Sir, Before 2000 (before any substantial effect from the current generation of speed cameras and road safety policies could take effect), deaths per year were falling at nearly double the rate than has arisen since that year. Indeed, had previous trends continued there would have been 500 fewer deaths in 2007 than actually occurred. Despite that, the authorities continue to claim that the cameras have saved lives. That claim is made on the basis that the cameras have reduced accidents at the camera sites themselves.

The authorities are also responsible for embedding in the public mind that speeding (narrowly defined as breaking the speed limit) is a significant cause (eg, 30 per cent) of road accidents when the DfT and TRL data show that speeding is recorded in an insignificant proportion of accidents.

Not only do the facts of the case undermine the credibility of the authorities but those policies have led to the prosecution of millions, the overwhelming majority of whom will have been driving sensibly for the conditions. Consequently there is large-scale resentment and many people have concluded that the official line has little or no basis.

Against that background it is scarcely surprising that 85 per cent of those surveyed by The Times (leading article, Oct 10) are hostile to average-speed cameras. Those cameras may well be effective on dual carriageways, but the prospect of their general use, and the imposition of unrealistically low speed limits, is to be resisted. Far better to concentrate on education designed to develop mature and deferential driving behaviour.

After all, treat people like idiots and they will behave like idiots, but treat them as responsible and they will behave with responsibility.

Paul F. Withrington

Director, Transport-Watch

Explore Letters

• Feedback