"Queensland Police should be using more hidden speed cameras to catch dangerous drivers,

[csv8]

"Queensland Police should be using more hidden speed cameras to catch dangerous drivers, the state's audit office says.

In a scathing report tabled in state parliament on Tuesday, the Queensland Audit Office accused the QPS of not using their full quota of hidden camera hours because it "wants to avoid perceptions of revenue raising".

"An apparent desire to avoid perceptions of revenue raising has unduly influenced decisions that have limited covert camera deployments (unmarked or not visible police vehicles) to well below their government approved levels," the QAO said.

"The results from road safety research demonstrate that one of the best methods to deter motorists from speeding is by deploying mobile cameras in an unpredictable way across approved mobile camera sites.
Advertisement

"This general deterrence effect is complemented by the specific deterrents from the fixed speed and red light camera network that target high-risk locations or locations unsuited to mobile cameras."

The QPS has been contacted for comment.

The state's collection of cameras has grown to 100 mobile, 41 fixed, seven combined speed and red light, 74 red light cameras and one point-to-point camera system.

Police issued more than 3.7 million infringement notices between July 2008 and July 2015 from its entire statewide camera program, the report said. Fines collected by Transport and Main Roads totalled $667.3 million over the period.

In the last financial year, 841,401 infringement notices were issued with an estimated value of $167 million.

However the QAO criticised police for "not using covert deployments to their full potential despite having government approval to increase the hours of usage".

"The QPS have approval for 30 per cent of mobile camera hours to be undertaken covertly. In 2014-15, they only performed 16.3 per cent of mobile deployment hours covertly," they said.

Had police used the full quota of covert hours there would have been a further 33,879 infringements issued in 2014-15, the QAO estimated.

They also said hidden cameras were also being used at the wrong times.

"The five-year trend for serious casualty crashes shows instances are rising on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays, as well as in the evening and at night. However, the QPS mostly deploys cameras to sites during standard working hours on weekdays," the report said.

Police and the Department of Transport also came under fire for not doing enough to improve detection of vehicles with personalised or custom numberplates.

The QAO said on average 71 per cent of revenue collected from traffic cameras was spent on road infrastructure. The rest was used for road safety, injury rehabilitation programs and administration.

They said speed contributed to 437 deaths on Queensland roads between 2008 and 2014, making up 22 per cent of fatalities."
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/quee...13-gk7yzm.html

My comment : how will the cameras know who is dangerous and who isnt??
Its an excuse for revenue raising as those just over the limit will be caught, too!!!

[irish2]

Originally Posted by csv8

Had police used the full quota of covert hours there would have been a further 33,879 infringements issued in 2014-15, the QAO estimated.

~34,000 more infringements, and probably the same death toll. Not revenue raising at all.

[marty351]

Time to post some poo to the QAO.

[Bill M]

The Queensland Police Union has made an interesting statement...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-1...u-says/6852598

[Trump]

Time to "audit" the QAO me thinks... Absolute effing scumbags.

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by csv8

"Queensland Police should be using more hidden speed cameras to catch dangerous drivers

Yes, yes they should.

Unfortunately they haven't been invented yet.

[chevypower]

Need to get rid of all this left-wing high tax collection BS in the world!

[meteoriTE]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Yes, yes they should.

Unfortunately they haven't been invented yet.

Absolutely correct, a couple of months ago got done by a speed camera as I had to avoid a truck not giving away at a give way sign. Luckily no traffic coming the other way, so had to accelerate and go around the idiot to avoid him, get up the road just past him and flash of the revenue camera. Monday same truck (easily identifiable) straight through the round about up the road from the same give way sign, if I didn't see he wasn't going to be able to stop in time, I would have been right into his front wheel. I guess this idiot is so glad about cameras and the police not being out in force on the streets looking for morons like this as he keeps his license and probably never gets fined, but drives like a complete idiot.
If they were serious about the road toll as they keep telling us, then they'd had the cops out patrolling, just like the use to do, and fining morons like this (and the many others I encounter daily) as a fine in the mail a few weeks later does nothing more than raise revenue. But that's something people from the real world know, including officers who operate these things.

[anto]

i dont know about other states but here in sAdelaide they call them "safety" cameras.

idjuts

[tut0r]

Originally Posted by anto

i dont know about other states but here in sAdelaide they call them "safety" cameras.

idjuts

Lol does SA still put a yellow sign about 100metres down the road saying speed camera team ahead? aha!

Everyone come to victoria, we have police in bushes and hiding behind lamp posts and lets not forget all the unmarked 4wds sitting around the place.

[asagaai]

Speed of itself over a prescribed speed limit does not equate to a dangerous driver.

The opposite logic is to say that driving at the prescribed speed limit = safe driver.

Such contentions are misconceived and spurious, for instance if the speed limit is 80 kph and you drive at 80 kph in icy conditions, or wet roads with zero visibility due to fog, you may pass a speed camera and be deemed to be safe, but in reality are driving unsafely.

The converse argument also applies to someone travelling above 80 kph in a prescribed 80 kph zone.

For instance, someone may drive along a straight road, at 90 kph on a straight stretch which is marked at 80 kph, with no other traffic, in a well maintained car, well rested and alert and paying attention to traffic and conditions, and be deemed by a speed camera to be a dangerous driver, when in truth they are a very safe driver and are driving to the conditions, putting aside the morality/ethics of complying with prescripted speed signs.

Do these bureaucrats say that if the lines indicate you can overtake- that it is safe because it is so prescribed? The times I have driven waiting to overtake and the lines break up allowing overtaking and I have made the subjective call that it was unsafe- despite the absence of oncoming cars.

This bunch of bureaucratic soft arsed lards should simply audit the many many thousands of motor vehicle accident compensation claims which are defended by solicitors who act for insurers in at fault schemes. The solicitors investigate the accident to see what caused the accident, and whether their driver was at fault, or someone else. Invariably there are police reports, and if required expert traffic reconstruction engineers are engaged to determine cause of accident.

I managed and defended a portfolio for claims for Compulsory third party insurers in NSW for some 12 years, investigated many hundreds of accidents over that time, and the number of accidents in which speed of itself was a major or the sole factor causing the accident could be counted on one hand (and that hand having 2 odd fingers missing to boot).

The major cause of accidents was intoxication (alcohol, drugs), fatigue , inattention, pedestrians and children running out failing in truth to take care, and in lesser degree mechanical defects(tyres being a big one in wet conditions), and sometimes roadway designs and defects (water flooding across highways, tarmac breaking way etc.

[simon varley]

no matter what the spin - it's always about revenue not road safety. The day the state governments remove the revenue expected from speeding fines from out of their budget, is the day I start believing is is truly about safety.