News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Mobile speed cameras supported 

Mobile speed cameras supported

04 Jan, 2010 03:00 AM
They’re anti-speeding devices that could catch you driving too fast at any time, and Dubbo motorists want them.

Local people have put their weight behind the calls of the State’s top traffic cop to introduce mobile speed cameras.

Drivers say the move would be worth it in an effort to lower the region’s road toll, which tragically blew out last year.

The death toll on western region roads for 2009 was 75 - more than double the previous year.

Assistant Commissioner John Hartley recommended the digital cameras for patrol cars on NSW roads to former police minister Tony Kelly in August, but at the weekend NSW Premier Kristina Keneally would not commit to their use.

Opposition leader Barry O’Farrell said her hesitation was because she was scared of losing votes, but the majority of Dubbo constituents surveyed by the Daily Liberal yesterday were happy to see the reform.

Almost 60 years separate Mavis Brooks and her granddaughter Kylie, but yesterday they were united on the matter.

“It’s a good idea if it’s going to stop people speeding - speeding and fatigue cause deaths,” Mrs Brooks said.

“You shouldn’t be speeding in the first place,” Ms Brooks said. “If it saves lives, then yes.”

Judy Aird said she stuck to the speed limit and so should other drivers.

“Anything to keep the roads safe - I definitely think it would help save lives,” she said.

Glenyse Tracey was convinced the cameras would make a difference to the road toll.

People knew where the fixed cameras were, but with mobile cameras they would have to drive the speed limit all the time, she said.

Alan Lloyd supported the idea and Erika Higgins said it was at least worth a trial.

Andrew Lavelle said the cameras were a good idea, but more so for urban areas.

“Not so much on the highway, highway patrols are a better solution,” he said.

Some local road users had concerns with the idea.

Dave Day was hesitant to approve the idea for the open

highway because if you were “five to 10 km/h” over it could be “a bit harsh”.

It would potentially bring down the road toll, but if people wanted to speed, they would, he said.

David and Debbie Williams were firmly against the idea, although they wanted to “stop people getting killed”.

Mrs Williams said it was sneaky, and Mr Williams said it was a smokescreen for revenue raising.

Jack Conyn said accidents were caused by the poor condition of roads, not speed.

There had been a tragic and disappointing increase in the 2009 road toll across western NSW, an RTA spokesperson said on Saturday.

The spokesperson said speed remains the major factor in crashes, with speed-related fatalities up 40 per cent in 2009.

faye.wheeler@ruralpress.c om

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
So this is the next revenue grab as the lowering of the Newell speed limit hasn't brought in much more revenue. Police are supposed to put a sign warning motorists, but those signs are usually behind the car or a power pole or suitably hidden. Cameras don't exercise discretion, so people are booked for 1, 2 or 3 km over, with motorists left to argue weeks later with a money hungry bureaucracy. If Barry O'Farrell wants to become premier next year he would do well to leave this issue alone. He would do better to campaign for better roads and less government regulation.
Posted by John Q, 4/01/2010 7:56:55 AM, on Dubbo Daily Liberal
To Mrs Williams why is it sneaky if your not speeding you can go anywhere anytime un-noticed and do it legally
Posted by confused, 4/01/2010 8:55:49 AM, on Dubbo Daily Liberal
Look at where the people who have accidents come from what,s their post code not .n,s,w. no it,s vic or qld so it,s not speeding that is causing the accidents it,s those tired drivers who just wont stop for a break. The truck driver is caught by the overhead cameras if driving to far to fast so why can,t it be the same for car drivers.No it can,t because thats revenue for the government isnt it, and as for the police they need to be more visible on our roads not hiding in town somewhere.
Posted by bluedog, 4/01/2010 10:47:56 AM, on Dubbo Daily Liberal
I'd put it forward that the majority of accidents are fatigue related, not speed related. But unfortunately they haven't figured out a way to fine you for being tired..yet.
Posted by DogsonaRock, 4/01/2010 12:18:46 PM, on Dubbo Daily Liberal
It is sneaky because the government pretends these cameras are being used to save lives, whereas in reality THEY ARE just after money. It is not speed that kills, it is poor decisions made by drivers with poor skills. This government is well practised at spouting BS with regards to road safety. This is the mob that says driver training is a bad idea because it will encourage risk taking behaviour on the roads, yet the same mob advocates training in a wide variety of jobs and services without fear of those with police training turning into vigilantes for one example, the Gov wouldn't dream of allowing someone to use heavy mining equipment without proper training for another example. Driver training does save lives- FACT. The reason the Gov't tries to disuade us from liking the idea of driver training is because it will cost them money to set up facilities etc.
Posted by Grady, 4/01/2010 12:24:52 PM, on Dubbo Daily Liberal

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
POLL
Q: Do you support the idea of the portable speed cameras?

No
(43.5%)

Yes
(56.5%)

Total Votes: 131
Poll Date: 03 January, 2010
BLOGS

Most popular articles


Buy Local


 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...