Figures show that 174,448 penalty notices were issued to motorists caught driving in bus lanes in Glasgow between April 23, 2012, and July 4 this year – an average of 397 per day.
This compares to around 100 per day in Edinburgh and Aberdeen, which launched its first bus lane cameras in March this year.
Motorists are liable to pay £60 if filmed at sites where number-plate recognition cameras have been installed, though the fine is reduced to £30 if paid within 14 days.
The Freedom of Information figures reveal that the scheme has generated an average daily income for Glasgow City Council of £11,075. It is more than three times the total average daily revenues of both the capital and Aberdeen, even though both have roughly the same number of cameras in similar city centre locations.
Both Glasgow and Aberdeen have 11 cameras on key routes in and around the city centre, while Edinburgh has five mobile and two fixed devices with plans for ten more.
The figures appear to chime with complaints from industry experts that Glasgow risks turning it into a cash cow.
Between April 2012, when it was first launched, and July this year, motorists in the city paid a total of £4,862,129 in bus lane fines. Meanwhile, drivers in Edinburgh paid £851,426 during the 2012/2013 financial year, an average of just over £2300 per day.
In Aberdeen, which has issued 11,874 penalty charge notices since its 11 bus lane cameras came into force on March 25 this year, fines have so far raised £103,400, less than £900 a day.
Neil Greig, director of policy at the Institute of Advanced Motoring, called for a "street-by-street review" of the policy.
He said: "You shouldn't be seeing 400 fines a day at this stage. Something is wrong if that's happening – the signposting is wrong, or it's confusing, as people should have learned by now.
"It should not be seen by Glasgow as a good way of making money.
"This requires a serious, detailed review, especially if there are certain problem areas. That's the next question: which streets are generating all this money?
"Signs should be clear and not obscured by overhanging trees or anything. The road markings in Glasgow are often very poor compared to elsewhere and if they're making this much money from fines they've got no excuse not to fix it."
Department for Transport estimates for 2012 show that Glasgow has a traffic flow of roughly 1,370,000 vehicle miles annually, against a combined total for Edinburgh and Aberdeen of 1,380,000 – 1,007,000 in Edinburgh City and 373,000 in Aberdeen City.
Both Glasgow and Edinburgh's schemes have faced criticism in the past for some of their fines which have been labelled bizarre and unfair.
In March, lecturer Dr Catherine Berry – who had pulled into a bus lane to give way to two fire engines – had her fine overturned after an eight-month battle with Glasgow City Council.
Meanwhile, Edinburgh was forced to write off almost 6000 penalty notices in May last year after an official review concluded one of the cameras had been poorly located. Residents of Willowbrae Road complained after being fined for crossing a bus lane to enter their driveways.
A spokesman for the Confederation of Public Transport (CPT) Scotland, which represents bus operators, said more work should be done to iron out problem areas.
He added: "Drivers are generally careful to avoid double yellow lines when they park, even when the reason for the parking restrictions aren't immediately clear. The same care should be taken to comply with bus lane regulations."
A Glasgow City Council spokesman said there had been a "sustained drop" in offences this year.
He added: "The majority of drivers abide by the law and will never receive a penalty notice. For those who do abuse bus lanes, camera enforcement should act as a deterrent."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article