We know that the Average Speed Cameras will pay for their own Feasibility Study, their own installation, and maintenance in only a short time and at least until people start to take notice and just slow down. It's a shame that so much money has to be spent just in order to change people's behaviour but at least this method bring some money back into the system whereas fences, speed bumps (not possible on unlit 40 mph), chicanes, and signs do not. Indeed lowering the speed limit itself is a waste of time unless it is enforced. Average speed cameras would cover Roger Penny Way, for example, for more time in their first day than the police have been able to cover in a period of six months or more. So, apart from the 'ugly street furniture argument' (and are they really any more of an eye sore than lots of dead animals) they would seem to be the obvious answer.

However, when you read the letter from the Department of Transport, you can start to see where the real issue lies. A County police force, already strapped for cash and categorizing priorities, will of course be resistant to spending this kind of money. We can't go on like this though.