The policy of giving leeway to speeders in 'buffer zones' is under an official review and could be scrapped, according to a report by the road policing head of the National Police Chief Council.
The current stance, which allows the police to not prosecute those who are only a few miles an hour over when enforcing the speed limit, was previously criticised by the NPCC's lead on road policing Anthony Bangham.
The review, seen by the Mail on Sunday, claims that a change in message is needed "to ensure greater consistency of approach when dealing with those who exceed the speed limit". Currently a '10% plus 2mph rule' exists, meaning that those travelling less than 35mph in a 30 zone, or less than 79mph on the motorway, will not face any action.
Speaking in January at the Police Federation road policing conference, Bangham said that "the law is set at the limit for a reason".
“They should not come whingeing to us about getting caught. If booked at 35, 34 or 33 in a 30mph zone, that cannot be unfair because they are breaking the law,” he said, according to The Guardian.
Bangham suggested that the move would improve road safety.
“On average, 5 people are killed on our roads every day. Our role is to help make our roads safer, and we will seek compliance with the law to help prevent the tragedies that happen too often,” he said.
The NPCC alleged that transport minister Jesse Norman agrees that reform to road policing is needed, although didn’t clarify if the minister agreed with Bangham’s proposed policy change. A Department for Transport spokesman told The Guardian that speed limit enforcement is a police matter.
Bangham’s proposal has drawn harsh criticism from various groups, including the AA and MPs.
IAM Roadsmart’s head of policy, Neil Greig, said: “Drivers want more enforcement, particularly of drink and drug driving, careless driving and mobile phone use, and to see more traffic police out there doing it.
"The limit is the limit but a lack of consistency on speeding has allowed urban myths about thresholds and revenue-raising to take hold in the minds of far too many drivers.
"Simply adjusting the electronic setting on a few cameras is unlikely to eradicate road deaths caused by human error, fatigue or impairment caused by drink, drugs or distraction.
"IAM Roadsmart also supports speed awareness courses, because the evidence to date suggests that most people who take them are less likely to reoffend.”
Join the debate
Add your comment
"the law is set at the limit for a reason"
Is it? I can understand that the 30mph limit has been set to minimise injury in case of pedestrian collision but can this idiot tell me what "reason" has led to the 60mph and 70mph limits? If there is a valid and rational reason for these limits, why is it that the limits in Belgium and Holland are 75mph and 81mph. If there really was a real logical reason for 70mph being the optimum limit for motorways, surely everyone would use it? This guy is talking bollocks in an attempt to justify his point of view. We shouldn't let him get away with it.
Same old same old
Every couple of years when a new ACPO Road Traffic chief is appointed this story runs. “Zero Tolerance” i.e. 0.001mph over the speed limit is unenforceable as a matter of law as the instrument being used by the offender to measure speed is not accurate enough. This Clown Prince of Road Policing is saying that any minute exceeding of a speed limit is an offence so let us go for a minuscule infraction rather than 1 whole mile per hour to show he is talking utter nonsense. Whether a 10% + 2mph “tolerance is to be reduced is another matter but to give you an example a village I drive through regularly has radar controlled sign that tells you if you are speeding (much more effective than a speed camera) with the cruise control set to 30mph I have been told by this sign that I am travelling variously at 28mph, 29mph, 30mph, 31mph, 32mph etc. Bottom line my car is not accurate enough for a policy as outlined in this story to be enforced since I cannot tell if I am breaking the law and so it is against all principles of fairness, reasonableness and law to prosecute in such circumstances.
spqr wrote:
From what I can tell from what some other posters are saying, the answer to this is "set your cruise control to 28, not 30. Limit not a target" etc. etc.
I’m not defending anyone
Who speeds, it drives me nuts everyday on my commute to and from work, Quite a lot speed and tailgate when they catch you up and it isn’t just the ones you might expect, it’s all kinds of people in all types of vehicles.
And the speedo accuracy is “by law” optimistic, so if your doing 30, your really doing 29,28,27 or even less depending on what vehicle your using.
No it’s not that we shouldn’t be held accountable, the laws the law, it’s the fact that the law likes to pick and choose the laws it enforces. Motorist are easy, there traceable and are easy to get money from.
But it’s kinda rather annoying if you happened to stray 1 mph over a 40 limit and get a fine and 3 points, when the person that was shoplifting in your shop has zero police action, because that’s the way they want to deal with it now. Or the burglar that’s just robbed and trashed your house and the police response is to just give you a crime number.
If there’s to be zero tolerance, then let there be zero tolerance, employ a lot more police and enforce the laws of the land, not just the easy ones.