Should Swindon scrap speed cameras? (From Swindon Advertiser)

League Guide

Send us your North Wilts team info »

Your Swindon

Get involved: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting 'SWINDON NEWS' to 80360 or email »

News RSS Feed

Got a story? EMAIL US, call us on 01793 501806 or text us at 80360, starting your message with 'SWINDON NEWS'

Should Swindon scrap speed cameras?

10:30am Tuesday 15th July 2008

comment Comments (45) Have your say »

By Stephanie Tye »

SWINDON has been thrusted into the national spotlight today by the council's proposals to pull speed cameras off the town's streets.

The council is reviewing its involvement with the Swindon and Wiltshire Camera Safety Partnership and considering whether to spend its £400,000-a-year contribution elsewhere.

What do you think about proposals to pull out of the camera safety partnership?
Have your say below

A decision will be made by September.

Council leader Rod Bluh said that they were not going to compromise on safety but were taking the opportunity to review how the money is used.

"A huge amount of money is being raised by speed cameras and we are seeking better ways of ensuring road safety without penalising motorists," he said.

In November, the Advertiser reported that former Coun Andy James had branded the cameras a stealth tax and hatched a plan to demand the Government returned all the cash from Swindon cameras to the council.

In January, Road Safety Minister Jim Fitzpatrick refused to hand back the cash generated by the cameras.

And yesterday the Adver reported that Swindon South MP Anne Snelgrove had backed residents' calls for the speed cameras in Queens Drive to be reinstated.

This morning, Coun Bluh spoke on Radio Four's Today programme and appeared on GMTV.

The story has also appeared in a number of national newspapers, including the front page of the Daily Express.

End of the road for speed cameras? - Daily Express
Speed cameras face the axe amid growing claims they are a "blatant tax" on motorists and there are much better ways to improve road safety.

We'll Scrap the Greedy Guts Gatso - Daily Mirror
Rebel council chiefs are threatening to scrap a town's speed cameras - after branding them a "blatant tax" on drivers.

Council may stop funding speed cameras - The Independent
A town council is threatening to withdraw funding from its speed camera network after describing the cameras as a "blatant tax on the motorist".

Council may scrap speed camera fun - Daily Telegraph
A local authority is to become the first in the country to try to scrap its speed cameras after describing them as "a tax on the motorist".

In May, we polled nearly 500 people asking them whether the town needed speed cameras, and 52 per cent them said no.

But what do you think? Should the council pull out of the Swindon and Wiltshire Camera Safety Partnership or remain in it?

Do you think speed cameras save lives or are they just a moneymaking device? Have you say below.

The best of the comments will appear in tomorrow's Advertiser.

Print article » Email to a friend »

Your Say YourSwindon

thutch, highworth says...
10:44am Tue 15 Jul 08

While I would like to see an end to speed cameras, this is total hypocrisy by SBC. Let's not forget the only reason that this action is being mooted is because HMG wouldn't hand the GATSO revenues back to SBC. One wonders if this course of action would have been taken if SBC coffers were being still swollen by the driving public

Report this post »

The feedbacker, England says...
10:58am Tue 15 Jul 08

If speed cameras are only there to deter speeding, rather than fine speeders, why isnt the fine dropped in favour of a heavier points total?

Threatening the speeder with a quicker loss of his licence would have the same deterrent affect without the government laying itself open to accusations of profiteering

Report this post »

emmylou83, Stratton says...
10:59am Tue 15 Jul 08

we are seeking better ways of ensuring road safety without penalising motorists," he said.

WITHOUT penalising motorists? Have I misunderstood this or is he saying basically we as drivers should drive carefully and within speed limits but if we don't there will be no consequence? Seems a little backwards to me. I personally don't think speed cameras do what they are meant to do as people know where they are and slow down for them then just speed up again afterwards.

Report this post »

Denis Cummins, Swindon says...
11:15am Tue 15 Jul 08

I believe the signs that flash your up the speed limit are more effective than speed cameras. If you require evidence take time to watch the traffic at the road works at Blunsdon. People speed through a good mile of road works and then brake when they spot the camera. However people slow down ahead of the flashing signs and then become more conscious of their speed which is noticeable on Cricklade road, Drove road and Kingshill. The flashing signs make you think how fast youre driving; cameras encourage you not to get caught.

Report this post »

LA, says...
11:17am Tue 15 Jul 08

The main thing is to spend the money in the way which will ensure the safety of road users best. If the cameras do this then keep them, if there are other measures which will provide a greater degree of safety then scrap the cameras and pay for those.

More importantly Swindon is on the national news. What a day....! What a fantastic day!

Report this post »

Grumpy old man, Swindon says...
11:17am Tue 15 Jul 08

The point is Emmy, road safety can not be measured by the speed traffic is going at, and in fact focusing solely on a number means people are concentrating more on the number than on things that really can affect road safety (such as keeping an eye out for that child about to run into the road, or the car that's pulling out of a side street without looking in front etc etc). Slowing the traffic down does not particularly reduce the chances of an accident happening, although it will reduce the severity of said accident if the impact is reduced.

Report this post »

Andy_C, Swindon says...
11:20am Tue 15 Jul 08

i'm not a speeder, but as swindon (excluding the A419) has ony 4 cameras, (oxford road and Queens drive. i cant see too much of a problem with them.
The ones on queens drive have been out of action for ages, and i havent noticed an increase in accidents, deaths or speeding cars.

im not fused as to whether they're there or not to be honest, but is the council are not getting back any of the revenue then get them shifted!!!

Report this post »

thenoose, Swindon says...
11:29am Tue 15 Jul 08

I would have thought in these days of such modern technology, car manufacturers would limit the speeds of cars. Unless I'm mistaken, there isn't anywhere in the UK where you can drive over 70mph, so why build cars that can do over 180mph. Surely with a bit of thought there could be some kind of electronic limiter that could be fitted to cars that would automaticaly adjust according to what road you are on.

Or maybe, is it that the government want us to speed as they make so much money out of it, both in stealth taxes and fuel duty??

Mmme food for thought!

Report this post »

Robins69, swindon says...
11:38am Tue 15 Jul 08

I'm all in favour of doing away with the speeding cameras. I notice our two MP'S don't support the idea I wonder why? mostly likely reason being less funds to support their expenses on second homes ect.

Report this post »

worz, Wootton Bassett says...
11:44am Tue 15 Jul 08

Surely with a bit of thought there could be some kind of electronic limiter that could be fitted to cars that would automaticaly adjust according to what road you are on.

Taking control of the vehicle away from the driver is a really bad idea. I've been in many situations where vehicles have been heading directly for me, and the only way to avoid being crushed is to accelerate away, and yes, to break the limit for a moment.

I'll say it again, driving faster than a number which was invented in the fifties is not necessarily dangerous. Speed cameras are nothing more than a way for the government to raise revenue, and it looks like Swindon council have been paying the government £400K a year to allow them to do so. If the government want to increase safety, then remove the speed cameras, and fill the place with red-light cameras, three strikes and you're banned.

Report this post »

yeti, swindon says...
11:58am Tue 15 Jul 08

i am totally against this idea.
i suggest council members stand next to queens drive for half an hour,near to where the camera has been covered up and observe what some drivers are doing now.
removing the cameras is an insane idea as the morons will just drive like ever bigger cretins than they already are.
there should be more convictions, stricter rules, and heavier penaltys for bad driving.
the laws need to change!
in the ideal world we wouldn't need cameras,road calming etc,etc, but drivers cannot be trusted to drive properly.
moore need to be banned,and banned for life!

Report this post »

Grumpy old man, Swindon says...
12:03pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Yeti, that speed camera has been out of action for some time now. Could you remind me how many accidents there have been on that 100yd stretch since? (forget the rest of the road as that wouldn't be covered by the speed camera anyway)

Report this post »

Robin Harris, Swindon says...
12:08pm Tue 15 Jul 08

The government are supposed to be taking all the revenue and giving grants to local authorities.

Perhaps Anne Snelgrove can tell us exactly how much Swindon BC gets back.

I generally agree with the fact people slow down when they see a speed camera and then speed up again. If you want speed cameras the only option is more mobile ones. When you don't know when or were they are deployed speeding is reduced. I haven't seen police with a hand held speed gun for years.

Report this post »

yeti, swindon says...
12:15pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Grumpy old man wrote:
Yeti, that speed camera has been out of action for some time now. Could you remind me how many accidents there have been on that 100yd stretch since? (forget the rest of the road as that wouldn't be covered by the speed camera anyway)

i have no idea of the accidents in the area?
but i know what i have seen which is poor driving. and cars weaving in and out of lanes at high speeds.

Report this post »

Grumpy old man, Swindon says...
12:35pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Well I'll go ahead with my guess. I'd wager zero, zilch, nadda, nil point.

Point is, a speed camera does not discriminate - a car weaving between lanes, with the driver on his phone while drinking some coffee and having a ciggy, whilst applying makeup but under the speed limit will not be caught by any speed prevention measure. However, a safe, sensible middle aged bloke who is being observant all around him and goes at 5mph above a speed limit that was set donkeys years ago will be caught and fined.

What we need is real traffic police with a remit to catch BAD driving, not fast driving. (the two are not mutually exclusive - bad driving could include driving too fast for the conditions but within speed limit)

You yourself hit the nail on the head when you said you saw plenty of POOR driving. That can be but is not always fast driving.

What we really need is a "Stupid" camera but they haven't invented that yet! :-)

Report this post »

Claire, Swindon says...
12:41pm Tue 15 Jul 08

I actually agree with speed cameras - as long as they are in the appropriate area. For example, out side schools and next to zebra crossings, etc. When they are placed on a straight road which happens to be a dual carridge way, then to me, it only appears to be there as a money making opportunity instead of a safety one.

Report this post »

yeti, swindon says...
12:51pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Grumpy old man wrote:
Well I'll go ahead with my guess. I'd wager zero, zilch, nadda, nil point. Point is, a speed camera does not discriminate - a car weaving between lanes, with the driver on his phone while drinking some coffee and having a ciggy, whilst applying makeup but under the speed limit will not be caught by any speed prevention measure. However, a safe, sensible middle aged bloke who is being observant all around him and goes at 5mph above a speed limit that was set donkeys years ago will be caught and fined. What we need is real traffic police with a remit to catch BAD driving, not fast driving. (the two are not mutually exclusive - bad driving could include driving too fast for the conditions but within speed limit) You yourself hit the nail on the head when you said you saw plenty of POOR driving. That can be but is not always fast driving. What we really need is a "Stupid" camera but they haven't invented that yet! :-)

completely agree

Report this post »

Global Templar, Marlborough says...
1:19pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Swindon council should be praised for telling the truth and backing the public's pont of view. If any local MPs wish to campaign for road safety issues then do it on a platform of placing more traffic police on the road, this will deal with a broader range of offences and ensure the public are either fined or educated or retrained depending on what is best to suit the situation, having a fine land on the doormat from a GATSO has little impact on driving skills or safety and just raises cash for New Labour's policies of making us all criminals on one big database. Local Labour MPs who want to keep the speed cameras will probably not be around after the next general election so any spending plans they have are just hot air! Coun Andy James seems to have the best ideas, listen and learn Labour!

Report this post »

roy bezzant, swindon says...
1:24pm Tue 15 Jul 08

The proof that people are breaking the law is evedent by the amount of revenue raised by these cameras,

Report this post »

jantheman, Swindon says...
1:33pm Tue 15 Jul 08

I have read the comments on this site and people mention no accidents or deaths
For Example Queeens Drive has 2 schools and a college Surely we should retain the speed cameras for Safety reasons
As for SBC looking to reduce costs Why on this subject surely as residents we need safe roads especially for Children going and coming home from school
We only need to look back a few months to see what a speeding car can do

Report this post »

Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon says...
1:38pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Returning from my radio show last night, I noticed that a flashing 30 mile an hour sign has been erected on Oxford Road, I also noted that prior to the speed camera there is a traffic flow monitoring device. It seems SBC took notice of my suggestion that to test the efficiency of the flashing signs there needs to be a camera nearby. In this way it can be shown either that the flashing signs stop speeding by a reduction in those caught on Camera, or it doesn't work. I know what my money is on. Well done who ever took this action. As for the removal of cameras, as has been said if they are a road safety measure then forget the fine, and impose more points. But we know it's about revenue. I am confident the flashing signs will have a far greater effect.

Report this post »

trend, swindon says...
2:02pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Speed camera's don't stop speeding. All they do is make drivers break hard just before them to bring their speed down, most of the time uncessarily as they are already doing the stated speed. This sudden breaking is far more dangerous than the speed they were doing, which as stated is usually the correct one anyway! Why shouldn't SBC ask for some of the revenue back, they are spending thousand's of pounds of our money to line the pockets of the police (who we also pay for out of the council tax).

Report this post »

redhousecomputers, Prioryvale says...
2:21pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Good riddance is all I can say. There are far better ways to slow traffic without the need for speed cameras, whilst they are at it...perhaps removing all the pesky speed humps around Swindon that cost me a fortune in damaged tracking and knackered tyres. Oh also if they actually made repairs to the **** roads in this town then this also would have a reduction in the amount of accidents, as I am yet to see a car stop on a piece of tarmac that doesn't exist...you only have to look at Thames down drive, to see that SBC and all government levels back up to the treasury are pocketing the money and not investing in sustainable road products... I see they have just put a camera up on the northbound A419.....why? I think maybe the coffers maybe a little empty over at the treasury.

Report this post »

Thandar, Swindon says...
2:25pm Tue 15 Jul 08

There is no way you can justify £400,000 for four camera's, that's £100K a year per camera from our council tax and we get no money back from it, zip nada.
Get some extra coppers and a hut on Queens Drive, it'd be a lot cheaper

Report this post »

Chris Paisley, Location, Location. says...
2:25pm Tue 15 Jul 08

They should scrap the cameras and spend the money on a robot police force to fly around Swindon with radars and laser guns.

Report this post »

redhousecomputers, Prioryvale says...
2:36pm Tue 15 Jul 08

jantheman wrote:
I have read the comments on this site and people mention no accidents or deaths For Example Queeens Drive has 2 schools and a college Surely we should retain the speed cameras for Safety reasons As for SBC looking to reduce costs Why on this subject surely as residents we need safe roads especially for Children going and coming home from school We only need to look back a few months to see what a speeding car can do

Interesting how you bring up the topic of schools in the area, there were schools along Queens Drive before the speed camera was invented, but better road policing, meant that the road was safer, however should we not start imposing fines and perhaps custodial sentences for anyone caught walking outside of a pedestrian crossing, or trying to cross a dual carriage way in between cars instead of using the foot bridge provided, I myself and am cyclist and a pedestrian when I have had something to drink/ need the exercise (delete as applicable) and have little problem in using traffic lights etc to make my way safely home from the pub, it is evident to me that these are just revenue generators, Now if a school happened to be in a small village on a fast piece of road then it would be understandable to have a camera in the vicinity and I would welcome it. However I am a firm believer in education in varying degrees of severity.
lets face it nobody puts there hand in a food blender when it is switched on...so why think you can just walk out in front of a moving vehicle? Whilst I am on my soapbox I believe they should ban MP3 players only this week I have had 2 near misses with keep fit fanatics not paying attention to the road, ignoring safe places to cross.
So ban them, then they can hear my planet killing, child eating sports car coming and get out the way!

Report this post »

Meldrews Dad, Wroughton says...
2:36pm Tue 15 Jul 08

The cameras are nothing but cash cows and the treasury want Swindon Borough council to milk them without paying the milkmaid!

The cameras have a negative effect as I will no longer cooperate with the police as a witness for any motoring matters I might see having been hauled before a secret court at Devizes which managed to "issue" a summons "hear the case" and "notify me of the result" all without a single piece of paper leaving the court offices. The first I knew about it was a court balliff at my door.

Corrupt system for a very corrupt organisation.
Scrap them NOW.

Report this post »

jo-ent, Swndon says...
3:22pm Tue 15 Jul 08

"SWINDON has been thrusted into the national spotlight..."
Why - for not teaching correct grammar? :-)

Report this post »

Robins69, swindon says...
5:49pm Tue 15 Jul 08

I just saw report on BBC News 24 live with one of the labour councillors defending the camera's in swindon, they were live in Oxford Road.

Report this post »

Mumstheword, Walcot says...
5:52pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Grumpy old man wrote:
Well I'll go ahead with my guess. I'd wager zero, zilch, nadda, nil point. Point is, a speed camera does not discriminate - a car weaving between lanes, with the driver on his phone while drinking some coffee and having a ciggy, whilst applying makeup but under the speed limit will not be caught by any speed prevention measure. However, a safe, sensible middle aged bloke who is being observant all around him and goes at 5mph above a speed limit that was set donkeys years ago will be caught and fined. What we need is real traffic police with a remit to catch BAD driving, not fast driving. (the two are not mutually exclusive - bad driving could include driving too fast for the conditions but within speed limit) You yourself hit the nail on the head when you said you saw plenty of POOR driving. That can be but is not always fast driving. What we really need is a "Stupid" camera but they haven't invented that yet! :-)

Honestly! I told you about a fatality on that stretch of road yesterday!

I agree with Jantheman regarding the two schools and the college along this road, we need the cameras.

I think we should have cameras AMONGST other road safety measures (not at the expense of police presence or to make money.)I think they are a small measure amongst several others such: as consistent road safety being maintained in all schools, pedestrian crossings, stronger police presence on the roads and harsher punishments for repeat speeding offenders.

Report this post »

Time_waits_for_no_ma n, Swindon says...
6:03pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Fixed cameras are not of a deterent, once drivers are aware of the location -they will slow for the camera and then zoom off. Mobile cameras are different, but I still class then as a Government Cash Van. Do away with them and use the money for local improvements to roads and road signs (including the ones that light up and flash the speed limit or actual speed of the motorist.)

Report this post »

swindonian, swindon says...
6:15pm Tue 15 Jul 08

If the council were getting all the revenue from the cameras they would be in favour of them.
Think and answer this question honestly
If the cameras saved only one life and it was your son, daughter, wife or husband would you then think they where worth every penney

Report this post »

Time_waits_for_no_ma n, Swindon says...
6:40pm Tue 15 Jul 08

swindonian wrote:
If the council were getting all the revenue from the cameras they would be in favour of them. Think and answer this question honestly If the cameras saved only one life and it was your son, daughter, wife or husband would you then think they where worth every penney

How it the devil would you quantify or prove that. Yes if the Council was getting the money and redirecting back into the town for improvements- fair comment, but they are not - FACT - hence the idea of scrapping the 'cash machines' and using the money for local SAFETY improvements and not lining the government coffers....

Report this post »

kyoceran, swindon says...
8:35pm Tue 15 Jul 08

A:The speed cameras are not selective, so the same speed limit applies wether it be a car or vehicle towing another.
B:With everybody flashing each other when Police or camera activity is operational, the whole point of the exercise is defeated.
C:The notorious speeders just avoid the areas concerned, funny how no Taxis/private hire cars get caught.
D:People will eventually be priced off the road, so an ability to pay will probably dictate anyway the ongoing agenda.
E:If Swindon has the expected growth of 40000 homes , this will translate into an extra 100000 people, and the traffic to boot, this will reduce the ability to speed as the traffic flow will be throttled.
F:Bad driving(occassionall
y speed associated) is the cause officially of the majority of accidents, especially Lorries on Motorways,use of handheld phones,alcohol,drugs etc.
G:Cameras earn Money, a single snapshot of a bigger picture, yes you do have to accelerate past a potential accident waiting to happen, they generalise with no real right to reply.
H:other non road users need to be more accountable for their actions, why should a road be subject to a speed camera if the unfortunate incident was a result of pedestrian neglect, pavements are for walking on, cycle tracks are provided at hugh cost to the taxpayer - for cycling on., Use them.
I:this is about the selfish actions about those who think they own the road, the camera should be installed like a tacho in their vehicle until such time as they can demonstrate their safe intentions to other members of the public
J: RANT OVER, GOODNIGHT

Report this post »

kyoceran, swindon says...
8:39pm Tue 15 Jul 08

a small point of interest, could it be mischief by Conservative Central Office, following David Camerons Gaffe about Swindon,that bearing in mind the two MP's for Swindon are Labour, they instigated this policy, to find favour amongst the voters they need to recruit to ensure their election to Office Soon

Report this post »

bootersmate, Park South says...
9:11pm Tue 15 Jul 08

I'm no Tory voter but I do agree with the Council. Why should we council tax payers pay for the cameras for the proceeds to disapper into the bottomless pit known as the Treasury?

Report this post »

mrptoyou, swindon says...
9:31pm Tue 15 Jul 08

i dont think thay should scrap the idea. im trying to get them to put a couple on drakes way the **** holes that drive after 8pm along here are mad. yes i do like the cars thay drive and am up for them showing them off to there friends but why use drakes way as a racing track.

Report this post »

MauriceMalpasClueles sNumpty, Swindon says...
10:03pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Good on Sbc its about time someone stood upto this government and its constant taxation agenda. As they have shown such ineptitude with prison places, immigration, Europe, etc etc. Why should they get the extra 400k from our council tax. Does 400k get us weekly bin collections, police on the streets and not useless CSOs, a central library that has been created by an architect, and a discount on next years council tax to keep down inflation :-)

Report this post »

Casual Observer, Swindon says...
10:50pm Tue 15 Jul 08

Robert Feal-Martinez wrote:
Returning from my radio show last night, I noticed that a flashing 30 mile an hour sign has been erected on Oxford Road, I also noted that prior to the speed camera there is a traffic flow monitoring device. It seems SBC took notice of my suggestion that to test the efficiency of the flashing signs there needs to be a camera nearby. In this way it can be shown either that the flashing signs stop speeding by a reduction in those caught on Camera, or it doesn't work. I know what my money is on. Well done who ever took this action. As for the removal of cameras, as has been said if they are a road safety measure then forget the fine, and impose more points. But we know it's about revenue. I am confident the flashing signs will have a far greater effect.

Hehehe.. brilliant stuff RMF, very funny - you should ask someone knowledgeable how to get your own blog going. Ask them about that odd shaped key on your keyboard as well, like a large upside-down 'L'... yes that's the one it's called the Return key... allows you to put breaks in your paragraphs - makes your scripts more readable.

Report this post »

Public Spirit, Wiltshire says...
12:36am Wed 16 Jul 08

WELL DONE SBC!! Speed limits are dliberatley reduced on dual carriageways e.g. around Swindon and the Bath By pass to catch motorists for revenue. They should be scrapped and speed limits returned to the national 70 mph for these dual carriageways.

It's good to see the poll shows ovr 70% of participants want rid of the nasty nanny fine gobbling monsters.

Report this post »

Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon says...
6:53am Wed 16 Jul 08

CO was there a point to your post, or was it just another knock Bob rant.

Report this post »

Neil, Swindon says...
8:49am Wed 16 Jul 08

I have read half the posts here (stopped as need to get to work and wanted to give my 2 cents)
To make roads safer, one only has to look at what a road is for?... Vehicles... what are paths for?... pedestrians. Educate children on road safety.. cross at designated crossings etc. And motorists... stay off paths. Just one easy rule there. As an example, I was hit by a car when I was younger, it was my fault as I entered the road without following the simple rules, stop look and listen!
Speed cameras do not catch bad driving, they just catch motorists breaking the speed limit and make a hell of a lot of money in doing so. I have witnessed on roads where there are speed cameras = reckless driving as motorists break suddenly in a 'knee jerk' reaction to seeing the cameras(even though they might not even be going over the speed limit).
I have found roads with the flashing speed limit (if you are going too fast) to be far more effective at slowing down traffic and making motorists more aware of their speed/surroundings.
I support this idea to scrap cameras, if they can implement more speed limit signs.

Report this post »

Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon says...
9:19am Wed 16 Jul 08

I have found roads with the flashing speed limit (if you are going too fast) to be far more effective at slowing down traffic and making motorists more aware of their speed/surroundings. Neil as I have previously said on many occasions these signs are really the way forward.

Report this post »

Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon says...
9:24am Wed 16 Jul 08

Report this post »

Robert Feal-Martinez, Swindon says...
9:28am Wed 16 Jul 08

I think everyone should read this link, it illustrates two things, the cost of flashing signs, is up to 50 times cheaper than speed cameras, and more importantly how incompetent this Government was again in reaching a decision to increase the number of speed cameras, as opposed to the installation of these signs that can be done for as little as £3000 if sighted at existing locations with an electric supply (IE street lights etc.
safespeed.org.uk/vas
.html

Report this post »

Your sayYourSwindon

comment Add your comment

Register for a FREE Swindon Advertiser account and you can have your say on today's news and sport by adding comments on articles we publish. The best comments may even get published in the paper.

Please register now or sign in below to continue.