Grzegorz Braun is demanding the total liquidation of all speed cameras and average speed enforcement systems in Poland, describing these systems as instruments that must be "mowed down and scrapped immediately." The MP is calling for the immediate shutdown of automatic speed control on national roads. Given the current balance of power in parliament, this proposal has no chance of being implemented, as it lacks support in the Sejm, and the project stands in complete contradiction to the state's current security strategy.
Braun declares war on automatic surveillance
Grzegorz Braun's political offensive against the Automatic Traffic Supervision Center, known as CANARD, is based on a radical diagnosis. The MP claims that devices recording traffic offenses have ceased to serve a preventive function and have become mere machines for generating revenue for the state budget. In his rhetoric, every device by the road is a form of state aggression directed against motorized citizens. Such an attitude is a clear signal to an electorate tired of the growing number of restrictions and an increasingly restrictive fine tariff.
However, moving from words to action in this case faces a legislative wall. The automatic surveillance system is strictly embedded in the framework of the Road Traffic Law. Changing these regulations would require not only political will, which is simply absent in the current Sejm, but also the conduct of extensive analyses regarding road safety. Braun ignores the fact that the infrastructure he wants to dismantle is financed from the state budget and EU funds, and its maintenance is an element of a long-term policy to reduce the number of fatal accidents. The MP's demand is therefore an ideological manifesto, not a proposal that could be put to a vote with a real prospect of success.
The scale of the system and its financial foundations
To understand what MP Braun is up against, one must look at the hard numbers. Currently, there are about 500 speed cameras operating under the wings of CANARD in Poland. In addition, there are dozens of average speed enforcement systems that monitor key arteries, tunnels, and road sections with an increased risk of collision. This is a complex, integrated IT system that sends data about offenses directly to the GITD headquarters.
The revenues generated by this system are significant. Every year, hundreds of millions of zlotys flow into the budget from fines imposed by speed cameras. These funds are then reinvested in improving road infrastructure, building safe pedestrian crossings, or modernizing signage. The liquidation of speed cameras would mean the creation of a massive budget hole that could not be patched in a short time without drastic tax increases or cuts in other ministries. Braun does not provide any concrete way to compensate for this loss, which makes his demand financially irresponsible in the eyes of economists and representatives of the Ministry of Infrastructure.
For the average driver, the information about "mowing down" the system sounds attractive. No one likes receiving fines. However, the reality of traffic management in Poland is based on the assumption that the presence of measuring devices disciplines drivers in places where the police are unable to conduct constant patrol checks. Removing speed cameras while failing to increase the number of road patrols could lead to chaos and an increase in average speeds on national roads, which directly translates into higher mortality in road accidents.
Will speed cameras really disappear from Polish roads?
Analyzing the chances of implementing Braun's demands, one must be brutally honest. In the Polish parliament, there is a dominant consensus that the automation of control is necessary. Even opposition parties that criticize the government for the level of fines do not go so far as to demand the total liquidation of surveillance systems. Braun is alone in his radicalism. Without support in parliamentary committees and acceptance from the Ministry of Infrastructure, his demands will not even be placed on the agenda.
It is worth noting that the debate about speed cameras in Poland is emotional but separated from statistical data. Proponents of liquidating the systems often point to the alleged lack of impact of speed cameras on safety. However, statistics from the General Inspectorate of Road Transport show the opposite. In places covered by average speed enforcement, the number of accidents drops drastically – often by even several dozen percent per year. This is an argument that is impossible for most MPs to reject.
The costs of dismantling the infrastructure are another aspect about which Braun is silent. Terminating service contracts, physically removing devices from masts, recycling electronics, and the need to return part of the EU funds – this is a process that would cost taxpayers tens of millions of zlotys. Can the state afford such an operation in the name of ideological opposition to surveillance? The answer seems obvious to most political decision-makers, regardless of party affiliation.
Political and social consequences of the postulate
MP Braun's postulate is a classic example of a narrative built on resentment. A driver who has paid a fine for exceeding the speed limit by a few kilometers per hour often feels "robbed" by the state. Braun skillfully preys on this sense of injustice, calling measuring systems instruments of oppression. Such rhetoric is effective in building reach on social media, but completely useless in the legislative process.
It is worth asking who will lose and who will gain from this. Drivers with a "heavy foot" will gain, as they will not have to fear punishment for breaking the law. All other road users will lose, including pedestrians and cyclists, for whom vehicle speed is the deciding factor for survival in the event of an accident. The state, as the organizer of traffic, cannot afford to abdicate its supervisory functions. Braun promotes a vision of the road as a zone free from any control, which in a modern society is an anachronistic and dangerous solution.
There is also no answer to the question of possible alternatives. Does the MP want a return to the times when the only way to catch a road pirate was a police car chase? Such a solution is not only more expensive per individual offense but also more dangerous for the surroundings. Automation, despite its flaws, is the most predictable and transparent form of surveillance. Braun proposes a return to vague methods, where the decision to punish a driver depends on the subjective assessment of an officer.
What this means for you
As a driver, you must count on the fact that the speed camera system in Poland will not only remain in force but will most likely continue to be expanded. Grzegorz Braun's postulate, although loud in the media, has no anchoring in legal or political realities. It is pure rhetoric that will not affect your daily way of moving on the roads. Paying fines will remain your duty, and the CANARD system will continue to record the speed of passing vehicles.
The catch? The real problem is not the existence of speed cameras, but their location, which is sometimes questioned by local governments. Sometimes devices are placed in places where safety is not really threatened, and the point is only to supply the municipal treasury. This is an area where debate makes sense. Instead of postulating the total cancellation of the system, it would be worth discussing an audit of speed camera locations and moving them to where they actually save lives. Braun, however, has chosen the path of populism, opting for total destruction instead of repairing mechanisms that cause controversy.
Questions and answers
Does Grzegorz Braun's postulate have a chance to come into force?
No. In the current parliament, there is no majority that would support the liquidation of the automatic traffic supervision system, which makes this postulate purely theoretical.
Which specific devices does Braun's demand concern?
The MP demands the liquidation of all 500 stationary speed cameras and average speed enforcement systems managed by the GITD as part of the CANARD system.
What does Braun propose instead of speed cameras?
The MP does not present any alternative plan. His statements lack proposals regarding new methods of ensuring road safety after the removal of automation.
Why is the liquidation of speed cameras expensive for the state?
In addition to the loss of revenue from fines, the budget would have to cover the costs of physically dismantling the devices, terminating service contracts, and potentially returning EU funds granted for the construction of this infrastructure.
Komentarze (0)
Ładowanie komentarzy...