The Underscore Archives

											Jon Hadley wrote:


> Extra money for public services. Not sure I can see a problem with that.

Extra money for the "speed camera partnerships" that manage the cameras 
and choose when, where and how to site mobile detectors.

Based on talking to officers I know personally (and "The Policeman's 
Blog"), the police don't like the arrangement much either - it's 
political wank, not a solution to any real problem; what traffic police 
remain are demotivated, and all police officers get more flak from 
punters even though they have nothing to do with the situation.


> Do you have any figures to back this up? As far as I can see they
> should actually *increase* the amount of time traffic police have to
> deal with accidents and other offenses.

I haven't time to research it, but 
http://www.racfoundation.org/releases/240505rac.htm cropped up near the 
top of a Google search:

"The Association of Chief Police Officers has previously admitted that 
traffic police numbers dropped by 11 per cent in England and Wales 
between 1996-2001 and justified the fall on the grounds that greater use 
of cameras compensated for the loss of police numbers."

I know it's a secondary source, but you're more than welcome to dig for 
the ACPO original if you doubt it.

-- 
Pete