HC Deb 29 November 1950 vol 481 cc1277-86

Motion made, and Question proposed. "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Sparks.]

10.0 p.m.

Mr. Harmar Nicholls (Peterborough)

From the hazards of the ballot for the Adjournment it so happens that tonight I have the opportunity to raise this question of road safety, at a time when national interest in this problem is perhaps at its height. I put down this subject because of a local problem in my own constituency, but I believe that we should not be doing our duty, even in this short debate, unless we dealt with it on a rather wider footing than that.

I should like to express very sincere thanks to the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary and his Parliamentary Secretary, and to the Parliamentary Secretaries to the Ministries of Education and Transport for the great interest they have shown in this subject outside this Chamber, realising that its scope would be much wider than we can hope to cover in a short Adjournment debate. In addition, I should like to thank the Chief Constable of Peterborough who, from his long experience, has advised me and "vetted" any suggestions which I have put forward, supported by the chairman of the Peterborough Road Safety Committee.

The national background to this subject is this. From January to August this year, 1950—a mere eight months— the national total of child casualties amounted to 27,675. The number killed in that period was 619 and the number injured 27,056. This is significant when we realise that it is 1,102 more than in the same period last year. That is the national background from which I approach this problem. The problem was first drawn to my attention when the residents in the village of Eye, in my constituency, became so apprehensive at the spasmodic supervision of the Eye school crossing—a road which carries a great deal of fast traffic—that 160 of the parents signed a petition and asked me to see whether I could do anything to help.

I contacted the local police authority and the local education department, and the only thing that I was able to discover was that owing to the shortage of trained men and women for general police duties, the police authority were not in a position to guarantee sufficient men for school crossings at particular times. These local conditions in my constituency exemplify the same problem which has been met throughout the country, and which is reflected in the high figure of casualties, despite the great precautions we take. I think, therefore, we ought to view the problem from the national point of view.

It is easy to say, "Let us have a policeman there, with all the authority of his uniform and standing." But it is quite clear that it is impossible for the police force, with its present strength, to be responsible for the innumerable crossings, all of equal importance, if the whole of the field is to be covered. The time spent in supervising school crossings when children are coming from and going to school is equivalent to one tour of duty for a police constable. Even if there were sufficient police available—and there are not; we know all about the "thin blue line"—it would be a waste of wages and training, as the majority of the crossing points could be sufficiently manned by part-time or volunteer men and women acting as trained wardens at a much lower cost.

I suggest that we are left with the second alternative—a patrol of traffic wardens—and I believe that a scheme along those lines, properly administered, is the only solution. At present these wardens are employed by a number of local authorities but, unfortunately, in some towns they do not command the full respect of the road user which is essential if they are to do the job effectively and well. The reason is that this problem has not been tackled on a national basis. It has been left to local authorities to make their own arrangements, and those arrangements do not altogether run parallel with one another.

What we have to do, I suggest, is to make these wardens, throughout the country, easily identifiable so that they may receive the necessary respect from road users and so that parents would know that they could leave children safely in their charge. We know that A.A. and R.A.C. scouts have no legal standing, but who would suggest that they do not command the respect of every road user? They are recognised, their uniform is well known and their directions are accepted almost as readily as if they came from a uniformed constable, with all the power of his office.

The reason that these scouts command respect is that they are properly organised and trained and are dressed in a uniform manner. It has never been necessary for them to use portable signs as a means of controlling traffic—portable signs such as those which have had the backing of the transport and education authorities and which, in a few minutes, I shall criticise. All road users know that the A.A. scouts are there to safeguard them. They respect their authority because of the very fact that they recognise who the scouts are and what they are there to do.

I suggest that traffic wardens should be dressed uniformly throughout the country and that they should be properly trained in road safety matters, particularly concerning children. I believe that if that were so, they would be accepted by all road users and would give a lot of confidence to parents who, at times, are most apprehensive when their children have to go to school across busy streets. So far as the training of these wardens is concerned, I understand that the Under-Secretary of State to the Home Office is to reply tonight, but I think I should say that the various police departments would be quite prepared and willing to give the necessary training to these wardens, once they were recruited and once they were provided with this uniform, which would be standardised throughout the country.

The uniform which I have in mind is of quite a simple type. I have had an exhibition arranged in Room 11 in this building where there has been on view the type of uniform which I have in mind, although I do not hold that out as the only possible type. I produced it merely to show that such a uniform is available and could be prepared simply and at a very low cost. The one I have had on view consists of a long white coat or mackintosh, with an amber collar and amber arm bands bearing the words "Traffic Warden," in red. I think head gear is necessary and I have suggested the ordinary police type of peaked cap with an amber band around the cap. If such a cap were adopted it would be suitable for all weathers and for both men and women.

If such a uniform, or a similar uniform, were introduced, it could be a source of propaganda and could be publicised on road safety posters. We have had the "black widow" and there have been all sorts of criticisms of various propaganda posters which have been exhibited, but I believe that once we standardised a uniform we could have good publicity which would bring really worth-while results. We could have, for instance, a coloured poster depicting a traffic warden, dressed as I have suggested and escorting children over a crossing, with a caption underneath such as, "This man is safeguarding your children. Please watch for him and obey his signals." I believe that in this way he would soon become a recognised national figure in road safety matters, and I think that his influence would be equal to that of the police and of the R.A.C. and A.A. scouts. I believe his presence and activities at school crossings would be the finest means that we could possibly have of educating children in road sense. Of course, women of the right type could be recruited into this service as well, and if the uniform were one that could be worn by both sexes its influence would be constant and effective whoever wore it.

My first suggestion is that, instead of allowing local authorities to decide upon their own traffic wardens' uniform, or to decide in some cases that there should be no special uniform, so that the wardens turn up in all sorts of clothes, we should standardise this simple type of uniform. If we did that, it would contribute to giving confidence to the parents, to which we feel they are entitled in these days of ever rising casualties. In March, 1936, a mandatory traffic sign was designed and given legal standing, and that has the approval of the Ministry of Transport and of the Ministry of Education. This sign is a board 2 ft. 6 in. by 1 ft. 8 in. mounted on a pole 5 ft. high, and it bears the words "Stop. Children crosing." The traffic warden who uses it while escorting the children, is expected to stand in the middle of the road so that it can be seen by road users coming either way.

In Peterborough these signs are not being used, and I believe that that is so in many local authorities' areas in which these signs have been issued, for they are unwieldy, and difficult to handle. I believe that they interfere with the traffic warden in doing many of his essential duties. If there is any wind about at all it is almost impossible to hold them up. I would ask hon. Members, if they have not already done so, to try to hold up an oar on a windy day when they are boating, yet an oar is nothing like the size of these boards, which are very difficult to handle.

I am suggesting that this sign, as has been found from practical experience, is really no use at all. It is not being used, and yet it is the only legal sanction that some of the wardens have got, and, as it is not being used, they are trying to do their job without legal sanction. I think we ought to face up to the fact that these boards are not likely to do the job we hoped they would do. I am suggesting that these boards should be withdrawn, and that in their place we can have this recognisable uniform for the wardens.

As far as cost is concerned, I understand that these signs cost about £5 each. If we adopted a uniform similar to the one I have described we should get three uniforms for the cost of one board, so I do not really feel that the suggestions I am making are likely to involve any extra cost at all. In fact, I think the chances are that, considering the number of people employed on this job, we should be able to save money.

My suggestion, arising out of our local problem, is that instead of allowing different people to have different uniforms, or no uniforms, we should have one simple uniform, which would soon be recognised on a national scale as is that of the motoring organisations' scouts, and would be accepted and respected by all road users. We had a demonstration in my constituency last Monday, and it was very sad that on the day that we were having our demonstration to try to save life on the roads at the school crossings, we had an inquest in the city on a boy of seven and a half years who had been killed at a school crossing where there were no wardens at all. So the big point is to get a sufficient number of wardens to man the crossings.

What I am asking for tonight, and I hope that it will be accorded, is that the wardens we have already, the wardens who are already being paid by the local education authorities, should have a standardised uniform, and that the boards which are unwieldy, should be withdrawn because they are of no real use. I believe that will be the first step—the first of many steps—required to give to parents that confidence which they are entitled to have.

10.15 p.m.

Mr. Janner (Leicester, North-West)

I think the whole house will be grateful to the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. H. Nichols) for raising this matter this evening, because there cannot be the slightest doubt about the anxiety felt in the country that every possible precaution should be taken to protect the lives of those on the roads, and particularly the lives of young children. I think the House will consider the statement in relation to road crossings made only a few days ago by the Minister of Transport to have been a very significant and important one in the history of improving protection on the roads today.

The specific point raised this evening is one which I think might be considered by the Government in order that a definite step can be taken to regularise throughout the country a system whereby people will get to understand quite clearly who and what are the persons guarding the safety of children crossing the roads, so that they may be recognisable. This is not entirely a new idea, as the hon. Gentleman will no doubt admit. For example, I am told by a reliable person that in Gateshead a system of this kind is already in force; that the men who do the job are supplied with coats, peaked caps and armbands.

Mr. Nicholls

I agree that it is in force in Leeds and Gateshead. My suggestion is that it be made national, and that they should all have the same thing.

Mr. Janner

I am not complaining a bit. On the contrary, I am entirely on the side of the hon. Gentleman. It has been tried, and I am merely giving Gateshead as an example. I gather that it has been particularly successful, and the police in Gateshead have commended the idea, which they find avoids the unnecessary use of police manpower. The local population have come to regard this type of protection as a useful one, and have recognised that the uniform worn by the men who are protecting the children is a uniform which should be protected. This having been tried out in Gateshead and, I now understand, in Leeds, I hope that some step will be taken to make it a general practice throughout the country. I think that perhaps it would provide an opportunity for, say, a number of British Legion men who are getting on in years, or other ex-Service men, to do a very useful job for the country in protecting our children. It would mean that men in the police forces could be used for other purposes—though I hope, incidentally, not for some of the purposes for which they are used, such as taking the numbers of parked cars. I hope we shall get a satisfactory reply. I have spoken because I thought some hon. Member on this side of the House ought to support this suggestion.

10.19 p.m.

Mr. Geoffrey Wilson (Truro)

I intervene very briefly indeed, as time is getting on, to commend to the House the diligence of my hon. Friend the Member for Peterborough (Mr. H. Nicholls) in bring- ing forward this matter. Those of us who have seen the exhibition to which he alluded will know the thoroughness with which he has gone into this question. This matter of children crossing the roads is a very serious one—27,000 casualties in a year—and it has been troubling a large number of schools in different parts of the country, including one in my own division, about which I have had some correspondence with the Minister. The use of a sign was suggested, and the very reason which my hon. Friend has given was advanced as a reason for not accepting that particular form of protection. It was said that the sign was clumsy, difficult to handle, and would not be effective. There was an additional reason given in that case, that the children happened to leave school at all sorts of different hours and it might be difficult to use the sign.

If we could have a warden in a distinctive uniform, properly trained, and readily recognisable by motorists, I think it would go a long way towards meeting this problem. The only point which occurs to me is that the term "traffic warden" has been mentioned. In some parts of the country there are already officials called traffic wardens, who are not employed on this particular type of work. They are often former policemen, wearing a blue uniform, who act as reliefs for the police in traffic direction at the ordinary points. It we are to have a national service especially for school crossings, we may have to adopt some other term than "traffic warden." That does not detract from my commendation of the idea, which I very much hope the House will accept.

10.22 p.m.

The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Geoffrey de Freitas)

I am sure that all hon. Members present will agree that the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. H. Nicholls) made a most interesting speech. I speak in this debate not only as a Member of the Government, but as the father of four children two of whom go to school so naturally I feel, as all parents do, the importance of this matter.

The number of deaths upon the road is appalling and the saddest figures are those of children. In 1947 the number killed was 891; in 1948, 982; and last year, 881. This is a serious matter which involves not only the Ministry of Education—and my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary is with me on this bench—and the Ministry of Transport but the Home Office. It involves the Home Office particularly for two reasons: first, because in the ordinary way no one but a police officer in uniform has the power to hold up traffic, and secondly, because it is of the greatest importance that from its earliest years a child should look to a police officer in uniform as someone to help him. There is no better way of developing this than by having policemen in uniform doing this work and doing it everywhere. As the hon. Member has pointed out, this is impossible. If only the police could do it everywhere, that would solve our task, but it cannot be done.

I must say something about the history of this matter. In 1936 the Committee on Road Safety among School Children reported and recommended the employment of adult patrols to look after school children on busy crossings: the Report pointed out that in some areas—and Peterborough is one of the very few mentioned by name—patrols had already been set up by the education authorities. As a result of the Report, the Board of Education decided to sponsor this development and sent out a circular to education authorities. That circular said that they would recognise for education grant any reasonable expenditure incurred by a local authority on adult patrols where these patrols had been arranged in agreement with the highway authority and with the concurrence of the chief officer of police.

Since 1936—and I agree with the hon. Member who raised this matter—the development has been uneven. Some authorities have done a great deal, but others have not done so much. In and around London there have been particular difficulties, and, as an experiment last year, the Commissioner of Police was authorised to employ up to 500 part-time school-crossing patrols. That is an experi- ment which is going on at this moment. At present, then, in the Metropolitan area the police organise the controls and the cost comes out of the police fund, but in the rest of the country the education authorities are responsible.

I must comment on the legal significance of the traffic sign. I want to amplify the point which has been made. As I have said, in the ordinary way, no one but a police officer in uniform has the power to hold up traffic. After the 1936 Report, however, the Minister of Transport issued a direction under the Road Traffic Act, 1930, prescribing the traffic sign, which has been described tonight, to be carried by the patrols. Under Section 49, a motorist commits an offence if he does not stop when the sign is exhibited. It is clear that, as the law stands, the authority to stop traffic is derived from the exhibiting of this particular sign.

Mr. Janner

Is it a particular sign as to size, and so on?

Mr. de Freitas

The dimension, colour and everything else—all is laid down.

I have sketched briefly the history of this problem and the present practice and law. As for the suggestion made by the hon. Member, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education and I have been in Room 11. We have seen his exhibition, and we were very interested in it. I willingly undertake, on behalf of my hon. Friend and on behalf of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport—this concerns the three Departments—to examine the matter very closely. The problem of children on the road is a very great one, and we must examine every suggestion closely, especially one which, we all agree, has been so thoroughly thought out as this.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-eight Minutes past Ten o'Clock.