Anyone know any more information? Apparently kathleen wynne mentioned trying to introduce legislation after more than 20 years of no speed cameras. My guess is that it wont happen, since they've tried before many times to bring it back after it was abolished.

The only issue is that voters hated photo radar when it was on the 400 series highway and the conservatives at the time got rid of them to fulfill an election promise. To make it more politically palatable it is going to be in school zones (though down the road I would expect it be rolled out everywhere) with all the fines going to the municipality. Under the old system the it was like a red light camera ticket with a fine only to the registered owner and no demerit points, I would expect this to be the same.

If the real reason of the proposed cameras is safety rather than revenue generation then I would hope that there is a sign warning drivers of the cameras.

That's what happens here in the UK. There are cameras everywhere but there are warning signs right before them so if you are inattentive enough not to slow down then that's your fault.

The UK used to be a racetrack but now, with cameras everywhere people generally drive pretty close to the limits

I don't have a problem with them in school zones. Especially if there are signs in place that say photo radar ahead, much like there are with red light cameras now.

sorry not true, 50+ brit here, and that's simply not true

since the introduction of speed cameras, driving is more dangerous,

people speed UP to the camera then slam on there anchors.

speed limits on some spots have "suddenly" changed and cameras put up

it's a taxation for the government, stats have shown, little to no improvement in road safety

It's also been proved that with actual LEO's/marked police etc MAKE the road safer,

The 400 series compared to the UK, is abominable, tailgating, swerving in and out of traffic,

no lane discipline, etc etc

argyll wrote:

The UK used to be a racetrack but now, with cameras everywhere people generally drive pretty close to the limits

bobajob wrote:

sorry not true, 50+ brit here, and that's simply not true

since the introduction of speed cameras, driving is more dangerous,

people speed UP to the camera then slam on there anchors.

speed limits on some spots have "suddenly" changed and cameras put up

it's a taxation for the government, stats have shown, little to no improvement in road safety

It's also been proved that with actual LEO's/marked police etc MAKE the road safer,

The 400 series compared to the UK, is abominable, tailgating, swerving in and out of traffic,

no lane discipline, etc etc

argyll wrote:

The UK used to be a racetrack but now, with cameras everywhere people generally drive pretty close to the limits

The problems with our 400 series highways are manifold:

- poor driver training:

- new drivers are taught to cruise along in the middle of three lanes instead of keeping right except when passing creating moving roadblocks

- new drivers not taught to keep right, not taught lane discipline

- poor highway design:

- 401 across GTA has right-most lane often ending or becoming off ramp, encouraging people not to keep right

- on/off ramps merging with the left lane, eg: 416/417 intersection for westbound traffic

- shared on/off ramps where the same small stretch of ramp is both on and off ramp, eg: 417 and Bronson/Lyon

- law enforcement:

- police seem to concentrate on speeding while ignoring weaving in an out of lanes, left lane hogging, tailgating, keeping right

Markus wrote:

bobajob wrote:

sorry not true, 50+ brit here, and that's simply not true

since the introduction of speed cameras, driving is more dangerous,

people speed UP to the camera then slam on there anchors.

speed limits on some spots have "suddenly" changed and cameras put up

it's a taxation for the government, stats have shown, little to no improvement in road safety

It's also been proved that with actual LEO's/marked police etc MAKE the road safer,

The 400 series compared to the UK, is abominable, tailgating, swerving in and out of traffic,

no lane discipline, etc etc

argyll wrote:

The UK used to be a racetrack but now, with cameras everywhere people generally drive pretty close to the limits

The problems with our 400 series highways are manifold:

- poor driver training:

- new drivers are taught to cruise along in the middle of three lanes instead of keeping right except when passing creating moving roadblocks

- new drivers not taught to keep right, not taught lane discipline

- poor highway design:

- 401 across GTA has right-most lane often ending or becoming off ramp, encouraging people not to keep right

- on/off ramps merging with the left lane, eg: 416/417 intersection for westbound traffic

- shared on/off ramps where the same small stretch of ramp is both on and off ramp, eg: 417 and Bronson/Lyon

- law enforcement:

- police seem to concentrate on speeding while ignoring weaving in an out of lanes, left lane hogging, tailgating, keeping right

^^^^^ yep agreed, good post

bobajob wrote:

sorry not true, 50+ brit here, and that's simply not true

since the introduction of speed cameras, driving is more dangerous,

people speed UP to the camera then slam on there anchors.

speed limits on some spots have "suddenly" changed and cameras put up

it's a taxation for the government, stats have shown, little to no improvement in road safety

It's also been proved that with actual LEO's/marked police etc MAKE the road safer,

The 400 series compared to the UK, is abominable, tailgating, swerving in and out of traffic,

no lane discipline, etc etc

argyll wrote:

The UK used to be a racetrack but now, with cameras everywhere people generally drive pretty close to the limits

Well we can disagree. I am a transport operations manager with a fleet on the roads. I do agree that

Pulling people over is by far the more effective deterrent and also impacts every other driver on the road that passes by but I thoroughly disagree that the roads are more dangerous than they were 20 years ago. Ton plus drivers were rampant previously but are rarely seen now.

From the BBC:

"They show that at the 212 fixed camera sites across the wider Thames Valley region - which also includes Buckinghamshire and Berkshire - there was a 38% drop in vehicle collisions.

This is when you compare the three years before each camera was put in place with the most recent three years."

source RAC and Daily mail online

"But the RAC Foundation, which carried out the study, believes some of the cameras appear to be causing accidents rather than preventing them.

They have now written to seven local authorities warning them of the 21 suspect cameras their areas.

And they say that, because only a third of speed-camera partnerships overall supplied data in a usable form, the true extent of the problem could be much worse.

You can't just pick and choose sentences from an article. The article is talking about 21 specific sites across the WHOLE of the UK.

The article summarises as follows:

"Merseyside Road Safety Camera Partnership said that, of the nine camera sites identified in the RAC report as being of 'concern, two were in Liverpool, four in the Wirral, and three in Sefton. All are in urban areas with speed limits of 30 or 40 mph.

But a spokesman insisted: 'There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that any of these sites have caused a collision and in fact these figures if anything suggest the opposite.

He said all nine cameras – close to which casualties have risen - were installed in the 1990s before key casualty reduction criteria were issued from around 2000.

The Merseyside partnership was set up in 2005.

'Since 2005 we have continually monitored all our camera sites and these sites have shown a 42% reduction in all injury collisions and a 71% reduction in killed and seriously injured collisions,' the spokesman said."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z4PqFYqn47

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Has there been a series of injuries and fatalities in school zones recently that has prompted the cameras? I doubt it!

It's all about income generation... tax the people until they revolt!

The evidence shows that it reduces injury collisions. Just because you repeat the mantra enough that speeding doesn't hurt anyone doesn't make it true. A collision at 60 kms/hr compared to a collision at 30 kms/hr is safer for everyone concerned.

The speed cameras in the UK absolutely have slowed the traffic down which is exactly the result desired with speed enforcement.

Of course the cameras need to be positioned in places where they actually make a different and not just in fishing holes. You and I agree on the stupidity and tax-generation of that. - the same as police office enforcement in the easy spots as opposed to in all areas.

jsherk wrote:

Has there been a series of injuries and fatalities in school zones recently that has prompted the cameras? I doubt it!

It's all about income generation... tax the people until they revolt!

No doubt there is the lure of revenue that is appealing to authorities with photo radar. But I think there is an issue, or at least a perceived issue, of people driving too fast in school zones that infuriates the public to the point where they press their councillors to do something about the issue. The easiest way to address this is photo radar.

I don't have an issue with photo radar being implemented in school zones as long as there is signage telling of upcoming photo radar. The way photo radar was implemented in the 90s by Bob Rae created more danger than the danger it was supposed to reduce.

I'm now going to put on my tin-foil hat and wonder if the proposed school zone photo radar is the start of a slippery slope leading to implementation of photo radar on any road. If this happens I would hope that there are guidelines implemented to limit the installation of photo radar to areas where there have an abnormally high incidents of collisions/injury.