The PPA proposes raising the speeding fine threshold instead.

Three coalition MPs — Madis Timpson and Valdo Randpere (both Reform) and Marek Reinaas (Eesti 200) — have been lobbying for warning signs which would notify drivers they are approaching a mobile speed camera.

Such warning signs about mobile speed cameras have been present on roads entering the outskirts of urban areas and on highways.

The PPA says these should remain in place, and its head of traffic supervision, Taavi Kirss, said the scope of warning signs should be broadened.

In response to the draft bill from the MPs, the PPA said the speeding threshold could be raised to 6 km/h. In other words, a fine would not be triggered until drivers exceeded the speed limit by that amount for that stretch of road at that time.

"This would provide drivers with more trust and curb minor speeding violations," Kirss said. Currently, the threshold is 3 km/h.

The bill is currently being processed by MP Tõnis Mölder (Independent) of the Riigikogu's economic affairs committee. Mölder said the committee would be open to discussing a fine-free threshold such as that proposed by the PPA, though this was not the bill's original intent.

The deadline for submitting amendments to the bill was last Wednesday, however, and the committee received no proposals.

Timpson, Randpere and Reinaas submitted the bill for consideration last winter. Under the terms of the bill, if it were to pass into law, if an adequate warning sign was not placed at a suitable location ahead of a mobile speed camera and speed measurement, and therefore any speeding fine, would be declared null and void.

The proposal was that signs should appear 300–500 meters ahead of the cameras on highways and 150–300 meters ahead of them in cities.

Opponents of the signs note that when the PPA used them, drivers simply slowed down, then sped up after they had passed the speed camera. Concerns have also been raised about the legal status of a fine when drivers claim they had not been able to see the warning sign in question, or if it had been vandalized, fallen over, or damaged in some other way.

Reform MP: Warning signs and speeding threshold hike are 'apples and oranges'

While the PPA has not provided a precise timeline, "Aktuaalne kaamera" reported that "within the coming weeks" only drivers going at, for instance, 96 km/h or more in a 90 km/h zone would be hit with a fine.

This principle is widespread in the Nordic countries and has cut the number of fines nearly in half, reducing costs and bureaucracy, supporters of the policy say.

Later on Tuesday, Randpere spoke to "Aktuaalne kaamera" and said that comparing speed camera warning signs with hiking the fine-free threshold was like comparing apples and oranges (or "apples and pears" in Estonian – ed.).

"Warning signs are an issue that the police promised seven years ago. When we legalized the use of mobile speed cameras at the Riigikogu, there was a promise that they would only be used together with warning signs. Now, the fact that they are proposing to raise the threshold from which fines can be issued — they could do that anyway," Randpere said.

Priit Tammeraid, board member of the Estonian car owners association, a lobby group, questioned the wisdom of mobile speed cameras themselves, adding these are often placed where they can get easy and/or lucrative pickings. "First of all, we should define what problem these speed cameras are actually resolving. Is the issue the state budget, or is the issue road safety? As drivers, we very often see that speed cameras, especially mobile ones, are installed in places where it is easy to catch fish, not where the presence of fish would actually be bad," he said.

Kirss clarified the speeding threshold hike proposal was not a compromise or a climb.down, adding that it is instead part of changing the principles of traffic enforcement.

"Since last year, we have been looking for different ways that might create more trust from the perspective of both road users and the police, but at the same time also avoid punishing every single violation," Kirss told "Aktuaalne kaamera."

The national association of cities and municipalities, representing all 79 municipalities nationwide, meanwhile questioned the relevance of advance speed camera warning signs, arguing traffic signs are already well regulated by law and more are not needed – these would incur additional cost burdens.

"In the case of installing additional traffic signs, we simply foresee increased costs for the Police and Border Guard Board, local governments, and ultimately the courts, because it is not only about putting up the sign. When speeding has happened, then disputes can arise simply over the number of meters regarding where the sign was placed," said Veiko Luhalaid, the association's chief.

MP and bill sponsor: Mainly about road safety

Timpson spoke to "Terevisioon" Wednesday morning and expressed confidence that advance speed camera warning signs do help improve road safety.

"For me, it is primarily about safety. If the sign is there, it is definitely safer than if it is not there. And if someone thinks, 'Well, I'll just speed from one sign to the next' — well, I don't know, a normal person doesn't speed from one sign to the next," he said.

As to how that actually works, the MP responded: "Well, it gives people a clear signal that there is a speed camera here, so just in case, check whether you are driving too fast or not. And I firmly believe it definitely makes things safer."

Kirss, also appearing on "Terevisioon," cited World Health Organization (WHO) road safety recommendations and other scientific articles which he said also support the view that warning signs should not be installed in front of speed cameras.

"A sign directly in front of a camera doesn't work, as it only marks the spot where police are carrying out enforcement, which means drivers can then speed freely elsewhere. We are trying to avoid that," Kirss added.

"I believe that what we really want is simply to know where the police are working so we can slow down there. That does not actually improve safety," Kirss continued.

He also drew the distinction between stationary cameras and mobile ones, stating that there is "no point" placing them ahead of the latter category.

Kirss also listed 17 countries in Europe, the U.K., the Netherlands and Germany among them, which have dispensed with warning signs ahead of mobile speed cameras.

He also cited the prevalence of speeding as against drunk driving: While less than 3 percent of respondents to a Transport Administration survey conducted last year admitted to having driven under the influence of alcohol, nearly three-quarters admitted to having sped while driving, suggesting its normalization, a phenomenon Kirss found disturbing.

Kirss said the PPA currently operates eight mobile speed cameras.

MP: Bill likely to pass anyway

As for the bill's progress, Timpson noted it had already passed its first Riigikogu reading (of three) and no substantive amendments were submitted between that reading and the deadline ahead of the second reading. Since the only changes between the second and third readings which may be made are cosmetic, this means the bill should be a shoo-in.

Kirss said if that happens, the PPA will naturally follow current law, adding the authority has already communicated its expertise and opinion from a road safety perspective to the Riigikogu.

The Riigikogu's economic affairs committee is scheduled to discuss the bill next week. The Riigikogu breaks up for the summer recess on June 18, returning to work at the start of September.

Editor's note: This piece was updated to include quotes and information from "Aktuaalne kaamera" and "Terevisioon."

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!