Adrian Whiting
My reply:
Dear Adrian,
Many thanks for responding as usual in your calm and informative way. I just
wish that some of those in the DfT, the Council, and safety organisations such
as Dorset Road Safe, could respond in any meaningful way at all, if any useful
communications were possible I’m sure that the obvious frustration that results
from being ignored would not have grown to the extent it has, and my
communications would certainly be calmer.
Although I am angry about these issues I am largely simply acting as a
spokesperson for the many who write to me with the same concerns. Here’s an
email which came in today, for example:
“Ian,
In regards to
your article
http://www.dorsetspeed.org.uk/news/sog30.aspx
I am glad someone
in a position to raise media awareness such as yourself has cottoned onto this
sneaky method of income the DSCP has been busy working away at. I have been on
one of these courses and although they are reasonably well run and informative
courses, it’s all run from the police HQ (in my area) at Winfrith with tea,
juice and biscuits provided, certainly no smoked salmon on offer – therefore
costs kept very efficient from the DSCP’s point of view, for maximum profit.
The cost is
approx. £10 more than the fine would be should you wish to take the traditional
fine and points, of course the points are kept off your license, saving you much
more than the £10 extra in insurance increases. The course was absolutely jam
packed, and there was two simultaneous courses running at the same time. There
were some people at the course paying £150, who were required to go on a
practical assessment after the normal course. I’d estimate there were about 20
people in each classroom.
Keep up the good
work in exposing everything this band of cowboys are continuing to get away
with, they seem to be accountable to no-one.
Regards
Dorset Road Safe seems to have persuaded itself and tries to persuade us it has
public support, but it really does not.
My
"estimation" of the actual course cost of £30 per person may or may not be
correct, but does not seem unrealistic. The actual course cost is obviously well
below the £100 charged. I can’t see anything too wrong or even sensationalist
with that? My other more flippant remarks were made in the context of
local authorities not gaining from the proceeds of safety partnerships, as we
have previously been told.
Most would not be too disappointed to hear that the “profit” from the courses is
spent on “overall costs of policing the roads”. The problems are:
-
there is deep distrust about
the methods of “roads policing” and where the money goes. It would be
interesting to see a spend breakdown of the £5.1m. Is such information in the
public domain or do I need to raise an FOI request for this?
-
If large amounts of money are
collected, but then spent inefficiently on the wrong solutions (partly in order
to keep the money coming in), as is the popular perception, it’s just completely
pointless and damaging. Why is it a rarity to see a traffic cop around the
streets of Poole? £5.1m would pay for plenty of
them (excuse the element of speculation again).
-
we are already taxed for
police services and expect those funds to be used as effectively as possible,
and provide adequate policing.
-
We are normally told that road
safety activities have NOTHING to do with raising money. If we were normally
told that some elements of road safety activities were in fact to raise money to
pay for basic levels of policing because it can’t be afforded any other way, as
you have now suggested, it might be unpopular but at least it would be honest.
-
Both the DfT and Dorset Road
Safe are trying to mislead, by saying no money goes to local authorities when it
clearly does. The air of deception is one of the big problems and with the large
amounts of money, jobs, questionable operations, poor communication etc. is
bound to breed considerable distrust.
Take for example the Speed on Green. If the publicity had been “this is not a
casualty reduction effort but it will allow us to pay for 4 traffic police in 2
cars which we need to police the roads properly but can’t otherwise afford”
rather than the confused and totally inadequate drivel we’ve heard from "DSCP /
DRS spokespersons", it would not be nearly so bad. Some would be angry that
policing that should be provided anyway has to be paid for by such means, but at
least it would be honest, and focus debate where it should be, i.e. police
funding amounts and methods, and efficiency.
The fact remains, large numbers of people are being fined, and in some cases
having their lives ruined, for driving totally safely, while it is easy to drive
like a complete lunatic without being caught, and accident, death, and injury
rates are too high. There seem to have been several bad accidents with serious
injuries and deaths reported in the local press recently that I’ve seen.
I’m certain it’s not all bad, “work with younger drivers” etc. is great, as long
as it it positive (and therefore likely to be taken in), and I have to say,
those who have commented on the course say it is good, although none have felt
that they were the right target audience (my wife included!). But I’m afraid I’m
certain that a lot is still bad, and I’m starting to think that my actions, even
if a little clumsy, may help to start improving things.
Adrian, I
know you have a tough job and you’ll never please everyone, but some of those
around you, and in the government and council, need to learn from your
professionalism particularly in terms of communication.
Best regards, Ian