Road Safety Bill [HL]

It is not a question of their nomenclature, it is a question of their purpose. They are safety cameras because it is announced to everyone just where they are. They are prominently displayed and the motorist knows exactly the device that may come into play to take the appropriate photograph if he breaks the speed limit in that area. That is a safety programme. It is nationwide; it is even found in the road of my noble friend Lord Howie. As I said, we are not against everyone knowing exactly where those cameras are placed, because they are part of the essential guarantees that our roads will be safer, because people will obey the speed limits in such areas. However, there are other occasions when the police need to enforce the law. It cannot all be policed through permanent, fixed safety cameras. I have told the Committee that we intend to remove the devices that identify police activity in the area. I turn now to Amendment No. 76. The noble Earl, Lord Attlee, has an interesting concept here: why should not speed limit traffic signs be electronic, because they would send out signals to individuals and give that additional helpful information immediately to the car driver that he may not have witnessed with his own eyes? I must say that car drivers who miss speed limit signs and say, ““I did not see them”” are not the safest people on the roads; that is why they are frequently prosecuted. But I understand what the noble Earl suggests, that that could be an additional form of safety. He will know that we have a very large number of speed limit signs. I gulp as I say this but there are more than 300,000. I do not have a figure at the moment for the cost of each individual electronic device, but the Committee will recognise that would involve substantial expenditure for communicating information that, if the driver does not see with his own eyes, he is not driving with the care that he ought. I understand the motivation behind the amendment, and, in due course, we may reach the stage where such an electronic device becomes required because of the nature of road traffic in this country. We just do not think that the cost is justified at present. On that basis, I hope that the noble Earl will withdrawn his amendment.