JP Smith: 'City does not conduct speed enforcement to fill our coffers'

"The only reason for the policy review was to determine whether the provisions are still relevant after eleven years and whether any changes are required," JP Smith said. File photo: Denzil Maragele/INLSA

"The only reason for the policy review was to determine whether the provisions are still relevant after eleven years and whether any changes are required," JP Smith said. File photo: Denzil Maragele/INLSA

Published Jun 27, 2018

Share

Cape Town - The City of Cape Town's Traffic and Speed Camera Policy, which was tabled for approval at a Mayoral Committee meeting on Tuesday 19 June 2018 and which will serve before the full Council meeting on 26 July 2018.

The policy is a review of the existing Traffic Violation Camera Policy, which was approved by Council in June 2007.  All policy documents are periodically reviewed as was the case with this policy recently.

"Some media reports have framed certain aspects of the policy review document as ‘new’ when in reality these provisions have been in place for the last eleven years," said Mayco Committee Member for Safety and Security; and Social Services, JP Smith.

Smith states that it has always been policy that:

- camera warning signs be placed not more than 1 kilometre from a fixed speed camera

- fixed speed camera housings must be coloured yellow or covered with retro-reflective sheeting

- fixed or mobile cameras must be visible to vehicles approaching or departing from the point of enforcement

"The only reason for the policy review was to determine whether the provisions are still relevant after eleven years and whether any changes are required. Public input was sought on the matter and the comments received are reflected in the documentation that is currently going through the various Council processes."

Smith added that there are two points of view on one of the key issues for the portfolio committee to consider, namely, whether the policy should allow enforcement staff to conceal traffic cameras or whether the policy should require them to be visible. 

"The opposing points of view on the debate argue that it is better for the cameras to be visible as a deterrent to speeding, on the one hand; and, on the other, that it is better for cameras to be concealed as drivers should always be driving as if they think that there is a speed enforcement camera around and not just slowing down when they note a camera," he said.

"The ultimate goal is to save lives and reduce fatalities on our roads as the number of fatal accidents on South African roads is extremely high."

Smith stressed that 'the City does not conduct speed enforcement to fill our coffers.' 

The existing speed camera policy, as well as the revised draft, are very clear on where fixed and mobile cameras ought to be used. The City of Cape Town’s Traffic Service is also the only traffic department that has such a policy in place. 

"Over the years, the City has seen a somewhat lower income from speed enforcement than other cities as our focus has been on ensuring that speed and other traffic enforcement is done where accident rates are highest in order to save lives. This has led to reductions or stabilization of the road death statistics in Cape Town relative to other metros.

"The public interest of every driver in Cape Town is not in opposition to the enforcement efforts of the Traffic Department – our efforts exist to serve these drivers and their passengers and keep them alive on our roads."

@TheCapeArgus

Cape Argus

Related Topics:

City of Cape Town