About 2,000 fines withdrawn since AI road safety cameras introduced in WACBy Cason HoTopic:AI1h ago1 hours agoTue 21 Apr 2026 at 3:26amAbout 2,000 seatbelt infringements issued through AI safety cameras have been withdrawn. (ABC News)In short:Fines valued at $1.1 million, issued since AI-assisted road safety cameras were rolled out in WA six months ago, have now been withdrawn. WA's Road Safety Minister Reece Whitby described the number of withdrawn infringements as relatively small and indicative of a "good system".What's next?Mr Whitby says the government is hoping to roll out more of the devices.More than $1 million worth of fines issued as a result of AI-assisted road safety cameras in Western Australia have been withdrawn in the six months since they were introduced.The controversial cameras have sparked outrage since they started slugging tens of thousands of WA drivers with penalties in October last year.Most Australian states now have some form of the new camera system, which uses AI to identify potential mobile phone and seatbelt breaches, with fines then sent to drivers.More than 53,000 seatbelt infringements have been issued in WA in six months, according to Road Safety Minister Reece Whitby.About 2,000 of those infringements have been withdrawn by the Department of Transport, amounting to at least $1.1 million in waived fines.'A good system': ministerBut Mr Whitby has doubled down on the use of the cameras, saying the number of infringements withdrawn was indicative of a "a good system" and that the government was considering rolling out more of the devices."Less than 4 per cent of offences, seatbelt offences in particular, have been overturned. It means that most people are copping the fine and realise that they're doing the wrong thing," he told ABC Radio Perth.Road Safety Minister Reece Whitby says the system is working well. (ABC News)"What we've actually done is waived a number of fines from people who have been fined in quick succession because they simply weren't aware of the technology catching them out."Mr Whitby said 60 per cent of appeals from motorists issued with infringements had been successful."If you do have a legitimate issue, and you think you've been wronged and it's unfair, you will get a fair crack and you will be considered," he said."We're seeing offences being picked up at a scale we've not seen before because the cameras actually look down into the [car] cabin."'Outrageous mess'Perth grandfather Ross Taylor, who has advocated against the AI-assisted cameras, refuted the minister's claim that the system was working."This is just more ministerial spin as they become, behind the scenes, quite panicked about this outrageous mess that's been created," he told ABC Radio Perth.The cameras have been installed along Perth's freeway system. (ABC News)Mr Taylor said the penalties should be different for when passengers were not wearing their seatbelt correctly, as opposed to the drivers themselves."The opportunity was there for the government to say right from the outset that when these cameras went live … they would aim at people not being buckled in, and send out a warning [for] or disregard a minor offence," he said."But that would have dropped the revenue."More cameras plannedMr Whitby argued the rollout was about preventing deadly road incidents, and was already proving effective."The law has always said that the driver has responsibility for the safety of [passengers], including the correct wearing of seatbelts of people in their car," he said."These new safety cameras have actually changed behaviour, and I have no doubt they've actually saved lives."We're looking at rolling out more, but again, we want to take a very careful and staged approach."WA Opposition Leader Basil Zempilas said the government should have ironed out the issues during an eight-month penalty-free trial of the cameras, before infringements started being issued in October 2025. He said he supported measures to keep people safe on the roads, but felt many motorists were being "unfairly pinged"."We want a deterrence, but we want the deterrence to be fair and appropriate for what the crime is."