The Conservatives will remove speed cameras which have failed to reduce accident rates, if they are elected. The Tories accuse the government of making �15m from fines last year and describe the partnership between police and councils in charge of speed cameras as 'cash-guzzling' bureaucracies.
The proposals include changes to the speed limits by increasing it to 80mph on some motorways and cutting it to 20mph around schools and hospitals.
The Government has said that speed cameras have saved 100 lives a year and up to 1,000 from injury and that in an AA survey 80% of people believed cameras were bringing down casualty rates.
Does Britain need less speed cameras? Do you agree with the Conservative's proposals for speed limits and speed cameras and will it influence how you vote?
This debate is now closed. Thank you for your comments.
The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:
 | SUGGEST A DEBATE This topic was suggested by Neil D, UK:  Would something as simple and obvious as removing speed cameras change your vote to Conservative?  |
It concerns me that some people are seemingly brainwashed into the idea that a speed camera is the utopia to road safety. Looking for alternative measures to camera placement seems to be forgotten. With a lack of traffic police on our roads this is being taken advantage of by drivers of uninsured vehicles, reckless driving attitudes and plain bad driving. Less reliance on cameras and more traffic policing driving standards will, in my opinion, improve safety on our roads to a significant advantage over cameras.
David Lobb, Occold, UK
Speed kills. Plain and simple. The faster you're going when that idiot driver in front pulls out unexpectedly, the bigger the smash, the heavier the injuries, the higher the death toll. Speed cameras lower speeds in their locality, therefore lowing injuries and deaths and should remain at accident black spots. Want to drive fast? Go to a racetrack. And a stealth tax? There's no stealth and do we really consider �70 million revenue as a tax? That barely covers the camera admin costs.
Matthew, Oxford, UK
After reading through these comments I wonder how different those people who are anti speed cameras would feel after seeing a loved one injured or killed in a road accident. As with most other safety issues in this country the general attitude is "I don't care" until something tragic happens and then it's too late.
Zoe Davenport, London
Speed cameras will never stop people running out into the road without looking.
Lee Sutcliffe, Bradford, UK
If people want to speed and end up paying fines great, as long as their stupidity and arrogance reduce the costs of other law abiding motorists.
Adrian, London
| Modify them to catch drivers who are doing the really dangerous thing by driving too fast too close to the vehicle in front |
I am quite unconvinced of the value of most speed cameras, although a small minority have a function. Why not reinstall most on fast busy roads, including motorways, and modify them to catch drivers who are doing the really dangerous thing by driving too fast too close to the vehicle in front. I am sure the vast majority of drivers would support this enthusiastically.
Derek Reynolds, Ilford, UK
What about all the other traffic offences? Speed cameras are not a substitute for trained police officers. I don't have an issue with cameras but I do think that the more that get sited the less police we see on the roads.
Clive, Woking
What a good idea! People talk about all the "opportunism" with the Tories, but at least they listen to people. Seven years of Labour rule and we have all forgotten what "good politics" use to be about. I drive around various motorways for my work day in day out. Everyone in the fast lane is cruising at 90. They keep their distance and everyone is safe. The limit should definitely be raised. Do you know how frustrating it is to drive a Saab 95 turbo at 70?
Jules Fraser, London
Cameras have changed the way in which many people drive, and for the better, especially those who are unfamiliar with the area. So even if a camera has had little impact in its immediate vicinity, its presence along with all the others has a wider impact. A general change in the culture of driving like this cannot be measured by localised statistics as the Tories are proposing. No-one is being forced to speed, if you don't speed, you don't have to pay.
Chris, Chorley UK
We all know that speed limits are just about the most widely flouted legislation we have in this country. The Tories are conveying a message that speed limits do not matter. My vote would go to a party promising a tougher clamp-down on speeding motorists.
Graham, Macclesfield, UK
I am happy to accept speed cameras and their fines, however why is this also laden with penalty points. A person in any one year could be 5 miles over the limit and thus lose their licence if this happened four times. Surely points could be applied to dangerous driving and fines for minor offences as is the case in Europe. I feel the system is anti-motorist and should be remedied
D Summers, Barnard Castle Co Durham Some people will say that this is Tory opportunism. Maybe it is but Labour provided them with the case. After almost a decade of a government that refuses to listen one that shows that it might pay attention to people rather than pander to special interest groups sounds pretty reasonable. Hope it catches on.
Rick, UK
If speed cameras release the police for more worthy tasks then they are a good thing. There is nothing more irritating than policeman standing with speed detection devices. Cameras are strategically placed and if you know the road then you know where they are and slow down accordingly for them. The only speed cameras that should catch you out are on roads unfamiliar to you. If I am on one of those and see the speed camera signs then I make a point of watching out for them.
Chris, London
About time someone took notice of what the motorists are saying. I am a law abiding driver of a small vehicle, who does not speed, tailgate etc. In my opinion especially along the high road in Wembley, any local will tell you that pedestrians are the main hazard as they just step out onto the road regardless of whether there is a pedestrian crossing 10 yards to the side of them. So Mr Blair/Mr Howard et al how about enforcing jay walking legislation on these irresponsible and stupid pedestrians who insist on throwing themselves in front of moving vehicles. Oh sorry I forgot you cannot be fined for Jay walking just cautioned if the police actually book you for it, so I guess the Tories will get my vote on this one! Stop victimising the average motorist!!!!
Beena, Wembley, UK
The Tories have identified something that could win them some votes and have seized upon the opportunity. Speed cameras could be distributed in better places but they're basically a good idea. Congestion charges are also a good idea as can be seen in London and have helped reduce accident levels overall. It'd be good if the police were more alert to vehicles in poor condition though, as so many in London are in a dangerous condition.
Mike Woof, London, UK
Fancy that, a party trying to make policies that the public might want in order to win votes! What is democracy coming to when a party listens to the public and then actually tries to win an election! I guess we are too used to a Labour party that doesn't listen to the electorate and policy made not by ourselves, or even our politicians, but by politicians across the Atlantic Ocean.
Evan, UK/Dubai
How can a fine be seen as a 'stealth tax'? How can something as simple as keeping to the speed limit be so difficult? Perhaps we also ought to ban security cameras, and CCTV, so that we can get more 'bobbies back on the beat' to catch law-breakers red-handed.
Sue, Wokingham, Berks
I was caught by a speed camera, doing 34mph in a 30 zone, good you say, however what the camera could not see was a broke down van and tow truck on my side of the road, just before the camera, as I ride a scooter I speeded up for safety to get round the trucks, result I get 3 points and fine. So good on the Tories, and this is from a Lib Dem voter!
Ian, Marlow
| It doesn't go anywhere near far enough |
A rare sensible policy from the Tories, but it doesn't go anywhere near far enough. The fast lane speed is 90mph for early commuter traffic. Does anyone, apart from Sunday drivers and road safety fanatics, think 90 is fast these days? Motorway speed limit should be 120, with a minimum of 90 in the fast lane.
Justin, Brighton Speed cameras focus drivers' attention on just one aspect of driving safely. Undue obsession with complying with the speed limit distracts from proper hazard assessment. Road safety comes from encouraging drivers to act responsibly. Proper signage of speed limits and hazards contributes more to this than hidden cameras and oppressive prosecutions. Compulsory retesting of drivers could also drive up standards? Of course, they don't make the Government money do they? This move by the Tories will get my vote.
Paul Beard, Basingstoke, UK
You can always spot the supporters of the Labour Party. They are the ones programmed to screech "opportunism� whenever the Tories make a suggestion. The Tories' idea isn't a bad one: the current indiscriminate use of speed cameras is a blunt instrument designed to raise revenue, not promote road safety.
Michael McGowan, London, UK
| They save lives. It's that simple |
Opportunism from the Tories once again. They respond to what the tabloids and the motoring pressure groups say is "what the public wants". and use it as attention seeking behaviour. Don't go over the speed limit and you wont get fined. If you drive for a living, you had better be careful. Just because you do, this doesn't mean you are exempt from the law. There is a good point on thresholds, but saying "I was only doing 10 over the limit" is no excuse. If the limit is 30, it means you doing 40. Hit someone at that speed and you'll kill them for sure. Perhaps a 10% margin is sensible, and this could be easily achieved. As for the spurious argument about not catching untaxed vehicles and drunk drivers, these are the people more likely to speed anyway and be involved in other crimes. Speed cameras don't catch bank robbers, drug importers and rapists, but that doesn't make them a bad idea overall. They save lives. It's that simple
Alex, Leicester UK I think we should have cameras that can identify motorbikes. I am fed up of driving at the legal limit and having motorbikes zapping through decreasing gaps and attempting to wipe out my door mirrors. The speed limit doesn't apply to motorbikes around here.
Robert, Glos, UK
Speed cameras cannot determine between good and bad drivers. An alert driver slightly exceeding the speed limit is a lot safer than a driver that is slower but not aware of road hazards, other drivers or pedestrians. The Tories are right in their approach, however they need to propose wider ranging measures for transport if they want to win the voters over.
David Keight, Newton Abbot, Devon
Speed cameras do not save lives - they simply photograph and fine people for speeding. If the DfT want to cut down on casualties on a stretch of road, they should re-engineer the road layout accordingly
Jon, Nottingham
| Being allowed to drive on the roads is a privilege not a right |
Why do so many people think they have the right to break the law? Have you all got diplomatic immunity of something? Being allowed to drive on the roads is a privilege not a right, and if you break the law you deserve all you get in my opinion. Especially when so many deaths are linked to people speeding. Remember, everyone is a 'safe' driver, until they have an accident.
Danny Callaghan, UK What is safer? Me in my high powered well maintained Vauxhall Vectra doing 90mph, or the lady I saw yesterday driving a Mercedes at 70mph with an almost flat tyre? My car would have continued at 90mph forever, her tyre could have blown at any moment sending her car crashing into oncoming traffic...
David Pallett, Slough, UK
People who don't like speed cameras are driving irresponsibly. I see them every day. They seem to have no idea what damage a big lump of metal can do if it hits a human being. I am in favour of more cameras and more controls. There should be speed limiters fitted to cars and proximity detectors that apply the brake.
Mark, Glasgow, UK
I drive a lot and it isn't speed that creates dangerous situations on a motorway, modern cars can easy sit with complete safety at speeds over the current limit. Tail-gaters are the danger, speed cameras do nothing to rid the roads of these stupid and aggressive idiots.
Peter Moore, Banbridge, NI
| Speed limits should definitely be increased on motorways |
Speed limits should definitely be increased on motorways. We're not driving cars with 1950s technology any more. Our brakes work and our cars are quite stable at 80 or 90 mph. Besides, taking a trip to London on the M4 will show you that people drive at these increased speeds anyway.
Steve, Bristol These cameras are a disgrace - they contribute nothing to safety, and are merely a cheap replacement for skilled traffic officers. Worst of all, they are controlled by local coordinators who have an obvious empire-building opportunity because the fines can be used to obtain more cameras and staff. We are being stealth-taxed to pay for unaccountable road safety tsars who have no grasp of modern driving.
Steve Walker, UK
There would be more merit to speed cameras if perfectly safe roads did not have their speed limits slashed at the same time as a new camera was installed. There are many roads now, dual carriageway, not near housing, where there is a 40mph limit. It would be perfectly safe to have a 70mph or 80mph speed limit there, but instead it is dropped to a level that the authorities know will lead to frustrated motorists speeding. Do the people here in favour of cameras think we should perhaps drop the limits to 5mph everywhere, and then fine everyone who goes over this?
John, London, UK
| A desperate and cynical vote grabbing stunt by the Tories |
A desperate and cynical vote grabbing stunt by the Tories pandering to those who think that the speed limit is a law which they can ignore when and where they choose. Are the Tories going to say which other laws we can pick and choose from? Perhaps stealing something, as long as it's only a little and no-one gets hurt? The speed limit is a law, there for a good reason, and should be enforced.
Warren, Brighton, UK Common sense attitude. No one is against properly sited speed cameras. However, it is obvious that some have been cynically sited and speed limits set unrealistically low in order to trap drivers.
Peter Jamieson, Yorkshire
Publish the "before" and "after" accident rate statistics for every "safety" camera, and remove those that have no measurable effect on accident reduction. Such figures must exist; why are the "safety" camera partnerships so reluctant to publish them?
Richard P, Addlestone, UK
Can't wait for the next election. I'll vote for the Tories on this issue alone.
Jerry, Basingstoke, UK
| Let's get more Police back onto the roads |
I got caught by a camera at 3.24am when there wasn't even another car on the road and I wasn't in a built up area. I was doing 8mph over the limit. OK so I was breaking the speed limit, got 3 points and a fine but who was I endangering? The whether was clear and the road was straight. However, the fool in his white van who hit me head on as he was driving down the wrong side of a dual carriageway got 6 points, no fine, and had to attend one 'driving education day' as a punishment. Put cameras outside schools and hospitals but let's get more Police back onto the roads. At least they can use common sense unlike cameras.
Stu, UK I'd rather law breakers who insist on driving too fast are used as 'revenue generation' rather than being taxed more myself. Don't people realise that this money will be raised anyway? Better to 'opt out' by sticking to the speed limits. This is one issue where the only possible complaint is from criminals.
Dominic Tristram, Bath, UK
Why not heavily advertise speed limits on all roads and allow for cameras to be hidden? A speed law should be applicable for the whole length of the road, not just the 100 yards where there is a camera - that only leads to sudden braking and dangerous driving.
Rik, London, UK
I am a police officer and think cameras have not saved lives or made roads any safer, all they have done is create hostility between the police and citizens who would normally support the police. We have criminalized people who are not what we would call "criminals". We need to bring back traffic officers and catch the drivers with no insurance, MOT and driving licenses, they are the real problem.
Ben, Reading, Berkshire
| That's a cost of millions per life saved |
Speed cameras save 100 lives? That's a cost of millions per life saved, way more than the DfT is prepared to spend on road safety improvements. The "saving lives" argument is a smoke-screen for a ideological 'war on motoring.'
Ken T, York Of course they don't do anything! All it has done is made a small distance either side of the camera safe as all speeding drivers do is slow down when they see it and speed back up again once they have passed it!
Nicole, London
Speed cameras do not save lives - in fact there is now plenty of evidence to show the opposite. They are being used to generate revenue and the public is increasingly aware of it. Well done the Tories!
Hazel, Manchester, England
Speed doesn't kill, hitting things does. What we need is responsible policing to clamp down on tailgating and irresponsible over- and undertaking, enforcement of lane discipline, realistic speed limits on motorways and roads (including the use of minimum speeds on motorway lanes) and the inclusion of proper speed management in driving schools. Moreover, penalties from cameras should be used not by councils, but by national bodies in order to minimise the cherry picking of sites to erect cameras.
Anon, England
I have no objection to properly sited speed cameras if they actually prevent accidents, However I do object to some petty little local council official hiding behind the bushes on a Sunday Morning on a perfectly straight road where there has never been an accident and claiming that they are in partnership with the police, These parasites are just revenue raising and do not give one fig about the accident rates, Also they have no more power to do this than I have to nick some one for a bald tyre. Once again it's policing on the cheap. How I wish I was rich so I could afford to take these 'civilians' to court for infringing my human rights
Alan Baker, Chelmsford Essex What pleases me more is the idea of new speed cameras that measure the distance between cars and issue tickets to tail-gaters. That will prevent far more accidents than this obsession with speed.
Simon Richardson, London, UK
Recently a road had its speed limit reduced from 60 to 40 and speed cameras introduced. As there have been no accidents and very few houses are off that road I can only think of one reason for the reduced speed limit and cameras - cash!
Caron, England
Speed cameras don't identify drivers who are drunk, uninsured, or driving stolen or un-roadworthy cars. The Tories are right to focus on those factors which are a far bigger cause of accidents, rather than just speed.
David, London, UK
The Tories have it half right in as much as they're looking to penalise rogue motorists. Currently no real sanctions exist for driving while banned or without insurance. These people are as much of a danger as speeding motorists and need to be locked up. Speed limits should be marked under each camera - what's the point of trying to stop people speeding if they don't know what the limit is?
Ben Eaton, Stourport-on-Severn, UK
| If you break the law, you should incur some sort of punishment otherwise the law is meaningless |
What is everyone's problem. People should complain about the level of speed limits if they don't like them. All a speed camera does is enforce the current law in a way that actually makes money, people who don't like them are effectively arguing for the abolition of speed limits. If you break the law, you should incur some sort of punishment otherwise the law is meaningless.
Tom, London For the first time in a long time, i ventured onto the motorway last weekend. I was shocked to see the number of new speed camera's which had gone up between Lancaster and the Garstang junction. Not only that, we were stuck in fairly heavy traffic all the way there due to maintenance crews erecting more of these things and shutting down lanes so they could paint the markings on the carriageway! I did notice that driving was more dangerous with all these camera's littering the roads. It wasn't pleasant to have the car in front breaking hard to avoid being flashed - this appears to be the way people drive now. Camera's cause accidents in my opinion and as usual the motorist is used as a cash cow.
Kerry, Ulverston, Cumbria
Perhaps those of you who claim that "If you don't speed you won't get caught" should think of those of use whose job depends on our driving license. I am required to drive to appointments up to 400 miles away and back on the same day regularly. One day last year i got caught by 2 speed cameras on the same day, on both occasions i was exceeding the speed limit by less than 10 mph. If real policemen had been around i probably would have been cautioned, but now my insurance is up and my job is at risk.
Ian, UK
| Cars are much safer now than they were when the 70mph was brought in |
I think the motorway speed limit should be raised, cars are much safer now than they were when the 70mph was brought in. I also agree with reducing speeds near schools-and an automatic driving ban for anyone breaking it.
Adam, London Yes, the Tories are going for votes but they are listening to what the public wants. Surely this must be a good thing.
TB, Spain
It is extremely dumb to assume that only motorists cause accident, or that only speeding offences cause any of this. Some cameras have quite clearly only been put up to generate cash rather than lower accidents There are many incentives that could be implemented instead such as more stringent scrutiny on other road users (buses, motorbikes, bicycles) and maybe something to deal with people that like to run out into a road without looking like they always seem to do in the adverts
Moo, London, UK
Yes - if there's nothing on the road why on earth should you be forced to drive slowly, hence causing congestion? Moreover, if a road is empty, the number of people who slam on their brakes when they see a speed camera could cause a pile-up: in my view, the cameras are nothing more than a stealth tax, and a potentially dangerous one at that
Laurence Tailby, London, UK
The thing that makes me laugh about those who complain that some speed cameras are only there to make money is that if you don't speed, then they won't make money. It's quite simple. Don't break the law, don't pay the fine!
John Kirkman, Leeds
At last a sensible approach to this problem. All too often these cameras are placed such that motorists have to brake unreasonably to ensure they are under the unrealistically low limit and that in turn has a concertina effect on the following traffic which can actually cause accidents, not prevent them. I also agree with the lower limits around schools and hospitals. Why has it taken this long to arrive at a sensible solution?
Terry, Epsom, Surrey, England This proposal makes absolute sense, particularly the review of all speed cameras, and is very attractive to keep motorists in Britain. For too long now the speed cameras have been used as a money making tool and not for the intended purpose of reducing accidents and road deaths. There are many cameras in the Midlands that are absolutely necessary, but there are also as many that are either in the incorrect position or simply not required. This proposal is not only bringing some common sense back to the roads, but will restore confidence in the police.
Adam, Birmingham, UK
There is no doubt that some cameras are good for some locations, but I do think that the placement has been carried a little too far and for the wrong reasons. As for motorway speed limits, absolutely that should be increased, and an 80mph limit on selected roads/sections is long overdue. So also, is a minimum speed limit. Will it affect my vote? Possibly, but the Tories will have to come up with much more than this snippet. I want to see an overhaul of the Road Tax scheme, taxation reductions on Fuel and a policy on Toll Roads. Behind all this I also want to see their plans for Public Transport improvement as unfortunately both Labour and Tories have repeatedly got this wrong.
James, Redhill, UK
You only need to look at the sitting of most speed cameras compared to the government's claim that every camera's location is chosen due to past accident statistics to know that they are another form of stealth tax. Even the Police admit that many cameras are located where no accidents have occurred. And as for safety results. I understand that accident figures are rising.
John Farmer, Henley-on-Thames, UK
I don't see why people hate speed cameras so much. If you are speeding and get caught then you deserve it! Don't speeding motorists realise how easily they can kill someone!
Jamie, Wycombe, UK
It should be up to the police where cameras need to be put not councils. If cameras are saving lives, why are the Tories trying to whip up support against them?
Kevin Spring, UK
This is just a Tory attempt to win some votes. Yes, I think there are too many speed cameras, especially in places where they're not needed, but no, the Tories still aren't getting my vote!
Joseph, UK
| A feeble piece of policy-making |
This is quite a feeble piece of policy-making, and shows the lack of strategic capability within the Conservative Party. We desperately need an opposition capable of challenging a complacent government. Focusing on the minutiae of village green concerns is not a major policy initiative. Real politics please!
Mark, London, UK I think we should extend this system of monitoring, and add a camera to every home - particularly those with children. Well, best not to take any chances.
Steve Gowt, South Wales, UK
If they save lives, how can anyone really argue? Those that complain, want to break the law. I do feel that they should face the driver though and the fact that I ride a motorbike (which only has a number plate on the back) has absolutely nothing to do with this.
James Murphy, Dorset, UK
Political stunt number 287 from the Tories. This party is now such a lame duck it has no hope at all of getting back into power - good riddance to the Daily Mail!
Nigel, Redhill, UK
Is the new conservative standard that it's OK to break the law if you haven't killed anyone? I could care less what speeding fines are used to pay for, the fines are there to punish.
Andrew McCruden, UK
Speed cameras save lives and should be used much more extensively. We should not pander to those who want to speed putting at risk their own lives and more importantly the lives of their passengers and other road users.
Baz Tregear, Derbyshire, UK
One-Minute World News 
News services
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version 
