I recently obtained a fixed penalty of 60 pounds and three points for speeding, 84 mph in 60 mph dual carriageway,
although i feel a bit hard done by, i realise that the speed was too fast and accept my points. What I do find hard to swallow is the fact that the police enforce these laws for speeding and give penalty points, but does that make me a safer driver? In short NO is the answer. would it not be a great idea to offer drivers that have been caught the chance to redeem their points or shorten the term of three years if they complete a road safety awareness course of driving course, hense improving road safety rather than just giving out fines.

G lyttle, Belfast, Northern Ireland

To stay within the speed limit I am more worried about being in an accident than if using common sense to drive at a sensible speed for the road, with impatient drivers just a few feet from my rear bumper whatever the speed, never quite knowing when they will choose to overtake and they do, often on the inside via a bus lane or on the other side of a traffic island or bend - it means having to look regularly at my speedo while watching the tailgater and therefore having less attention on what is in front of me - I've never seen one of these cars tailgating being stopped for this offence even on a motorway, forget sitting just around the next bend trying to catch a slightly over the speed limit motorist, pay more attention to catching those who tailgate, cut you up on a bend or pull out of a junction with no warning

Angel, dagenham,

I would like to say to Dave, Redditch, UK who says:-
I'd like to see a campaign educating pensioners that the national speed limit on single carriageway country roads, particularly nice sweeping enjoyable ones, is not actually 35mph.

Perhaps it is because on their incomes they are terrified of being got by a speed camera having not seen the speed limit change sign hidden behind a bus stop or overgrown tree.

D Cage, Highworth, Wilts

I am told that 85% of the planet's gatsos are in the UK. It seems credible when you actually consider how far apart these monstrosities are. I have realised that in accident (collision) hotspots, where my attention should be focussed on whatever qualified the area for the accolade, my attention is fixed wholly on my speedometer. A jolly green giant could bounce into the road - I would not see him. However, if the prevailing limit was 30mph, he might survive the encounter with my bumper while I stare at my guages!

Russ Williams, pinner,

I have never bothered to vote because I believe that all major politcal parties are much the same,all promising more for less.
I know there is no such thing as a free lunch so I largely ignore their constant droning.
However this is one law that will make me lose my ability to earn a wage,therefore any party that does away with it , or doesn't bring it in will get my vote.
This is one law that will affect me directly and I am tired of being a money pit/easy target for the goverment.
I am not a speed freak by any means just a punter doing a job driving 27k a year and constantly scanning for temp speed cameras with vague signs and wondering what the actual speed limit is!!

john thomson, edinburgh, Scotland lothian

I'm a driving instructor and I drive at the speed limit all the time, and I am constantly being overtaken and tailgated by other drivers who are intent on getting somewhere a few seconds sooner, no one seems to even bother about the speed limit. The problem is, we all think were good enough drivers, up until someone(a pedestrian) walks out from behind a parked car, then its too late, and its never the drivers fault.

If you cant be bothered to look at your speedo, or you think the law is not there for you, then you dont really deserve to have a licence anyway. Take the bus and get off the roads, because sooner or later your going to kill someone.

Damien Burke, Bracknell, Berkshire

“Police need the flexibility to enforce any breach of the limit, even 1mph over it.” says Rob Gifford, the council’s director.

I take it Rob has never tried to stay at a steady speed whilst driving over the potholed tarmac "roads" that we pay out our hard earned for. Its impossible!! More and more people will be watching their speedo's rather than the road for fear of getting points.

Why not just introduce marksmen on every road so that when we look like we may be speeding were taken out - We are a menace to society after all.

What a stupid rule.

Daniel Clarke, Aberdeen, Scotland

The Government should have a vote on the speed camera issue to the public, as there are strong views both for and against, I have two children, and still think the government is over the top on speeding issues, its just a get rich quick scheme, its not about safety, although they would like us to think that it is. Dont get me wrong going at excessive speed is bad, but the government is too busy making money from motorists.

James, Newcastle,

It amazes me that the control of speeding has not been privatised. It is a bigger money-spinner than the National Lottery. I don't own shares, but I'd put my life savings into SpeedCo. Perhaps the government cannot afford the loss of income, but they are doing little to capitalise on the incredible potential.

Alternatively, private individuals should have the right to fund a speed camera anywhere they wish, and to be given the proceeds from the fixed penalty fines. I could get rich just sitting in my front garden in my sleepy Hampshire village counting my bankrollers going past.

Steve Swift, Alton, England/Hampshire

Another money making scheme! Currently 6 points during your first 2 years of driving means you have your license taken away and you need to sit your driving test again! Would this mean new drivers were banned after one speeding ticket? It doesn't seem fair for somebody driving a couple of miles over the limit!

DW, London,

A misleading headline. It turns out that to be banned for two offences you need to be exceeding the speed limit by 50 per cent! If anyone does that, ban them straight away, I'd say.

I presume those who argue that speed doesn't kill don't have children or grandchildren of their own. Who knows when a child might suddenly emerge from behind a parked vehicle to cross the road? If you hit him/her, it may not be deemed your fault, but it's still obvious, as road safety ads point out, that the faster you're going, the more likely that child is to be killed or seriously injured.

Barry, Wallington, UK

speaking as a village victim of speeding drivers, i applaud higher penalties and more speed cameras. it is often forgotten that the faster a car goes, the noisier it gets

some motorists think they have a divine right to go as fast as they like- the governement must set out to show them that they are wrong

peter codner, devizes, england

Speed is NOT directly related to death/injuries. On Saturday night whilst driving homee at exactly 30 mph a motorist following me -in a Mini - drove around a roundabout on the right hand side even though it was a high roundabout and hee could not possibly see if there was anything coming the opposite way. Inconsiderate, dangerous & careless driving - which can include speeding in some instances - are far more dangerous.

Jim T, Solihull, W.M.

MRSA death tolls on the rise to 5500 a year. Road deaths 3201. Now I don’t know about you. But I use the roads every day and the Hospital ones every 10 years. If speed cameras could be converted to super bug cameras.
Nicholas Wood.
Wakefield

Nicholas Wood, Wakefield,

Surely if we are to be penalised for going even one mile an hour over the limit, this is going to generate a nation of over cautious drivers. There cannot be a single driver on the road who hasn't driven above the speed limit, intentionally or otherwise.

Who has not driven on a motor way and without realising crept over the seventy mile an hour limit? The only way to ensure your speed is within the limits is to keep looking at your speedometer and this means taking your eyes off the road.
Surely this is also a danger to pedestrians and other road users!

There is a very large difference between speeding intentionally and unintentionally. The law should reflect this and discretion
should be given to those who made an error!

Paul Moffat, Worthing,

To all those who say just keep to a speed limit to avoid prosecution - that's not the point.95% of all accidents involve vehicles travelling BELOW a speed limit so whilst keeping to a speed limit may guarantee you immunity from prosecution and keep the contents of your wallet intact,that alone doesn't make you a safe driver.There are far too many people on the roads today driving with their eyes on the speedo instead of the road in response to a government that seems to think that keeping to what they think is a safe speed regardless of conditions guarantees their safety.It doesn't.

A.Pittman, Bristol, UK

The stalinistas at their best!

What these dull brained civil servants lickspittling to their equally challenged political technicians fail to see is that the ludicrously low limits prevailing in this country were imposed on vehicles that bear little similarity to those now manufactured.

Speed does not kill but stupidity will.

robin james, sussex, uk

OK - but what is the government going to do about the c10% of drivers whose cars are neither taxed nor insured and who can therefore drive around with impunity at whatever speeds they like? Even if they are caught and charged (which is by no means always the case, incidentally) the fines levied are often less than the cost of tax and insurance - that is if they are ever paid! As ever, the nanny state will come down like a ton of bricks on the otherwise law-abiding, from whom fines can be collected easily, and do nothing effective against the rest.

alan, northants,

Every stretch of every road fluctuates as to what is a safe speed and what is dangerous. We used to be able to use our common sense, and the police were allowed to use theirs too.

The speed limit signs can only ever be a general guideline to a certain road. To enforce them to the letter of the law is excessively retentive in the back passage.

Spider, London,

As the level of accidents per passenger mile on motorways is only a fraction of that in dense urban area, why should we be giving draconian penalties to motorists speeding on a relatively empty motorway? This is just another revenue raising trap.

By the way, the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety is a self-styled organisation and NOT a Parliamentary Committee or any other official arm of the UK Parliament.

Neil Marshall, Cambridge, UK

Certainly, this may lead to a few less road deaths. Ten or twenty more people - at most - may avoid being killed as a result of this move.

But road deaths are falling anyway. And these people would grow up anyway and in due course die after their artificially prolonged lives.

Is it really worth losing the genuine pleasure of driving a modern car, built for speed, quickly in order to contribute to so-called government "road safety targets"?

I suppose it is. Bloomin' nanny state.

M Poppins, Partick, UK

Speed isn't what kills, it's attention to the road and the conditions that you are driving in. Sometimes the speed limit isn't safe; raining, poor visibility, children leaving school time and somtimes a higher speed would be acceptable. I think that the government should introduce more training for drivers, I passed my driving test some 12 years ago and only recently had an advanced driving lesson - what an eye opener - in one day I picked up more tips on how to drive properly than I had in the past 12 years - surely we should consider better education - this could be enforced v simply; if you want to drive a faster car (anything that is remotely "hot") you should pass the AIM or equivalent?

Richard, London,

I agree about the 'have your say' suggestions about smart speed limits to reflect conditions like rain (as in France) or when schools are closed. I also agree that there are worse things than speeding - drink driving and poor driving for example. But I do agree with these plans for increased deterrents for those caught at higher speeds. Bad driving is more of a killer than speed but bad driving at very high speed must be a lethal combination. I'm sure that speed is addressed so obsessively because it's the one thing that's easy to measure objectively but in the absence of good controls on poor driving I think we're stuck with speed checks for many years to come.

Jim Hall, Hampshire, UK

The only argument for fuelling the Scamera frenzy is 'at 35 mph and child is more likely to be killed' blah blah. As an exRoad Safety Officer and Traffic Cop I can say that the casualty figures for child and adult deaths on the road are virtually the same in 2007 as they were in 1981/82/83.

This is despite the camera craze. It's all about 'anything looks like a nail when you have a big enough hammer'!

Children getting hit by cars are almost 100% caused by kids on the road when and where they shouldn't be and NOT cars on the pavement.

In Scandinavia they are starting to prosecute kids and cyclists for 'hitting' cars instead of the normal assumption that the 'car hit the kid'.

Get children off the roadway and you will reduce child fatalities by the un-achievable 50% target this stupid Govt has set.

Blaming speed is a nonsense but it does bring in millions of pounds and helps to reduce congestion by getting driving licences off some motorists!!!

Chris Williams, Cardiff, UK

Am I alone in being fed up with listening to retarded sound-bite politicians (and some dogma-driven chief constables, who have remained PCs in one respect ) who clearly think that a motorist exceeding an arbitrary speed limit who, even if driving carefully, is more of a danger than a motorist who is paying more attention to their mobile phone or their cigarette than observing the road; or than those who fail to indicate when they are turning; or than those who pull out to the right before they turn left and vice versa; or than any other of the myriad grossly bad examples of driving that one sees in multiplicity on even the shortest of road journeys. They just target the easy-to-get cases on a quantitative approach instead of the harder cases on a qualitative basis. I will surely get shouted down for suggesting that more accidents are caused by bad driving and driver's error than by speed but with over a million miles driven on the road, I just may have a point! Ban the politicians.

Steve Buckel, Braunau-am-Inn, Austria

I agree that in built up areas we need enforced limits but there has to be some intelligence applied outside of that. Surely some concentration on bad driving is also in order, rather than just speed. I would endorse 3 or 6 points for anyone who sits in the overtaking lane of a dual carriage way or motorway thinking it is their right to be there because they are doing 1 mph over 70 or because they have XTI or TDI or whatever written on the back of their Mondeo...

Charles, Epsom, UK

People like me are easy targets for speeding fines, we can be traced, but are not necessary bad drivers. How do you control the driver without insurance and tax that probably hasn't registered the car. This I think is much more important. I am also a bike rider and am constantly looking at ways of improving by riding ability by training courses. How many car drivers even think about post test training.

Alistair Burgess, Margate, Kent

I live in South Carolina in the USA and there is always something going on about the driving laws and regulations. The legal limit for driving after drinking alcohol is now 0.8% but I feel it should be lowered even more. If someone wants to drink and drive, then do one but not the other. Better still, find someone who will NOT be drinking to drive you home.

I have said that I try to obey all the traffic laws as I cannot afford to make any contributions to the treasuries of the state or the insurance companies. If people realzed how much their car insurance premiums would go up for traffic offenses, then they would be a lot more careful.

Claire, Florence, SC, USA

I have no objection to drivers being penalised for breaking the speed limit by an ‘unreasonable’ amount, especially around schools, hospitals, etc. What I do object to, however, is ‘unreasonable’ speed limits.

Cars now have better breaks, better tyres and shorter stopping distances than they did in the 70s, so why hasn’t the speed limit been increased on the motorways ? Why am I restricted to 20mph (ridiculously slow) in some town centres, even at times when no one else is around ?

I think there would be more respect for speed limits, and consequently a lot less infringement of them, if some intelligence was evident when they were set. At the moment it seems the purpose of speed limits is to maximise the number of fines rather than increasing safety

Chris Long, Thirsk, North Yorkshire

To have a speed limit enforced to 1 mph would require all car speedometers to be accurate to 1 mph at all speeds. They are not.

Given the massive increase in the number of cameras and fines over the years, why are more and more children getting killed? Maybe it's time to wake up to the fact that speed in excess of the posted limit doesn't actually cause many accidents (around 7%).

How many accidents have occured the second after someone has been caught speeding? I'll bet my mortgage on "very, very few" being the answer...

It's time we stopped letting people get killed on the roads and start punishing bad driving (which causes many time more accidents than breaking the speed limit. Backers of speed cameras as road safety measures have blood on their hands.

Jerry, Basingstoke,

I dont know why they dont just throw people who speed in jail as surely that must be the next step. I know speeding is dangerous but these measures seem extreme to me. I reckon there will be a backlash if introduced as lots of people will start losing their licence.

If anything the Govt shold be concentrating on sorting the problem on kids and guns. It seems that some as young as 10 or 12 are also inviolved with these gangs.

Joe, London,

The biggest problem is bad driving. Sometimes that is reflected in speeding, but often its overtaking on bends, tailgating etc. I have narrowly avoided several accidents recently where someone has overtaken on a bend and driven straight at me. It is so bad I wonder each day now if I will return home that evening. I live in North Norfolk, somewhere with very high accident rates and the worst driving is often within the official speed limits

Neil Murphy, cromer,

As someone who drives about 30k miles a year...

...reading the of-so-predictable, pathetic wingeing, you'd think that the speed limit on any particular stretch of road was a secret, that the signs lied or that they deliberately hid them. Sticking the the limit is not hard, people. If you can't do it, perhaps you're not as good a driver as you think you are.

Matthew, Ringwood, UK

A terrible idea. All these "discussion papers" would never be voted for if put to the citizens. Motorists are fed up with being hounded by authorities who are not accountable. Fining and points and the whole poacher v gamekeeper mentality should be done away with. Allow motorists to drive as they like and use the savings from having to pay enforcers their wages to build pedestrian friendly roads. We're tempted constantly with faster higher performance cars and can never enjoy them because of killjoy nanny statists. If people die on the roads then we all have to live with it and be more careful. It's just a matter of how you want to live. In a cage run by policemen and traffic watchers or free with risk, danger and excitement. Build roads for cars and build pavements for pedestrians and keep them apart. No cameras, no speed limits no bounds.

Unfettered, Hong Kong,

not going to save many more lives . this highway robbers should turn to death by mrsa which kills thousands more.
beds in ward travelling at zero mph.

pp, london, uk

More draconian rules from the most authoritative government in our history? Ewan McGregor was right, this country is becoming intolerable.

Ian, Benfleet, UK

Driving laws need to be upgraded immediately to no drink allowed at all and if caught imposing a harsh fine or imprisonment or both and the person caught gets an automatic criminal record and the vehicle being driven is confiscated to the state for disposal.

Mike, Burley-in-Wharfedale, England

An excellent proposal. My friend was killed by an HGV going 20mph over the limit giving the HGV driver less time to realise he wasn't concentrating. He lost his license for 12 months and was back driving. Anything that encourages us to stick to lower speeds is a good thing.

As for all the moaning minnies who say it is just a form of tax collection - a tax you do NOT HAVE TO PAY - just obey the law. It's not a tax I choose to pay. Burglars don't say that fines on them are form of tax collection and they don't even get any notices in the press warning of them watch out for the police that weekend.

Mydaughter wants2 walk2school, Dundee, Uk

Chris of Didcot complains about our narrowmindedness compared to the Germans (who can drive at 200 km/hr on their autobahns). German road fatalities ca. 8,000 per annum. UK ca 3,500. The message is fairly clear. SPEED KILLS!!

John Turnbull, Bourne End,

In modern cars and on modern bikes the limits we have are very unrealistic apart from very built up areas. Dual carriageways, motorways and open rural roads should have higher speeds, better visibilty and no cameras whereas towns, villages and in sensitive areas like schools, hospitals and elderly housing should have the very best protection against road traffic fatalities and that DOES NOT mean just speed cameras as they do NOT judge a good or bad driver or act of driving. Punishment should be harsh at sensitive areas but advice given at others where higher speeds should be expected. Let's get more common sense back onto our roads NOT less. Drivers get severly punished but what of pedestrians steeping out in the road or kids playing in our streets? I see little point in banning a driver from speeding down open roads but do see the point in keeping drivers and pedestrians apart in built up areas. The Government have done lots to punish drivers yet speed is NOT the enemy people are.

Dan Whetton, Nottinghamshire, UK

Ive got to say im sick and tired of the same stupid people complaining that the initiative is simply to raise more revenue for the government.
if you break the law and are caught speeding then too bad. Stop breaking the speed limit and you will not pay a penny, its that simple.
That said i do not believe speed is the majority factor in road deaths. The competance of the driver is just as much an issue as well as inattention. But on a brighter note for drivers on Manchester's motorways who like to ignore the speed limit you can look forward to seeing less motorway police as they are all to be transfered to the road policing units of individual areas around Manchester meaning that they will be responsible for twice the area with the same number of patrols which means less chance of being caught, but beware wander into Cheshire or Lancashire forces by accident and you can fully expect to be done for being just 3mph over. Happy driving folks.

Andy, Wigan, England

This is purely about revenue generation. If the Government truly cared about pedestrian safety it would invest in roadside barriers along all pavement edges.

This would have two immediate benefits; barriers would act as additional brakes should any vehicle veer off the road and attempt to mount the pavement (a comparatively rare occurrence), and more importantly, pavement-edge barriers would prevent pedestrians mindlessly wandering out in front of oncoming vehicles (which is by far the more likely probability).

London Underground already employs a similar Platform Edge Barrier system on the newest parts of the Jubilee Line - what I'm suggesting would be the same principle but on street level instead.

Understandably, there will always be those who wish to scale the barriers and take their chances, in which case the outcome is on their own heads. This is not harsh, just practical; people scale barriers to walk along train tracks - but we don't reduce trains' speed limits.

Neil Hood, London,

I was banned under the topping up system, and although I clearly was in the wrong, on each of the three times I was caught on camera, I was only marginally over the limit. I drove over 5K miles per month and was accident free, but that made no difference. However, the irony was that once banned, I was forced to claim Social Security and was paid almost as much as I would have earned at my regular job. This of course begs the question; is a ban a punishment or a treat! Even considering the obvious inconvenience of a ban, the fact that a banned driver is then paid by the state to stay at home makes it something of a joke,

Tom Cassidy, Chester, Cheshire

At least you have a 4mph leeway before getting fined. Here in my state, it's 3km/h (even though speedometers are only required to be accurate to 10%). What's more, 25km/h-35km/h over the limit is an automatic 1 month ban (goes up from there).

Just as well it's only one point for under 10km/h over, and I live in the country where there are less $peed cameras (people definitely realise they're there more for revenue than safety).

Dean, Geelong, Victoria, Australia

Less speed is also safer and better for the planet and the environment. Also it is hard to know what the speed of the car is when it the speedo is reading something like 32 or 33 so it is better to stick to 30 mph. 30 is 30, not 30 is 35 !!!
Today, something raced past me at 50 mph on a 30 mph road directly into a massive traffic jam. I caught up with him doing 5 mph about 40 seconds later !!!!

Robert, London, UK

We should start by following Ireland and going metric with road signs and speed limits and then harmonise speeds and penalties across the EU.. We can learn from the best practices throughout the EU instead of "going it alone" and getting it wrong.

Peter Goddard, Epsom, England, EU

I totally agree with the strict enforcements of speed limits BUT the limits are not at all consistent. Here's ust one of the many examples - there is a dual carriageway with no pavement on one side just a brick wall and a fenced off pavement on the other side near where I live which has a 30mph limit then 200yards later the road becomes a single carriageway with pavements on both sides and driveways from houses opening onto it but the limit is then 40mph. Guess where all the moblie speed cameras are located when they bring one!

We need to get people on the law's side and remove anomalies like this. It is essential people can respect the limit and also that they are educated as to why they should keep to it. Our roads are much more crowded than Germany so the motorways must
have a lower speed limit.

Kate, Fareham, Hants

A lot of problems are caused by drivers who get into bad habits through years of driving (as well as inexperienced drivers). There should be compulsory theory tests every few years just to remind poeple what they should be doing. Also driving assessments at least every 10 years: not over a carefully selected course, but on a route from the driver's home and including the trip to the shops or work and a stretch of familar dual carriageway which would show, after a short while, normal driving patterns.
Most accidents are caused by driving too close or by not paying enough attention to what is going on!

Lindsey, Fleet,

Raising the amont of points will do nothing. This has been proven here in WA with the fines and points increased at the beginning of the year but the number of tickets been issued has not decreased. It is just a simple way for the coffers to have more money in them and to keep the anti car lobby happy.
As for speed camaras, whats wrong with the government, afraid to catch me the old fashioned way? Because that is the only way to make the roads safer and that is with more patrol vehicle's out there on the roads with trained officer's.

Steve, Perth, West Australia

I'd like to see a campaign educating pensioners that the national speed limit on single carriageway country roads, particularly nice sweeping enjoyable ones, is not actually 35mph.

Dave, Redditch, UK

The big menace on the road are cyclists of all ages who ride at speed on pavements and then without warning move on to the road, often in front of unsuspecting motorists. The other menace are motorcyclists who drive at speeds well over the limit, often with numberplates obscured by an item of clothing hanging over the back. Are they caught by cameras? The whole system of speed control must be looked at again; the offending driiver who exceeds the limit by thwo or three miles should be subject to a warning rather than a penalty. The electronic boards which light up to advise offending drivers are a better way of controlling a few miles over the limit speeds than the cameras .

A.Lawrence, Marlow, Bucks

It great to see how our goverment can squeeze another pound or two out of us! - It has long been recognised that for our major routes, ie. Motorways and A Roads that the 70Mph speed limit is unrealistic.

Interestingly enough though, I agree that in built up areas the harsher penaties are worthwhile. Though this needs to be applicable to all - not so long ago I was witness to a Police car driving in excess of 120mph and they were not rushing for work reasons!!! How many people recall the incident where the police couldn't recall which driver had booked out the car that triggered a speed camera... not something the public would be allowed to do.

Personally I feel that if the authorites want to enforce this type of action then they should be obligated to document everytime they have cause to breach the regulations themselves.

Dominic Lambert, Witham, Essex

Why don’t the government put as much effort into reducing the 30000 who die in hospitals due to errors as they seem to with drivers. Could it be that they make more money out of us drivers and would have to spend a lot more in the NHS.

Richard, Oxford, Oxfordshire

Dr Jimmy, Just what planet are you on? It’s obvious that your have not read or understood most of the replies re this stealth tax idea. Speed does not kill – idiots do. I know plenty of drivers who keep within the speed limit and are lethal. I don’t know about other parts of the country but around here the biggest problems are boy racers in over powered Saxos with break discs the size of side plates, little old ladies who can’t even see over the steering wheel and the groups of young lads wearing dark cloths and riding bicycles in the dark with no lights. If we had more real police and a proper court system they would be able to target the idiots and get them off the roads.

Mark Sheppard, Retford, Nottinghamshire

My motoring friends in Blighty will be happy to hear that the government will repeal this measure about 10 months after it passes. Why? Because the traffic courts will be overwhelmed.

The State of Connecticut did something similar approximately 10 years ago. The result was a near doubling of people pleading "not guilty" and a ~50% increase (IIRC) in the number of summonses. The courts could not handled the influx so as a practical matter these cases were "pled out" with the results that, in some months, the net effect was to lower fines (if at the expense of annoying motorists).

Happy Motoring!

CT Barbarian, Fairfield, CT

Fine if you are a politician or an off duty police officer, they are hardly ever prosecuted

fnusnuank, Gen, Switz

"of course 94mph is excessive speed" says mike.

really?

you must be a very timid and inexperienced driver. don't assume we all are.

30mph is way too fast in a built-up area near a school. but out on a clear motorway 100mph is a perfectly reasonable speed. not if you're tailgating. maybe not if it's wet. maybe not if there's traffic. not if you're in an old car with poor brakes and handling. but then all of those things are dangerous at slower speeds.

simply to say 94mph is excessive when many cars are designed to go double that and it's not even remotely taxing for the driver.... that speed in the right circumstances harms no one. if 94mph were dangerous per se, the police would never drive that fast.

I'd worry far more about the untaxed, unlicensed and uninsured drivers scooting around town than about the sensible, but fast, driver on the motorway. if the focus was there, at least people could be made responsible for any offences they commit.

jem, london, uk

Surely its time for the motoring public to rise up against this petty minded stupid government that the British public misguidedly voted into power. I for one am sick to the back teeth of being persecuted by the authorities and bleed white by the Treasury just for having the temerity to own a motor vehicle and wanting to drive on the roads that I and many others pay for.
When [If ever] there is a general election ask the prospective candidates when they come begging for your vote ‘What will YOU do for the motorist’ I’m sure you’ll be surprised by the answer, just remind them motorists vote, at least at the moment but then again with the present incumbents at Westminster that privilege may also be removed from anyone with a driving license.

Disillusioned professional driver, Derby, UK

The Bognor police a while ago changed a 40 mph zone to 30mph and set up speed cameras to catch a whole host of motorists..

Only one problem the length of road was NOT legally altered, the police and council officials having just changed the signs.

So it was changed back but no news about the illrgal convictiond.

So haw many others are there across the country?

Charles horne, Chichester,

What absolute nonsense! A knee-jerk reaction so typical of this government.

Bad driving causes accidents. Tired drivers cause accidents. Because these cannot be measured by cameras and radar guns the police have zero interest in them. They don't want the cop spending a day in court being challenged by a clever lawyer.

What is really sickening is all these camera schemes have the word 'safety' in their title. They are nothing to do with road safety (why are mobile cameras never, never sited where it is dangerous to spied?). They are to do with collecting money and meeting targets.

The hypocrisy is nauseating.

Roger Tilbury, Worthing,

Speed cameras should always be visible and have the ACTUAL limit displayed. Instead of focussing on the road ahead and children/cyclists hovering at the edge of pavements, I find I am almost continuously scanning the hedgerows, and overgrown trees for speed cameras. When I see one I am often in doubt as to the current speed limit because change of speed limit signs are obscured or missed (maybe because I have been looking for the speed cameras...perverse eh? )

The drive into London along the M40/A40 is a nightmare as limits change from 70 to 50 to 40 to 30. There is even a speed camera in the 70 de-restricted zone. Strangers slam on the brakes when they see it thinking it could just possibly be a 30 limit speed camera. As these cameras are already expensive items, could they not have flashing LED indication of the speed they have been set at. And fines/points should be invalid if the camera is not clearly visible (say) 100 metres away. Thats my "thought for the day".

Braychurchmouse, Maidenhead, UK

With regard to child pedestrian and child cyclist deaths increasing may I suggest a return to Police (- or nowadays, Community Support Officers) spending quality time in schools teaching both the Green Cross Code and Cycling Proficiency Tests? Schools, communities and parents need to teach children to use the roads safely - including in winter months, wearing 'uncool' reflective clothing. The onus should not be on the motorist to predict when an ill-prepared child is going to assume the roads are there for his or her convenience. This is not to suggest that motorists can go haring about at wild speeds, but enough of the presumption that all child deaths are solely the fault of the motorist.

A Dean, Southampton, UK

I don't really have a problem with harsher penalties for grossly exceeding the limit in dangerous places such as built up areas, around schools, etc. But, I see no problem with rasing the speed limit on safe roads such as motorways, especially at quiet times of the day or on roads which have low rates of traffic using them.

Why not establish a system whereby a driver can can undergo special high-speed training and end up with an extra authority on his license to travel at much higher speeds on Motorways? The outside lane of motorways could then be used for this purpose and a minimum speed of 70mph inposed on it at times of low usage, or suchlike. This system could even raise revenue if drivers were required to pay an annual fee to maintin their high-speed authority.

J.

JonathanL, Newcastle, UK

Camera's DONT save lives. Just look at the DfT figures. Since early 90's the death rate hasn't dropped. unlike the previous decades. There own figures say 95% of deaths happen under the speed limit. Incidentally the figures quoted about child fatalities is made out to be pedestrians, but this is actually ALL children killed on bikes, in cars on buses etc etc. We need education of drivers, education of children, more police on the roads, and get rid of the useless yellow boxes! Even the ACPO top cop Meredydd Hughes has allegedly been caught at 90mph, so even he ignores the speed limit!............this is just another way of punishing the hard working, tax paying driver. Go and catch some real criminals and leave normal motorist alone. Perhaps this is the governments way to reduce congestion-BAN MORE DRIVERS!.....and of course we will see an increase in driving whilst disqualified and non insurance, especially as there are no cops out there catching motorists anymore. What a useless lot!

Im Not Fat Either, Cambridgeshire, UK

In Oxford a major section of the Eastern bypass had the speed limit reduced from 70mph to 50mph because- tragically- a woman overloaded her car with seven children, resulting in the death of four people. Speed was not a factor in the incident. Last week , the local paper ran a story that many people were speeding on this section of dual carriageway- ie travelling above the new lower limit. While politicians set speed limits as a knee jerk reaction to general 'safety' concerns rather than according to what a 'safe' speed is according to the design of the road, motorists will also set their own speed limits. As with all the other punitive nannying that Nu Labour are so intent on, people will ignore decisions and rules that are not clear, well- balanced, fair and made after due consultation. Treat adults like irresponsilbe children and I'm afraid that is what you will get.

Dan, Oxford, England

Enforcement is all well and good. The motorway and dual carriageway speeds to be up'd to European speeds i.e 80mph.
We all know that Speed cameras are not just located outside accident blackspots and schools. Let's face it's Ladyman's steath tax dressed up in a road safety guise. It always has been and always will be.

The government don't even have to do the dirty work by justifying it. They loonie left do-gooders like BRAKE and Safe Speed. Then implement it by the Quango Gestapo (Speed Partnerships)

Sean Streets, Bournemouth, DORSET

All camera signs should include the current speed limit. I always try to keep within the sped limit but can be guilty of inadvertently not noticing a speed sign or just not noticing that my speed has crept over the limit. Often this is my fault and I would just have to accept the situation if I were to be caught. I am annoyed however by signs with just a picture of a camera and no indication of the current speed limit within sight. At such times I immediately worry that I may have missed a speed limit sign as a result of previously paying attention to other hazards at a road junction etc. Some roads look like 40 or 50 mph roads but may have had a lower limit imposed for some reason such a the location of a school somewhere in the vicinity. I think that it should be mandatory to put the current speed limit on every camera sign.

Bill Henley, Stroud, Gloucestershire

I find the biggest problem on our roads are the inconsiderate idiots who tailgate. This is so so dangerous and reckless and far more dangerous than speeding.

There really needs to be a campaign about it.

Jim, Shrewsbury,

Why are all these child and cyclist accidents the motorists fault? It's an absolute nightmare trying to avoid cyclists in traffic who pass you on either side, cut you up and wobble all over the place to avoid potholes. Many simply ignore red lights and other rules of the road. Similarly if a child decides to step out into the road without paying attention and I hit it, how is that my fault? If we all drove at 5mph with a red flag in front of us of course it would save lives. But the other party must take their share of the blame rather than the motorist being put in the frame.

Dave, Croydon,

The New Labour politcos and hangers on are becoming seriously addicted to abusing the public. They no longer 'represent' their constituents, they rule them.

MarkS, Leeds,

Speeding offences can be decreased by raising the speed limit.

I obay speed limits in towns, villages and residential areas but when the NSL applies, the gloves are off and the only limit that applies is the maximum speed of my car!

Zak Larue-Buckley, Leicester,

Jim Fitzpatrick, the Road Safety Minister, cites an increase in child road deaths in support of his policy.

Recently 3 children were killed trying to cross motorways near Manchester. What difference would speed cameras make to that? What does he propose to do to prevent more incidents like that?

MarkS, Leeds,

I never cease to be amazed at the ignorance and selfishness of some motorists as shown by the previous comments. Of course 94mph is excessive speed and, despite the rantings of people here it would be heavily punished in most countries. And driving fast in built up areas is dangerous- its that simple.
Drivers really need to get their head around the fact that speeding is not a tax on driving its against the law and therefore punishable. For me the proposal makes perfect sense as the excessive speeds that more and more people drive at need to be curbed and stiffer penalties should help. Please note that I say all this as a driver with a previous speeding conviction.

mike, herne bay,

Back in the 60's, futurologists in New Scientist predicted that there would be a separation of cars from pedestrians and cyclists. It hasn't happened, but perhaps if the lackwits at the DoT got off their brains, they would realise that separation of cyclists from motor traffic would substantially reduce all cyclist deaths, not just children. Just across the water in the Netherlands they do this - what are their statistics like in this regard?

Bill Q, Derby,

The proposal to raise the number of points is just the latest in a long line of tactics aimed at avoiding addressing the real problem - a failure to invest in high quality road design and maintenance, and the rather unintelligent belief that the behaviour of beings not well adapted to the driving task can be forced into adaptation by draconian legal measures, developed by ignorant and insensitive laymen.

Andrew Fraser, Stirling,

Just because you have chosen to live far away from your work, doesn't give you an excuse to drive dangerously.

There is no excuse for speeding, it's simply putting your own needs above the safety of others. It's selfish and dangerous.

If the £1 per litre encourages motorists to get off their backsides and do some exercise (maybe cycle to work instead of drive), then this is a good thing too. Maybe this would help motorists become more aware of other people rather than obsessing about their own needs.

Dr Jimmy, Bath, Avon

Your survey asked people what steps they would accept to reduce speeding offences. Slightly surprising then that 59% wanted more / improved speed cameras as I would have thought this would have the opposite effect(!). The agenda is clearly to capitalise on speeding as much as possible. Maybe the government should just come clean and introduce a new "Speed Tax" of say £100 a year, thereby making the revenue, freeing up police time and eliminating the perceived need for thousands of unsightly "safety" cameras.

To any motorist wishing to avoid the problem, my advice is to buy a car from one of my Lithuanian neigbours - no tax, MOT or insurance needed and no need to worry about cameras ever again. But that's another issue altogether.

Steven Matthews, London, UK

This is just one more of many reasons why my family and thousands like us are leaving this country!

Mark Sheppard, Retford, Nottinghamshire

I'm glad the government is taking it more seriously. The Times should routinely report when children are crushed by fast cars in the streets, as it does when firemen are killed in a blaze. I suppose kids get killed all the time, so it's not newsworthy?

Jacques Cartier, Cambridge, England

So Rob Gifford thinks that the police need the flexibility to enforce a breach even if someone is driving just 1mph over the limit. Doesn't seem to add up with the Government's recent pronouncements about reducing paperwork and bureaucracy for the police. Will it save lives? Highly unlikely. Will it distract police from focusing on far more serious crime? Undoubtedly.

I agree with the comment about 'smart' speed limits. There are many stretches of dual carriageway which carry 40 and 50mph limits during the day for very good reasons but which are pointless during the evening and overnight. But, where would the revenue come from then?

Oh, for a Government which engages its collective brain before introducing more draconian legislation.

Lesley, London,

This has nothing to do with saving lives, it is all about the money! After all, we have illegal wars, immigrants, the eu etc to pay for so it's back to the motorist for the cash. This is the reason why they have rulled out the lower points and fine scheme, far to much money to be lost.

Grant, Norwich,

I'm all for much tighter controls in built up areas. In the small market town that I live in, some drivers regularly drive at over 40mph when the limit is 30mph, and I get sick of the morons who drive up right behind me, and even flash their lights at me, because I am driving at 30mph. There should be many more speed cameras within town. On motorways, however, I believe that the speed limits should be raised to 80mph, or even 90mph, but, if they were, then they should be strictly controlled. Given that the police have said that you won't get stopped unless you are doing more than the speed limit plus 10% and one mile - i.e. on a motorway doing 79mph or above, then if the limits are increased, then this leeway should go.

If you break the speed limit there is no point bleating about it - you know what it is! (although I do accept that on some rurals roads it is not always obvious, and that does need sorting out).

Dawn, Saffron Walden,

I see very little comment on the education of children around cars. Is this another example of legislating against a soft target to hide shortcomings in education? Why was the biggest increase in deaths amongst children? I don't believe the average motorist (Including Mr M Hughes ACPO) is driving AT children with the intent to kill. Is a driver doing 40mph in a 30 zone really at fault if a child runs between parked cars into his path? I would be devastated if that happened but roads are for the use of vehicles and should be treated with respect - there are more than enough crossings being built in the towns I visit.....And YES I am totally in favour of cameras to enforce safe limits in the area of a school - its just that that I very rarely see a speed camera near a school...Why is that?

Volvo/Ford/Audi/Vauxhall driver, Bristol,

and the penalty for driving with cloned number plates???

jonathan, Sunbury, UK

Research shows that at zero mph a person is twice a likely to survive than at 1 mph. No driving ban will be imposed for those who are caught doing zero mph however parking tickets will be issued. While I sit in the corner sucking my thumb I wonder if breathing is an offence.

mike gee, bournemouth, uk

This is a tired old debate; especially in the patronising way in which Govt,. police and the rest of the moral majority assume that all car drivers have no idea that excessive speed kills and merely wish to drive as fast as possible at every opportunity. I would wager that most speed convictions are suffered by perfectly safe drivers who as a 'one off' stray a few mph over a 30 limit which is probably poorly signed anyway. The figures prove nothing.
The point made on different speed restrictions on identical roads in adjoining counties is spot on. If there were a genuine debate on individual limits then people would be less cynical, but this will never happen; in our democracy Nanny knows best. I suggest that police resources are diverted to detecting tailgating, cutting into slip roads and other manouvres with far more potential for carnage. And if you're going to target speeding restrictions, why not start with foreign HGV's which are seemingly immune from prosecution?

Allegro man, Somewhere in Suffolk,

So the money cow motorist is to be milked again. Points ok but why a fine if it's not just a money making scam. All those who enjoy seeing the driver hit time and time again want to think what will happen as more and more of us are forced off the road. We the car driver pay an obscene amount of taxes for the pleasure, or what was once a pleasure, and when we're gone you're taxes are going to go up to cover the loss.

Kate, Newcastle, England

You may get a 100% conviction rate for speeding, and the government will get the extra money that it wants to prop up its finances, but will it reduce crime? If your friendly, local burglar keeps to the speed limit then he will not be caught as the clear up rate for burglary is derisory. I suppose it will help to keep the clear up rates (as speeding is now a crime rather than a road traffic offence), whilst not reducing crime by one iota.

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

I am the only person I know who bothers to go out and do speed limit proposal surveys and objections as we all should. So I can give evidence that Fitzpatrick is wrong. Most of the limits are not scientific but entirely to satisfy some local perceptions and aspirations. (NIMBYISM). We never question the limits themselves. I can tell you it is mostly '30 for no reason at all'

Keith Peat.
sedgepeat@msn.com

Keith Peat, Sutton on Sea, Lincs.

When are legislators going to take the more difficult option of insisting on higher standards of driving on our over-populated roads? Inappropriate speed kills, not speed per se. Speed limits are rarely appropriate for the conditions - weather, volume of traffic, time of day etc - and, at the wrong time, 30mph can be lethal. Only by training drivers to a higher standard will we make serious inroads into the levels of death and injury on our roads.

Malcolm Cardy, Hindhead, Surrey

Oh come on people, the government has to make up for the loss in tobacco revenue from somewhere so suck it up.

Cromwell, Leeds, England

In principle it is a good idea. In practice it will be something else, another moneyspinner until everyone has lost their licence and there are no more motorists to fine. In all areas there should be reminder signs of the speed limit in force on the particular road. On the approaches to London suburbs there are so many changes of limit, many obscured by foliage, that I would not have a clue as to the actual limit, and then there is the 'safety' camera on a dual carriageway stretch with no houses, no crossings and no danger that I can see.
Having said that, it is about time that the deliberate speeders, rather than the 'momentary lapse in concentration' speeders, had to pay more.

John, Bremerhaven, Bremerhaven, Germany

The proposed levels are not low enough. Anyone driving more than 10 mph above any imit should be given the higher penalty. Why do so many people think they have the right to drive at speeds which are dangerous to other road users? It may be freedom for them but not for the rest of us.

John Claxton, Portishead,

Ahhh the New Labour philosophy:

Crime doesn't pay BUT motorists do! And they pay very well thank you very much!

Must be some new target that New Labour is trying to fiddle with. Maybe it's environmental one about getting people off the roads

Or maybe this could go the way of the Bin Tax. U-turn followed by counter U-turn (though not quite) followed by ????

John Goh, Welwyn Garden City, UK

Will politicians running late for meetings and police officers practicing their driving skills still be exempt from prosecution?.

John Wilford, Northampton, England

In my view the reason for the increase in accidents is that drivers now have to spend a good deal of their time watching the speedometer, not the road. I certainly feel that driving is now much more stressful; the speed limits are not clear, and there is a constant threat of fines and points for slight speed errors. These things are bound to increase the incidence of accidents! Are these people so ignorant of human psychology that they do not understand this simple cause - effect relationship?

David, Belfast,

When are the motoring organisations going to help out the motorist and stand up for common sense? Speed is not a killer it is inappropriate speed and usually mixed with other bad habits that the police no longer bother with - too busy form filling. I have a 55 mile commute each way each day and rarely see a patrol vehicle - just what Clarkson calls the Wombles!

Leave the poor motorist alone - we are being stuffed already £1 a litre and most of it extra tax!

Peter S, Letchworth, UK

That's fine provided we have realistic speed limits but it's become all too easy to lower speed limits to ridiculous levels thereby increasing the revenue from people who drive perfectly safely at sensible speeds.And when 95% of all accidents involve vehicles travelling below speed limits it would suggest that it's those we see who drive around with a clear road in front of them and an endless queue of traffic behind them and who probably shouldn't be on the road at any speed who the road safety lobby should be setting their sights on.

What is also needed is discretion when enforcing fines.What is a safe speed at 5am on a bright summer's morning when there's no traffic about is not the same as at 5pm on a dark winter's evening when it's raining,but when there's revenue at stake that will be conveniently forgotten.

ANDREW PITTMAN, BRISTOL, SOMERSET

This morning on the way to work on the rural windy roads near where I live a driver passed me, one hand on the wheel, cigarette clenched between his forefinger and middle finger.. while the other hand was stuck to his side of his head talking on his phone. .. I think he was keeping to the speed limit so that alright then isn't it.

Kevin Thompson, Reading, UK

I think this is an excellent proposal, and I fully support it. It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who speed and drive recklessly, especially on residential and urban roads, and all for what - to get home 3 minutes earlier so they can sit slumped in front of the telly watching Big Brother! I have no problem if people who speed kill themselves, but I do bitterly object when they kill pedestrians, cyclists, and other drivers through their stupidity and selfishness.

To those who complain that speeding fines are just a stealth tax or revenue-raising exercise, just be grateful: this is one of the very few taxes that you can easily and legally avoid paying - just stick to the limit!

The simple fact is if you break the speed limit you break the law, and must take the consequences if caught. If you don't like it get elected to Parliament and change the law - good luck, cos it ain't going to happen.

Neil Harris, Nottingham,

what a riduclous comment - "high-skilled migrant worker" are to abandon the UK becasue of speed restrictions? grow up.
I think a strict enforcemnt of speed limits in built up areas is a good thing but the government needs to offer something back - an increase on the speed limit on motorways would bne a start

mouse, London,

I don't think this governmnent wants any cars on the road.Would'nt it be great if we all left our cars at home for just one day ,in protest.

DPC, London,

This is nothing about safety and all about two things: a) An easy way to squeeze yet more money from the 'I'm too busy to contest this' financially able middle classes who generally drive at common sense speeds and b) Further tighten the noose of a big brother controlled dystopia by giving a reason to install cameras on country lanes. My points: As I type this, the news media of the last few years has reported a significant rise in murders carried out by young people, yet no draconian laws to crack down on that far more serious issue - because it is unprofitable. The real reason for most deadly collisions is poor driving by those who can only be caught by old fashion human policing. This is very very worrying - yet not a surprise from this 'Laws for for profit government. Next, cameras on every small street, but still no real police to physically chase criminals or observe that drunk young man chatting to his mates in the back seat. Think about this and act on it as you think best.

Time2Chill, London, England

If anyone believes this is anything other than a tax raising effort they should look at the reality.

These are automated fines, with no discretion or thought to the circumstances. 94mph on a deserted motorway, excessive speed?

As already stated, what the UK calls speeding, is elsewhere in the world just driving at speed. This is the function of motorways and cars.

One road with a limit can have an entirely different layout and to another road with the same limit. A speed restriction could be put in to reflect that there is a school nearby, but for the rest of the time be a perfectly safe proposition for double the speed limit.

Ian, Reading,

I agree with Alan Miney's comments below. The few times that I drive around the UK I often find myself on roads where there are no obvious signs as to the the speed-limit for that road. Yet there will be 'speed' cameras. It was all a rather sad and pathetic commentary on the UK - but now this Labour government seems intent to take away peoples driving licences - and jobs.

Why not just paint the speed limit on speed cameras? If the government wants to reduce 'speeding' - make it clear, for each stretch of road, what the speed limit is! Kind-of-obvious.

If any reader wants a grim experience, they should just go to a magistrates court and listen to people trying to defend themselves against motoring penalties. It ain't pretty and it certainly ain't Justice.

Alun Long, Westbury, UK

When are we going to have 'smart' speed limits? I can see why I should drive at 20 mph past a school at 8.30am, but why at midnight when the whole area is deserted?

And please, get rid of the tyre wrecking speed bumps.

P Robbins, Cornwall,

I always hated the draconian traffic laws in Britain...until I moved to the Gulf. The roads here are utter madness. People think nothing of driving at 80mph in a built up area. There's hardly any attention paid to traffic laws at all. The result is carnage. On a 5 mile journey to work yesterday I saw three wrecked cars, the aftermath of separate accidents, lying by the roadside. Last year 300 people died in Doha, a city of less than a million people. Having survived (so far) for a year, I have to say I would rather run the gauntlet of a forest of speed cameras than what I have to put up with here. The Qatari Government has just introduced bigger fines for traffic offences but it has made no difference. Mainly because the police do not enforce the laws and everybody here is so wealthy, even a large traffic fine is no big deal. Rail against the new U.K. laws if you like - but give give a thought to the alternative. It's not pretty I can tell you.

Defensive Driver , Doha, Qatar

the nanny state will loose all its high-skilled migrant workers with foolishness like this.

why is it safe to drive 200km/h in german highways but not on the M40 or M5 - it is exactly the same.

The answer is british narrowmindedness

Chris, didcot, uk

Once again Government wishes to "nanny" the public about driving, ministers saying speeding is as bad as drink driving merely dilutes the argument that drink driving is unacceptable (which it is) giving local councils the ability to change speed limits on local roads has led to confusion as to what the speed limit is. One council has a 30 limit on a dual carriageway and another council has a 50 limit on what is essentially the same road. Do the latest figures on road deaths not show that the current system of using speed cameras instead of Traffic Police is not working. Try using some of the 50 Billion a year from car taxes to build a descent road infrastructure with Traffic Police patrols and see the benefits or get out the Government stick and take driving licences away from the people who need them for work putting more people on benefits. Who will the Department for Transport be consulting with lobby groups, interested parties and not a member of the public in sight.

Alan Miney, Edinburgh,

I say forget all this points means prizes rubbish. Employment can be boosted by local authorities having a pool of "Red Flag" men at entrances to towns,perhaps using that inexhaustible supply of immigrants looking for a better life. These persons then can "escort" cars safely around towns, at walking pace ('cause you know, speed kills!) thus saving the lives of the witless plebiscite. Less pollution, more employment opportunities, happy "car haters", oh the neatness of it all!
Cynical! You bet!
All I need is a party brave consider the "driver" before headline appeasement policies and they've got my vote. Roll on election time. Up the revolution drivers!

Car driving VOTER!!!, Devon, UK