
a risk to public safety becomes apparent.” Who will decide if a “risk becomes
apparent”? Those whose jobs depend on cameras perhaps? The cases are more likely
to act as a comfort to determined speeders and thugs who can’t believe their
luck that the authorities are continuing to think that yellow boxes covering
0.1% of road space are a good way to enforce speed.
PLEASE CAN SOMEONE in the Dorset Authorities answer these and previous concerns.
The reducing funding of DRS is good, but our councils are demonstrating serious
and dangerous incompetence by still spending £851,000 on DRS while no one can be
bothered to answer the multitude of concerns raised, or are unable to without
demonstrating that I am right.