Speeding - police concern site criteria

Waiting for an internal review by Leicestershire Constabulary of their handling of this request.

Dear Leicestershire Constabulary,
The Leicestershire Speed Camera Initiative Report 20/10/20 says that future deployment must meet the new police community concern criteria of 50% of all traffic above the NPCC threshold (which is 35 in a 30 limit). Expressed another way, this means only around one in three vehicles travelling within the LEGAL limit is deemed acceptable.

• What is the source of this “police community concern criteria” and what is its legal status? (in relation to speed limit definitions in the 1984 Road Traffic Act).

• Where is the data that indicates that 50% is appropriate (or any other percentage)?

• From where does it derive the authority to effectively waive the stipulations in the Road Traffic Act?

• With such a large relaxation in the law, has a risk/impact assessment been performed to establish the how many more deaths/injuries will arise & if so, where can it be found?

Yours faithfully,

J Newman

FOI, Leicestershire Constabulary

Dear J Newman

I acknowledge receipt of your request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

This is receiving our attention and a response will be sent to you in due course and within the specified time.

Regards

Jane Orange
Freedom of Information Officer
Information Management
Leicestershire Police
http://www.leics.police.uk
email; [Leicestershire Police request email]
Tel: 101 Ext: 3307041

show quoted sections

FOI, Leicestershire Constabulary

2 Attachments

Dear J Newman,

Please find attached response to your below Freedom of Information request.

Regards

Jane Orange
Freedom of Information Officer
Information Management
Leicestershire Police
http://www.leics.police.uk
email; [Leicestershire Police request email]
Tel: 101 Ext: 3307041

show quoted sections

Dear Leicestershire Constabulary,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of Leicestershire Constabulary's handling of my FOI request 'Speeding - police concern site criteria'.
Thank you for your response. It was the 20/10/20 report that gave rise to my questions.
I fear you have misunderstood my questions, so allow me to explain. I am simply trying to get to the bottom of who has sanctioned what in relation to the law & what authority they have to do so.
1. The main speeding offence is contained within s89 Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, which clearly states:
“A person who drives a motor vehicle on a road at a speed exceeding a limit imposed by or under any enactment to which this section applies shall be guilty of an offence.”
In court, this is the standard to which drivers will be held, and you will notice that there is no reference here to any threshold other than the sign posted speed limit. According to the statute, if you are even 1mph over the speed limit, you can legally be convicted for speeding if a police officer considers it appropriate in his discretion. No reference is made to the NPCC guidance in the statute whatsoever: it has zero legal status.
2. In their safety campaigns, both Government & Police rightly play heavily in the fact that small speed excesses can make a hugely disproportional difference to the injuries that can result from an accident, so there is a clear human cost associated with speeding.
So we have two very good reasons for insisting that “30 means 30” for all motorists, not just an arbitrary proportion of them – the greeter the excesses, the greater the loss of life.
In contrast, a regime has evolved that has deemed a significant proportion of infringement is acceptable despite it being illegal and costing lives. I am simply trying to establish where the accountability for the associated decisions to do this lie and what steps have been taken to ensure the known consequences have been fully considered.
Furthermore, the aim of the partnership (LLRSP) is “to reduce the number of people killed and injured on the road network in the partnership area” so any action that might have an adverse impact is highly relevant.
So, returning to my 4 questions:
Q1: Clearly none of the decisions that have effectively relaxed the RTA requirement have any legal standing.
Q2: Perhaps, depending on what comparison you are making. The one I am making is to do with the proportion of traffic that has to be speeding before anyone shows interest in enforcement. The NPCC guidelines sanction 35 in a 30. Typically speed surveys in 30 mph limits show around 15% of traffic in the 30-35 band. The site criteria then require over 50% of traffic to be over 35, so the total over the LEGAL limit (30) is 65% = roughly two-thirds. What I want to know what “science” this 50% was based upon – why not 40% for example – who took the decision?
Q3: NPCC has published guidelines. They have no legal standing whatsoever. The decision to implement or not rests solely with the Chief Constable.
Q4: As there are known consequences to this decision, a risk/impact analysis should have been performed to assess the scale. This is standard practice to ensure decisions are balanced. Was one undertaken? If so, where can it be found?
So as you can see, you have misunderstood my request, which leaves Q2 & Q4 outstanding.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/s...

Yours faithfully,

J Newman

FOI, Leicestershire Constabulary

Dear J Newman

I acknowledge receipt of your request for an internal review for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

This is receiving our attention and a response will be sent to you in due course and within the specified time.

Regards

Jane Orange
Freedom of Information Officer
Information Management
Leicestershire Police
http://www.leics.police.uk
email; [Leicestershire Police request email]
Tel: 101 Ext: 3307041

show quoted sections