Cash Grab Or Life Saver? Speed Cameras Save Money And Lives

Pedestrians and cyclists in BC are killed and injured at a rate that would never be accepted in any other public space. We ask a simple question with a complex political answer: if automated speed enforcement cuts injuries and deaths so reliably, why isn’t it everywhere it’s needed?

Dr. Brandon Yau, Medical Health Officer with Vancouver Coastal Health, helps us unpack how speed and red light cameras actually work, where they’re currently deployed, and what the data shows about their impact. We examine the “cash grab” myth head‑on and discuss how to design a fair program with clear signage, robust technology, and transparent, revenue‑neutral operations that reinvest any residual funds into road safety.

Transcript

Why Road Injuries Are A Health Crisis

SPEAKER_01 0:06

Welcome to Bike Tent, the BC Cycling Coalition's podcast, where we talk about all things related to active transportation advocacy in BC. I'm your host, Peter Ladner, Chair of the Board of the BC Cycling Coalition. I hope you enjoy the show. Every week in British Columbia, an average of one pedestrian is killed in a collision with a car. Every day, more than six pedestrians are injured in collisions with cars. Every year in BC, seven to nine cyclists are killed by cars. And every day, more than four cyclists are injured by car crashes. We have a problem. But we also have a solution. And what is frustrating and interesting to me is that we do not implement that solution. So today our guest is Dr. Brandon Yao, who is a medical health officer for Vancouver Coastal Health. He's based in Vancouver. He has some answers for us. What really causes accidents? Why are cars still being allowed to wreak this havoc on pedestrians, cyclists, and other vulnerable road users? And what could we do about that? Welcome, Dr. Yao. Thanks for having me, Peter. So you've told me this is what you consider a priority policy topic. Could you first explain why Vancouver Coastal Health is so in so interested in this topic?

SPEAKER_00 1:46

Yeah, absolutely. So my role at Vancouver Coastal Health as a medical health officer means that I am trained in public health and preventative medicine. And it really is to do with that public health and preventative medicine piece. Part of my role is to address illness and injury in our population. One of the top causes of injury hospitalization in British Columbia, as you've mentioned, is transport-related injuries. And this is across almost all age groups. So it really is brought to the top in terms of one of our top priorities to reduce the number of people who are injured on our roads. And automated speed enforcement, the topic of today, is really one of the best evidence-based interventions that we've been able to identify. And we really want to implement more widely across the province.

SPEAKER_01 2:38

I understand that in Vancouver alone, in the city, the cost the direct health costs from these kinds of injuries and crashes is $92,000 a day. So there's a very big financial factor at play here. But could you just explain to us now what is automated speed enforcement?

SPEAKER_00 2:57

Automated speed enforcement at a very simple level is just the use of technology to monitor and enforce speed limits on our roads, as well as other road rules such as red light running and things like that. It's more commonly known as kind of red light cameras

What Automated Speed Enforcement Does

SPEAKER_00 3:15

or speed cameras to the public. Well, first of all, how much are we already using this technology? Our current intersection safety camera program consists of 140 cameras at high-risk intersections, and they are in 26 communities across British Columbia. A vast majority of those cameras are only looking at red light running offenses. And then a small number of them, 35, are looking at both red light running as well as speeding offenses.

SPEAKER_01 3:46

So 140 throughout the province. I would just reckon that there are many, many more dangerous intersections than that in the province. Never mind stretches of highway and places of school zones that require people to go slower. But for some reason, we've kind of stopped there. Who decides when and where these speed cameras or red light cameras are put in place?

SPEAKER_00 4:13

There's definitely a significant need for expansion of this program. And we'd have seen across many municipalities over many years requesting that the provincial government expand this program. So there is definitely a documented, significant need for more of this type of intervention. The province's response to the 2024 resolution calling for an expansion, they are a bit more open to examining it. So what the province has stated is that they are currently reviewing the current program and considering an expansion. And uh the information that I have is that they're considering an expansion for 2027, which may include new technologies and new funding models. So that may be something that's relevant because I think that that actually may be a policy window right now as well. In terms of your second question about how we identify these intersections, um, ICBC does have a complicated site selection model that identifies higher risk intersections for crashes and fatalities and severity of crashes. And so that's how they have decided where these ones exist. But I know that many municipalities and local communities have a lot of local knowledge and are have been identifying intersections and stretches of road that need more interventions and specifically requesting intersection safety cameras or or safety cameras in general in those areas as well.

SPEAKER_01 5:44

So before I ask questions about uh fighting back the cash grab accusation, do these intersection cameras work? Are they accurate? And are they how expensive are they to put in?

SPEAKER_00 5:56

They are they're incredibly effective. We have looked into the research uh examining their efficacy as well as their impact. And most of the research that's been done on speed enforcement or automated speed enforcement are based on real life um interventions in in multiple municipalities and multiple jurisdictions around the world. What they found, what these studies have found, is that these interventions can reduce by 50% uh crashes resulting in injury, up to 40% reduction in fatalities, up to 65% reduction in speeding. So, really, those are the types of endpoints that we are wanting to achieve. And so those are all very, very important. In terms of cost effectiveness, there's a cost-benefit ratio of

How Sites Are Chosen And Why Expansion

SPEAKER_00 6:45

around 1 to 14.5. So it is a relatively cost-effective intervention that not only saves lives, but it saves our system uh money as well. The available ICBC data that I was able to find showed that our program that was implemented in 2011 had a 14% reduction in collisions in the immediate year and a half after they introduced their intersection safety camera program. So we even have really local data to show that these interventions are really effective and save our system money.

SPEAKER_01 7:18

So they work, they save lives, they're cost effective, and you say the municipalities want them. Let's talk a little more about who wants them and who doesn't want them. What is the data on public support for these? Because I've got to say the word cash grab, which inevitably comes up when this topic is raised.

SPEAKER_00 7:38

We do have uh good polling data to demonstrate strong public support for these interventions. The data that I was able to find was from 2023, a public opinion survey that showed around uh 70% of British Columbians uh agreeing with uh the use of speed on green and red light camera enforcement. What does speed on green mean? Oh, that that essentially means speeding through intersections versus running a red light.

SPEAKER_01 8:05

Okay. 70% support. And the municipalities want it, the coastal health people want it, lives could be saved, money could be saved. Why don't we have more of it?

SPEAKER_00 8:17

Yeah, I think there are a lot of benefits. One of the barriers primarily is just that the uh program brings political risk. Yeah, essentially to anyone who wants to expand the program in British Columbia. Um, we have experience here in British Columbia in 2001 with our old uh photo radar program. Uh, and we have our provinces in Ontario and Alberta uh that have gone through recent shrinkage of the program or cancellation of these programs because of public backlash. So I think it's important for us to be aware of the political uh liability of owning a program or running a program that's not well managed or well operated.

SPEAKER_01 8:58

We're gonna get to to what it would take to make it more politically appealing in a minute. But do you have data on the actual potential political damage from bringing this in, other than some angry calls to talk shows? I mean, is there really a groundswell of opposition to these when the polls show that 70% of the people are in favor of them?

SPEAKER_00 9:18

Yeah, I think I don't have any specific data to speak to that point, but I think the experience in other provinces, as well as British Columbia in in the 2000s, really demonstrate how quickly things can turn if this is not a well-run program. Uh and so, yeah, generally people do support this intervention, but uh there are definitely a lot of pitfalls to running it. So just making sure that all of those pieces are in place uh to ensure that there's a longevity of this program because we know that it can and it does save lives.

SPEAKER_01 9:53

Let's talk about what a well-run program is. But first, I just want to mention I read somewhere about some stretch of road in some town where they set some the cameras up and they were just nailing car after car after car and bringing in, they were, I think, using it to finance the municipality. And there was no warning. People were very angry because the common speed through that area was higher than the limit. And I could fully understand how people could be angry about that. But your research has shown that there are ways to set this up where people don't get angry and they understand and they feel it's

Do Cameras Work And Are They Worth It

SPEAKER_01 10:30

a fair call. Tell us more about that.

SPEAKER_00 10:32

Yes, uh, the BC Injury Prevention Committee, which is a group of injury prevention uh folks at health authorities, uh, conducted a research study and a public opinion polling study that looked at this specific question because we do want to kind of have widespread public understanding and support for these interventions. And so some of the findings from that survey was essentially that um elements that increased public support uh included the fact that there were no surprises that this enforcement was in place. So something as simple as signage to warn uh drivers or motorists that enforce automated enforcement was in effect to ensure revenue transparency. So just again, being clear about and communicating to the public how the revenues from the fines were being directed to road safety measures. And the other pieces were more so about uh ensuring that technology is uh robust and reliable and good technical design, and then as well as community engagement as well. And so those pieces really can increase uh public support and kind of continue the um longevity of the program.

SPEAKER_01 11:43

So transparency just means putting some signs up saying caution, this area is under camera surveillance or something.

SPEAKER_00 11:49

Yeah. Essentially how this works in some jurisdictions is that there'll just be a sign to say automated enforcement in effect. So just to give people an awareness so that they're not caught by surprise.

SPEAKER_01 12:00

And when people see that, does that slow them down in itself?

SPEAKER_00 12:05

Yeah, so I mean, that's part of the effect and the brilliance of this program is that uh not only it really is one of the few interventions that addresses driver behavior, and we see that um impact long-lasting in the in the research evidence. So we see people slowing down, which is the risk factor or the behavior that is the greatest risk of an injurious crash. I just want to also mention that um the issue of the cash grab, I think one of the pitfalls that we can fall into is to try to sell this program, especially in our current economic and political times as a revenue generating system. We need to be careful about that because a well-run, effective program would not generate revenue. People would be driving below the speed limits because that's what we want. We don't want to collect lots of money from drivers who are speeding. We want people to not speed because we don't want people to be injured or die on our roads. So that's a critical piece because I hear that a lot from advocates sometimes to say, oh, we need these cameras so that we can catch those bad actors. Uh yes, we do, but it's primarily about uh reducing the behavior in the first place.

SPEAKER_01 13:22

Do you think these should be revenue neutral? I don't I'm not sure what that means, like just paying for the cost of the cameras or or what? Because that expression comes up sometimes.

SPEAKER_00 13:31

And the the evidence from other jurisdictions that have uh really well-run programs, I think Australia is one of those examples. Uh, they do have and they do run a revenue neutral program. And I think it is strategic to communicate that to the public so that they don't get this perception that it's a cash grab, that the intention is to run a revenue neutral program. And the more that they're able to demonstrate that it's revenue neutral, the more that they're really able to focus on the why of having this program in the first place. And they're not trying to um uh to unnecessarily tax their citizens. They don't necessarily want to add that. They want to reduce injuries. And so I think it uh ensures that we remain laser focused on the actual uh goal of the program.

SPEAKER_01 14:17

And you mentioned that the proceeds should or do go to road safety measures. Is that the case in BC?

SPEAKER_00 14:25

Yeah, so my understanding is that uh currently in British Columbia, the kind of the revenues from the violation tickets are combined with all violation ticket revenues, and then they're sent back to the municipalities as general revenue. Um so uh it so in based on that, I don't think

Public Support Versus Political Risk

SPEAKER_00 14:45

that our program right now in British Columbia kind of fulfills that checkbox of being able to say back to our communities the revenues are going back to improve road safety. So it would be ideal if any of the revenue, and hope, you know, the smaller the revenue actually, the better the program is running. So the small amount of revenue that is generated should be going back to improve road safety because it it's a great kind of um self-fulfilling loop in some ways.

SPEAKER_01 15:12

I I love the idea of thinking of this as a cost-saving grab in that you can eliminate the cost of police officers huddling behind a tree with a radar gun and some up the road picking up uh speeders, which seems to me uh bizarrely and grossly uh last century way of trying to trying to identify and enforce uh speeding problems. But I also heard that when people have been nailed by these cameras, there's a very impressive rate of improved uh behavior afterwards.

SPEAKER_00 15:51

Yeah, I um I think that's kind of borne out in the the speed data that's uh in places where these have been implemented. So we often do see a uh increase in uh fines or infractions early on in the implementation of these uh speed cameras, and then they quickly drop and level out. That really demonstrates that driver behavior is really effectively impacted. Um, and I think maybe I'll just since you mentioned law enforcement, I failed to mention one of the great benefits of this program as well is that it kind of reduces law enforcement um time on enforcing speed on our roads and it kind of allows them to focus on other policing priorities. There are also some areas, uh some roads and some uh spaces where it's not safe for law enforcement to be uh on the road enforcing speed or or monitoring speed. So it there's a lot of benefits for law enforcement as well. And we try to work closely with our law enforcement partners to kind of build support for this program because I think that there's a lot of natural alignment with their work as well.

SPEAKER_01 17:00

Do the RCMP and the municipal police like these cameras?

SPEAKER_00 17:04

Yeah, I've not been in contact with RCMP specifically, but from what I've heard at the city of Vancouver is that there is what they are building support from the chief of police currently to with this program. Um, and I I think that there have been other municipalities that have spoken to their chiefs of police and RCMP. And I I think I I don't see anticipate a lot of opposition because it really supports their work and their mandate to public safety.

SPEAKER_01 17:42

Now I know Vancouver Coastal Health is not in the business of being lobbyists with the provincial government or whoever, but I you you like to say you're you're advocates for safety measures. Fair enough. Uh who else is involved in advocacy of this? I know Vision Zero is an organization that's just starting to find its feet in BC in some municipalities. There are obviously individuals on councils and and elsewhere, cycling organizations who would like to see this, but who's pushing for it and what is the most effective way, do you think, to have more of these cameras brought in?

SPEAKER_00 18:20

Yeah, I think there's a lot of grassroots um movements and grassroots organizations pushing for this. Organizations like like the BC Cycling Coalition, like Hub Cycling. Um, I've seen lots of community organizations in the Sunshine Coast within Vancouver Coastal Health really taking road safety into their own hands because they perceive a lack of kind of uh leadership at our provincial govern at our provincial level. So there's a lot of local organizing that's happening. I do think that on this specific um issue at hand, uh the municipalities

Designing A Fair, Transparent Program

SPEAKER_00 19:00

really are leading the way. Um I did a review of a recent UBCM or UBC, the Union of BC municipalities resolutions in the past several years. And there have been dozens of municipalities that have expressed support. There have been many resolutions that have been passed uh year after year calling for an expansion of this program. Um there's been multiple council letters to the BC government to support the expansion of this program. So uh municipalities have really been leading the way for many, many years. And so I think part of my role is to kind of help support that with the health rationale or the health lens and to bring that to the fore. Ultimately, this is a the in in British Columbia, this is a program that's run by ICBC and Road Safety BC. So they're the ultimate um deciders, uh, but there is good movement in the past several years. And it seems like the provincial government has been a little bit more receptive in the past several years than they have been previously.

SPEAKER_01 20:07

I do remember, I think it was Gordon Campbell many years ago, who, in an act of what was seen or portrayed as populist pulse taking, saying, we're getting rid of these. There's freedom for drivers now from now on. I don't know whether that, uh, whatever data or instincts drove that decision are still at play in the provincial government and making them somewhat fearful of offending certain drivers who think they have a right to drive around and kill people.

SPEAKER_00 20:39

What's front in mind for me is just the experience in in Ontario and Alberta and how quickly it can be a political win to not have these types of programs. And so I think that that is the major challenge that we have to kind of encounter because the the argument for it is maybe somewhat more nuanced. You know, the the scary thing of being fined or taxed is always an easy sell for people. Uh, whereas the safety uh argument can be a little bit more challenging to convince uh the public. Yeah.

SPEAKER_01 21:14

We're we've talked mostly now here about cameras, uh, but there are other ways technology can be used to slow down traffic and keep people within the speed limits. Uh those signs with the readout boards that say how fast you're going and how much the speed limit is, pretty simple, uh unintrusive, but are they effective?

SPEAKER_00 21:36

Yeah, the the research that I've seen shows that they are relatively effective. That's purely educational in some ways and maybe a little bit of peer pressure. So there's no enforcement attached to that, but I think it can be insightful. People may not realize how quickly they're they're going down a road. Uh, and so those are kind of interventions that can be strategically placed that can influence driver behavior. I'm not sure if they are as effective as speed enforcement, but I think that there is definitely some evidence to show that those uh can be effective if placed in the right uh situation.

SPEAKER_01 22:13

One would assume they are because you see them so often. Uh there's another measure. I mean, I'm sure there are many. Well, a couple others I'd like to mention. One is this system where at the beginning of a stretch of highway, you're warned that the average speed on this highway cannot exceed, say, I don't know, 100 kilometers an hour. And you're everybody who goes through is is clocked or photographed at the beginning and at the end, and if your speed at that time comes out over the limit, you're fined. And you can speed up along the way to pass somebody or something, but you can't keep a consistent higher speed. Do we have any of those in the works or coming in BC that you're aware of?

SPEAKER_00 22:53

Yeah, I I think what you're describing may be something called point-to-point cameras. And it would um in my hierarchy, and I don't know if this is a correct hierarchy, but that fits under automated speed enforcement as a general category. Yeah, you're right. There's there's a camera at the beginning, there's a camera at the end, and it kind of uh kind of tracks how fast you go through by making that calculation. I I think that this is uh a potential uh addition to our current system in British Columbia, primarily because it doesn't rely on being on it at an intersection. Um I know that intersections are one of the highest risk locations for collisions, um, but highways are also high risk. So it so it's a unique application for uh highways where people may be traveling at extremely high speeds. And I believe that that is under consideration for uh for a potential expansion of our system. Yeah. That would be interesting.

SPEAKER_01 23:49

Another area that I've heard about, and I can really see the political dangers of this one. We already have governors on e-bikes.

Revenue Neutrality And Reinvesting Fines

SPEAKER_01 24:00

They can't go over 32Ks. We have governors on the big trucks, they have a limitation on how fast they can go. In between, all the majority of the vehicles can go as fast as they want. It would be very simple to put something in the car that prevents them from going over a certain speed. Or even in a very sophisticated world that knows what speed limit is at a particular place and then it adjusts accordingly. Do you see that coming? Is that in any way politically feasible? And if so, have you studied that at all?

SPEAKER_00 24:33

I haven't looked at any of the research on that or or the emerging research on that, I should say. Um, it's an interesting kind of potentially new intervention. Yeah, I it's it's hard to say because I don't think that this has been really studied or implemented anywhere that I'm aware of. But um, with more uh use of kind of uh satellite technology, our maps are able to tell us how fast we should be going when we're driving and we're using that technology. It would definitely be possible. It's interesting because you know the automated speed enforcement technology that we're talking about is is quite old. Um it's just and it's it's it's been proven. Uh, I think the challenge is that they've not been effectively utilized in our jurisdiction necessarily. So uh thinking about the newer technology is really interesting and how it can really improve road safety significantly more. Yeah, the best evidence that I'm aware of is is from kind of our our dated but uh underutilized technologies like ASC.

SPEAKER_01 25:37

Well, one place that they could be tested would be in municipal fleets or corporate fleets where uh those particular vehicles would be held back to a certain speed limit by something in inside the vehicle. Uh and perhaps that would be a way to test it and begin its implementation. Dr. Yao, uh I am thinking I've covered all that I'm interested in covering this in this question. With one exception, you're with Vancouver Coastal Health. If somebody were in, say, Prince George or Fort St. John and they thought we've got to get going on this, do could they call their health authorities? Would they have people in their health authorities who would also be experts in this and willing to lend some local health and and money saving data to their arguments?

SPEAKER_00 26:25

Yeah, absolutely. There are uh kind of public health teams from uh health authorities all across the province. Uh and so road safety is important for public health all across British Columbia. So if anyone's interested in working with us, we're we're always welcome to speak with them and to kind of work with our elected officials to improve road safety in whatever way we can.

SPEAKER_01 26:48

Well, thank you so much for your work on this. And uh it's sometimes these seem like strange bedfellows, cyclists and and doctors and and public health authorities, but it's all really very much the same thing. We're trying to make the roads safer for more indifferent and better or even ways of getting around. And if cars are going too fast, that's not going to happen. So thank you for your work in raising our awareness of this and keeping the research alive and helping people who want to make these, what could be politically tough decisions, have some data behind them and show that they really do make a lot of sense.

SPEAKER_00 27:28

Yeah, much appreciated for having me and for uh for the platform.

SPEAKER_01 27:37

You've been listening to Bike Sense, an original podcast from the BC Cycling Coalition. If you like the podcast, we'd be grateful if you could leave us a rating on whatever platform you use. You can also subscribe so you don't miss future episodes. If you have comments or suggestions for future episodes, email me

Behavior Change And Policing Benefits

SPEAKER_01 28:00

at peter.ladner at bccycling.ca. You can help us amplify BC Cycling Coalition's voice by simply becoming a free member at bccycling.ca