Poll Shows Canadians Want Photo Enforcement Traffic Policing | High Tech Enforcement Red Light Cameras | Photo-radar

There were 2,778 fatalities on Canadian roads in 2001, five per cent fewer than in 2000.. Many of the drivers responsible for these deaths were breaking the law at the time of the collision.

A lot of serious crashes wouldn't happen if people just obeyed the law — and research clearly shows people are far less likely to offend when they believe they will be caught. Visible, effective enforcement is the best deterrent.

The Canada Safety Council recently commissioned an Environics survey to find out how Canadians feel about traditional traffic enforcement, including roadside checks, radar, speed traps and visibility of police in the community, and how receptive they are to the use of high tech devices to enforce traffic laws.

Traffic Policing

The survey found that Canadians are very positive about traffic enforcement by police. Fifty-five per cent felt the current level is about right. A further 38 per cent said they'd like to see more. A meager five per cent felt there was too much.

Residents of Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec are more inclined to think there is not enough enforcement. British Columbians are more likely than average to think there is too much, but even in that province, a majority is satisfied with the level of enforcement.

High Tech Enforcement

There's no substitute for strong police visibility in problem areas. But the police can't be everywhere, and some people can't be persuaded to change their aggressive driving habits.

That's where electronic enforcement comes in. Cameras, instead of police, identify vehicles that speed or run red lights. They are installed in locations with an unacceptable number of collisions. The owner of the offending vehicle is fined but no points are assigned to anyone's driving record.

Photo enforcement is used in many countries, including Australia, Austria, Belgium, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, Singapore, South Africa, Switzerland, Taiwan, the United Kingdom and the United States. In Canada, it has been implemented in British Columbia and Alberta.

Across Canada, public support for all forms of photo enforcement is strong. These devices have been shown to improve traffic safety without increasing overall costs, provided proper analysis is done before implementation.

However, the Canada Safety Council cautions that the cameras must be used to prevent collisions, not to make money or simply to punish offenders. The purpose isn't to collect more fines, it's to stop people from breaking the law. The administration of justice must never be linked with revenue generation.

Last year the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control developed a standard sign to indicate the presence of photo enforcement. The sign should be installed on approaches to an intersection or along a road where cameras may be present. When drivers know they could be caught if they speed or run the traffic light, the number of violations drop.

The value of photo enforcement can be quantified by assessing the targeted location before and after implementation. The measure should not be the number of offenders caught or dollars collected in fines. Rather, it should be the decrease in offences and collisions, with related injuries and fatalities.

Red Light Cameras

Nationally, four out of five respondents agreed with the use of cameras to identify vehicles that go through intersections after the light has turned red. In Alberta, the province which has the most experience with red light cameras, there is 86 per cent support. Support is particularly strong in Ontario (84 per cent) and Saskatchewan (88 per cent).

From 1996 to 1999 in Toronto, 52 people died in collisions caused by drivers running red lights. When the City installed a test camera on a busy intersection in 1998, the camera recorded about 60 red light violations per day. After a warning sign was installed and the location was announced by the media, violations dropped by half, to about 30 per day.

In November 2000, safety experts applauded the decision by several Ontario municipalities to try red light cameras. The cameras were set up at intersections plagued with collisions due to drivers running the lights. However, in some cases the signs were not installed. The Canada Safety Council expressed its concern that the omission, if not corrected, could undermine the success of the program.

Photo-radar

Photo-radar identifies vehicles that break the speed limit. Approval for its use to enforce speed limits in school zones was very high - 84 per cent nationally. Two-thirds of respondents supported photo radar to control speeding on the highway. Support in Ontario and Manitoba was higher than the average.

One out of every six fatal collisions involves speeding, but it can be very dangerous for police to chase speeders on busy highways.

The effectiveness of photo-radar is undisputed. Norway, for instance, credits it for a 20 per cent reduction in injury crashes. When drivers know there's photo-radar they tend to slow down. The Quebec government will use photo radar to control speeders at particularly dangerous construction sites this summer.

The Environics Research Group interviewed 2,114 adult Canadians between December 22, 2000 and January 15, 2001. When speaking nationally, these results are accurate to within +/-2.2 percent at a 95 percent level of confidence.

The Canada Safety Council has informed federal, provincial and territorial ministers of transport and justice about this survey.

Survey findings

 Return to top of page

Cameras Cut Red Light Running up to 60 percent

Red Light Cameras

2003 Survey