Road Safety Bill [HL]

The noble Lord, Lord Colwyn, has an interesting point. He will recognise that we have variable warning limits—they are not mandatory—on motorways according to traffic conditions and density, and so on. I have no doubt that the thinking that he has advanced will inform aspects of road safety in years to come. He will also recognise that the great safety issue is to have people secure about what the speed limit is and to get compliance with it. So far, the history with regard to cameras indicates that we have a way to go on educating a percentage of the public about compliance. My two noble friends, as usual in their exceedingly helpful way, have succeeded in unpacking the argument that I advanced a moment ago. Speed cameras have been in operation for the past few years. We have a lot to learn about their success. We have statistics, which show improvements in certain areas, and have commissioned an independent report looking at the whole question of cameras’ deployment. It is contended by some that the placement of some cameras could be improved on. There is an argument there, although it is not one that concedes everything to the road lobby—that constraint ought not to be applied—as my noble friend Lord Berkeley suggested. In the natural order of things with the deployment of so many cameras, not everything is perfect, even in the world that the Department for Transport happily inhabits. We learn from experience. The report is on the use of cameras and their deployment over recent years, and bears in mind all representations on the matter. The hiatus—it was highlighted by my noble friend Lord Harris, but I put it as no more than a hiatus—on additional deployment will last until we have taken fully on board the implications of the independent report. Then we will approach the issues on the principles that we have adopted all along.