ICBC – Red light cameras bad public policy
Posted in Commentary on September 14th, 2010 by Sacha PeterICBC is apparently putting up approximately 100 new red light cameras that will automatically give tickets to those that go through intersections on red lights.
The revenues from such tickets will apparently go to municipalities.
“We looked at over 1,400 signalized inersections throughout the province and gradually winnowed that down,” said Mark Milner, manager of ICBC road safety programs.
He estimated there will be a six-per-cent reduction in serious injury and fatal crashes at intersections as a result of the cameras.
The amounts paid out in claims for crashes should go down accordingly, he said, covering the cost of the new cameras.
The ticket fine revenue will go to local municipalities, not to ICBC.
The digital system means tickets could go out in days, rather than the current four to six weeks.
Although the cameras could run all the time, Milner said each one will only be activated part of the time.
The aim, he said, is to maximize safety, not fine revenue.
ICBC will study which times of day and days of week it makes most sense to run the cameras.
Milner didn’t rule out further expansion of the red light camera system.
“It’s possible we may consider adding more further down the road,” he said. “Right now, we think we’ve got the optimal road safety benefit per site at 140.”
Citing safety, rather than revenues, is complete bullshit. The public knows it, and ICBC knows it. Red light cameras do nothing to prevent accidents. You could even make the argument that they cause accidents (people realizing there is a camera on the intersection and jam on the brakes whenever they see the yellow even if they are very close to entering the intersection), but I do not believe this either. Everything I have read (that wasn’t obviously funded by some special interest group) suggests that there is zero to trivial net effect in terms of traffic safety.
Instead, as is common in these instances that safety is cited, the real motive is profit.
Now that said, I have no problem with the concept of installing cameras at high-risk intersections to be used (by any parties involved) as evidence to determine cause and blame in automobile accidents. This would actually be a net positive because currently there is little incentive for participants to actually tell the truth about their inept driving habits to ICBC when they make an insurance claim. Objective footage, such as coming out of an intersection camera, would be a positive step by ICBC.
But using these cameras to ticket red light offenders is just purely a revenue grab, and bad public policy.
When the NDP finally get back in government in 2013, it is also highly likely that they will use these devices for the purposes of speed monitoring since that is where most of the money is to be made.
Apparently in Calgary and Edmonton, their system (with about 50 cameras each doing red light and speed) pull in about $30 million a year in fine revenues. I was shocked to find out when I was there a couple months ago I actually did not get a ticket in the mail (not that I was speeding or going through red lights or anything there), but I did notice that the majority of the traffic did the usual 10-20km/h above the posted limits.
Hi Sacha,
Thanks for your post on our red light camera program and for the chance to respond to some of your comments. Some people, like yourself, may believe that red light cameras do nothing to prevent accidents. This simply isn’t true.
More than 40 per cent of police-attended crashes happen at intersections and red light cameras have and will continue to help save lives.
If fact, the most recent study, completed in 2009 and based on a five-year period, showed a five per cent reduction in total crashes at intersection safety cameras and a 4.3 per cent decrease in crashes resulting in injuries and fatalities. This reduction is similar to results of red light camera programs in other areas.
We aren’t aware of any comprehensive evaluations of red light camera programs in other Canadian provinces. However, there are many high quality studies from the U.S., Australia and other countries.
First and foremost, the intersection safety camera program is about saving lives and reducing serious injuries by deterring drivers from running red lights.
All intersection safety camera sites are selected based on extensive data analysis, which identifies intersections where crashes related to red light running are a problem and where road safety results will be most effective.
The goal is to prevent crashes, injuries and fatalities, not to generate tickets and to make money.
All money generated through tickets is returned to government and distributed among B.C.’s municipalities to enhance their policing and community-based public safety programs.
Which I think you’ll agree, will be a good thing for all communities in the long run.
Stay tuned to ICBC for more information on the program as it progresses…
Karin Basaraba
Senior Communications Specialist, ICBC
Can you please not recycle political talking points? You used exactly the same line that Adam Grossman did in late June 2010:
http://www.vancouversun.com/Orwell+right+Brother+watching/3214646/story.html
Also if you read the studies in question, ever stopped to consider if there were some other circumstances that resulted in such a minuscule decrease OTHER than putting cameras at intersections?
What a condescending copy-and-paste response by ICBC.
I’m sorry you both feel that way, but facts are facts. If you’d like to discuss this further, I’m always happy to help.
Anthony, note how they can’t even cite the study in question. This Karin Basaraba clearly is a paid staffer at ICBC that is diligently just copying and pasting the same talking points to the internet.
Here’s a study (University of Florida) that says that red light cameras INCREASE the number of accidents:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2008/fl-orban.pdf
They also stated that red light violations constituted about 4% of traffic fatalities.
@Karin,
Gosh, I didn’t know that facts are facts. Somehow, that tautology escaped me up till now. How much is ICBC paying you to post this stuff?
Anthony, because the Financial Information Act requires a disclosure of people receiving more than $75,000 a year, you will doubtlessly be relieved to know there was no “K. Basaraba” in their disclosure.
And that’s a fact.
I just turned 65 without any major injuries or accidents in my life. Do I want to live the rest of my life handicapped or incapaciteted because an idiot runs a red light and I get broad-sided? There are more and more ‘red-light- runners’ these days – I welcome more red-light cameras on all major intersections.
Sigh.
Well. I had to run a red light today because if i did not, the cars behind me would smack into me and push me into the intersection. Now I`m going to get a ticket because of that.
The people who are decrying red light cameras, calling it a “tax grab” and such can easily avoid paying this tax. Quit speeding and quit running red lights. It’s simple. This BS about having to run the red because you didn’t have the time to stop is only true if you’re speeding and/or not looking ahead to see the state of oncoming traffic signals. I’ve never encountered a situation where I had to enter an intersection after the light turns red if I’m staying within the speed limits.
Too many cowboys driving around Vancouver who think they have some god-given mandate to speed through city streets. Enjoy paying your tickets, pardner!
Hey Jim, why dont you open those eyes a little bit more. If city and government really cared about safety, they would install prevention that works! Red light cameras Do Not Work!!! Stop calling red light runners the bad drivers, because a vehicle that gets T-Boned at an intersection was not operated by a very goodndriver either. A good driver would ensure the coast is clear before proceeding, even in the Green. Most red light accidents are not preventable by the presence of a camera! There is a 2 second grace between signal change, this is the time most drivers get nabbed or run the light, do you know why? Because at only 3-4 seconds to decide, most choose not to slam on the brakes which is just as dangerous as running a red light! Guess what, cross traffic should observe and react as necessary. If a Tbone accident occurs, it is way out of a cameras capability to prevent, cause that red light runner was not planning on stopping, camera or no camera…and the other driver involved did not monitor the crossing very well! Other methods of control would be way more logical for safety than charging up the arse for a split second decision that technically shouldnt hurt anyone!